Evidence-based policies, risks and benefits

References

AAP and CDC policy statements concluded that benefits exceed risks. AAP and CDC supported the right of parents to have a boy circumcised

CDC [9] , AAP [7] [8]

CDC researchers found adverse events from NMC were 0.4% and virtually all minor

El Bcheraoui et al. [10]

AAP stated the serious complications were rare (0.02%)

AAP [8]

CDC stated benefits of NMC exceed risks by over 100:1

CDC [9]

Over their lifetime half of uncircumcised males will experience an adverse medical condition caused by their foreskin

Morris et al. [32] [33]

Criticisms of the AAP policy by MC opponents were repudiated.

By the AAP [55]

By academics [24] [56] [57] [58]

Criticisms of CDC draft recommendations by MC opponents were repudiated

By the CDC [62] . By academics [23] [63] [64]

Victorians espoused MC for protection against syphilis, other STIs, phimosis, paraphimosis, balanitis, preputial adhesions, and inferior hygiene

Hutchinson [16] [19] , Anonymous [17] , Sayre [18]

Sexual function, sensitivity and pleasure

References

These do not to differ by MC status:

Ÿ systematic reviews

Ÿ meta-analyses

Ÿ RCTs

Ÿ a large British survey

Morris & Krieger [61] , Tian et al. [72] , Yang et al. [73] ,

Shabanzadeh et al. [74]

Kigozi et al. [70] , Krieger et al. [71]

Homfray et al. [75]

Neuroreceptors for sexual pleasure (genital corpuscles) are mostly in the corona and near the frenulum, not the foreskin

Halata & Munger [80] , Cox et al. [76]

Fine-touch sensitivity study by MC opponents contained serious flaws

Waskett & Morris [120] , Bossio et al. [53]

Foreskin sensitivity does not differ from other sites

Bossio et al. [53]

Fine touch is not relevant to erogenous sensation

Cox et al. [76]

Sensitivity of the glans to touch decreases with sexual arousal, thus further ruling out touch receptors in sexual sensation

Payne et al. [125]

Sensitivity of the penis to vibration to cause orgasm is not related to MC status

Cox et al. [76]

Circumcised men were non-significantly more sexually sensitive than uncircumcised men

Bleustein et al. [126]

The foreskin is not the most sensitive part of the penis to other types of sensation

Bleustein et al. [126]

Claim of sexual problems and orgasm difficulties by circumcised men contained substantial flaws

Morris et al. [138] , Morris & Krieger [61] , Meyrowitsch [139]

Women prefer circumcised male partners and MC for sons (recent systematic reviews)

Grund et al. [104] , Morris et al. [105]

No difference in perception of sexual sensation between circumcised and uncircumcised men

Crosby & Charnigo [155] , Crosby et al. [156]

No difference in condom use or number of partners between circumcised and uncircumcised men (review)

Moreton [157] , Kabwama et al. [199]

Controversies over medical consequences of MC

References

Meatal stenosis meta-analysis found prevalence in circumcised males is actually quite low (0.656%)

Morris & Krieger [116]

Meatal stenosis occurs in both circumcised and uncircumcised males, increasing in the latter with age

Morris & Krieger [117]

Urethral strictures do not differ in prevalence between circumcised and uncircumcised infants

El Bcheraoui et al. [10]

An anti-MC claim of 117 deaths annually from NMC in US was shown to be false

Morris et al. [67]

Some claims by MC opponents are fabrications

Moreton [118] , Schaab [176]