A few years ago, circumcision bashing became de rigueur, especially by Dr. Dean Edell, who calls the practice unethical, painful, dangerous and without medical benefit.
If Edell doesn’t like circumcision, that’s fine by me. I’ve always harbored a few doubts about the practice. But the guy would incessantly rail against the procedure to such a degree that I had to tune him out. After all, I can’t undo my circumcision, and now I have a boy who is circumcised.
So I read with extreme irony that circumcision may cut the risk of HIV infection in half, according to The New York Times. U.S. health officials were so amazed by the results that they halted two clinical trials and offered circumcisions to the other men in the African study.
Everyone agrees that the best method to avoid HIV is through safe sex practices, but with infections spreading unchecked throughout Africa and parts of Asia, they also agree that circumcisions can be a useful tool in fighting the disease.
And for one last tweak at Dr. Edell: Despite his claims otherwise, recent studies show that circumcisions significantly reduces cervical cancer rates and other sexually transmitted diseases, reports the Times.
Now please stop making parents feel so guilty, Dr. Edell.