It has been shown that male circumcision at a young age helps prevent urinary infections and other unclean situations. With that in mind, male circumcision is recommended in infants, which is why most American boys are circumcised at a young age. Other countries don't follow the same pattern today, though.
Male circumcision helps urinary infections. Circumcision is beneficial for many health related reasons and circumcision can help prevent urinary infections from occurring. Research shows that those who are uncircumcised get urinary infections more often than those who are circumcised. It does not cause urinary infections at all and infants should get the procedure done to prevent any health dangers.
Many people try to avoid circumcision when the boy is a baby but then realize how hard it is to avoid urinary infections and wind up having it done when he is older which is more painful and traumatic. It definitely helps things to stay more clean and avoid urinary infections.
Male circumcision helps to fight infections for the rest of the male's life. With any procedure there is always some risk, but if properly done the risk of infection from the circumcision is very low. Without the circumcision there is a much greater need of care to prevent infection for the rest of life.
My grandfather and great grandfather died from infections die to not being circumcised my dad almost died at 6 where they circumcised him. When my son was having surgery a 4 year old boy got a bad infection and almost died ! He than had to be circumcised he shared a room with my son and ever since them I am so happy I did. This little boy was in excruciating pain ! And he will always remember this awful experience. I don't don't stand either way but for my family it's right and I will stand by that. And frankly I'm sick of being made to feel like a failure as a parent because I did something that's was recommended to me by everybody and did research. We do what we think is best.
Yes, male circumcision helps, because it helps keep a boy's private area cleaner. That makes it easier for caregivers to keep clean. Circumcision makes it harder for the area to become infected. There are practical purposes to circumcision, and any new parent should think about circumcising their infant boy. There are health benefits, in addition to cultural aspects.
One commonly quoted figure is that UTIs are ten times as common in intact boys (1.1%) as circumcised boys (0.1%). This means that circumcision can offer an absolute reduction of 1% at best.
Combining the rarity of UTIs, with the only partial prevention attributable to circumcision, To et al calculated that it would take 195 circumcisions to prevent one UTI
There are no benefits to circumcision. They have all been debunked. Circumcision was invented to cure masturbatuon. If you think that chopping off an important part of the male genitals, then allowing the open *painful* wound to sit in a feces and urine filled diaper PREVENTS infection, then YOU are ignorant and YOU are the problem. Quit mutilation your baby boys, leave them be.
When infants are not forcefully retracted, the foreskin prevents bacteria from entering the urethra. In studies done in areas without routine circumcision, where it can be speculated they are aware to not retract the foreskin, the rate of UTI is no different between circumcised and intact boys, and some studies show that cut men are more at risk.
If proper intact care is given, the foreskin prevents infection. 2% of boys and 8% of girls in America will get a UTI by the time they are 10. We don't cut the genitals of girls, we just give them antibiotics. Our sons deserve the same treatment. Circumcision is an outdated non-therapeutic surgery on non-consenting minors. It's hard to believe we still have to argue about genital cutting of minors.
Being intact protects your penis from feces as a baby. Why on Earth would you want a wounded, cut penis coming into contact with urine and feces? Aside from disgusting, it's extremely not hygienic. This increases a child's portability of contracting an infection! Nature doesn't make mistakes. We do for thinking we can do better.
In Europe, where baby boys are not routinely mutilated at birth, boys and men are not running around with rampant infections. Men are happy to have 100% of the bodies they were born with, to use and enjoy as God/Nature intended. The foreskin serves many protective and pleasurable (for BOTH partners!) purposes and is MEANT to be there. The rest of the civilized world looks at us Americans, still cutting our boys, with the same horror and disgust with which we look upon cultures who cut their girls.
"When it comes to holding down perfectly healthy babies and severing flesh from their bodies, how much can you cut away before it becomes morally wrong?”
Antibiotics Before Amputation! Removing Healthy Skin From A Healthy BabY will Not Prevent Infection! And Even If A Boy Were To Get An Infection, They can easily Take Antibiotics. There Are No Medical Benefits To Mutilating Non Consenting Babies. It Is Cruel And IngestCompletely Unnecessary. Let THem Choose For Themselves.
I'm angry because:
1. Part of my body was removed without my consent.
2. I suffered excruciating pain while the foreskin was cut away.
3. My parents did nothing to protect me. They wanted me to be circumcised.
4. A part of my body that was supposed to produce pleasurable sensations experienced excruciating pain.
5. The two most erogenous parts of my penis – the prepuce and frenulum - were cut off.
6. My penis has a scar.
7. A private, sexual body part that should be hidden most of the time is permanently exposed.
8. I have spent years wondering what was wrong with me.
9. Both myself and my future wife have been denied the pleasures of natural sex.
10. Foreskin restoration is time consuming and will never restore the tissues and their nervous system that was taken from me.
Improper intact care is the cause of issues related to the foreskin , *not* the foreskin itself. What other body part do we cut off rather than wash?!?
My intact husband and two intact sons have never had a UTI, but I have had several (none since being with my husband, though). Sounds like *I* (and other women) should have had genital reduction surgery, instead.
The foreskin actually protects the urinary tract from infection by blocking bacteria from entering the urethra. The idea that circumcision has any medical benefits (it does not) is perpetuated by doctors who make money of the procedure and are desperately trying to justify violating their ethics. It's sad that so many people voting on this post have accepted the lies.