I am against you, in that I think aside from it being unnecessary and at risk for surgical complications it's a relatively harmless procedure. And I don't think you're angry, emotional rants are very effective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMS
He posted one inconclusive study, dummy, taken from a sample of adults that were recently circumcised. Recently, get it? Meaning not yet having the wear and tear of years of keratinization on the glans, like children who are circumcised at an early age. Likewise even in that, its inconclusive and shows variables that state sensitivity is lost and variables that don't like it.
And this is a test from a Medical association that exists in a heavily pro-circ society. A society that has developed a billion dollar industry around it.
|
Wrong. Test was done in the UK, where only 16% of males ages 16-44 are circumcised. Maybe you should actually confirm things before pre-emptively making statements that cater to your points.
http://www.circinfo.net/rates_of_circumcision.html
Anyways I don't have the time nor interest to argue further. Maybe some other time.