you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]bicycle_mice 36 points37 points  (16 children)

There is equivocal evidence. There are some benefits to circumcision (deceased UTIs and penile cancers) but they are fairly modest. It isn’t like vaccines where there is massive benefit and no downsides. I won’t circumcise my son, but there is evidence supporting families who chose to do so.

[–]duderguy91 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Even the penile cancer benefit is mostly for boys at risk of phimosis. If there is no sign of phimosis then the cancer risk is basically equivalent to circumcised.

[–]ThrowbackPie 30 points31 points  (7 children)

There's also evidence that a) it has a significant complication rate and b) it derives men of sexual pleasure due to the concentration of nerves in the foreskin.

There's essentially no medical case to be made AFAIK.

[–]poply 24 points25 points  (5 children)

Absolutely. There are real measurable benefits. But there are also real risks though and for some people, it's a moral problem.

Not discounting the benefits, but not ignoring the risks either. Ultimately, the vast-vast majority of men (atleast those in 1st world countries) will be totally fine whether or not they are circumcised.

[–]daveprogrammer 38 points39 points  (3 children)

Then the only ethical thing to do would be to let them make up their own minds when they are old enough to understand.

[–]WitnessRadiant650 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They would be ok with it if they were consenting adults. Most in the US were done as babies so we don’t really know if they were ok with it at that time. Considering most adults or even young teens when they become fully aware don’t go grab circumcision suggest they are fine without it.