Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Briar Rabbit


My experience is that those who promote the foreskin are shocking liars.


In what way?



There is a general rule that if you scratch a little at the surface of
what they say you will 10 to one open up a can of worms. Just watch how
this thread develops.



Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?


No. To be one of the uncircumcised, regardless of whether that's the
minority or the majority, because it avoids unnecessary harm and
discomfort.



Harm? What harm would that be?

The discomfort of the post circumcision period is minor and should not
be exaggerated ... unless you have an agenda?





I don't know, as I haven't heard the wild psychosexual reasons. Of
course, I've heard from several men who support keeping the foreskin
because sex is more pleasurable with a foreskin, but making sex more
pleasurable doesn't strike me as a wild reason.




These several men? They were circumcised as adults and now are able to
make a valid comparison? If that is the group (you are talking about)
then the findings are the opposite of what you claim. You are not
deliberately trying to deceive people are you?

Read this one for starters then:

==========================

Conference Abstract number: TuPeB4648

Adult male circumcision in Kenya: safety and patient satisfaction

C J O Opeya1, B O Ayieko1, A Kawango1, M O Onyango1, S Moses2, R C
Bailey3, J O Ndinya-Achola4, J N Krieger5
1UNIM Project, Kisumu, Kenya; 2University of Manitoba, Winipeg,
Canada; 3University of Illinois, Chicago, United States; 4University
of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya; 5University of Washington, Seattle, United
States


Background: There is growing interest in male circumcision as a method
of reducing HIV transmission. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of
male circumcision (MC) to reduce HIV incidence is underway in Kenya.
If MC is found to be efficacious in reducing HIV incidence, then the
rates and severity of complications must still be weighed against
benefits of the procedure. We report frequency of adverse events (AEs)
and satisfaction resulting from circumcisions performed during the
initial phase of the RCT.


Methods: Healthy, 18-24 year-old, consenting men are randomized to
circumcision and control arms. Those in the circumcision arm undergo
surgery using local anesthesia (maximum 15 ml 2% lidocaine). They are
followed up at 3, 8, 30, and 90 days post operatively, or whenever
they need to return to the clinic.


Results: Among the first 380 circumcisions, there were
14procedure-related AEs (3.6%) from 13 participants: 4 bleeding; 3
post-operative site infections; 3 other infections; and 4 other
complications. Nine AEs (2.4%) were definitely related, 3 probably
related and 2 possibly related to the surgery. All were mild or
moderate and resolved within hours or several days of detection. Most
AEs occurred in the first 3 months of the study. At 30 days
post-surgery, 99.3% of men reported being very satisfied and 0.7%
somewhat satisfied with circumcision. None were dissatisfied. Men
reported returning to work after a median of 3 days (range 0-21) and
to general activities after a median of 1 day (0-3 days). All sexual
partners who were aware of the man's new circumcision status were very
satisfied with the results.


Conclusions: Circumcisions can be performed safely in this setting
with no serious or lasting complications and with high levels of
patient satisfaction. Lessons learned from this trial will be useful
if MC is to be introduced widely as an intervention.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unasha...rc/message/419