LMAO! My stomach hurts.
Posted on 07/10/2006 8:36:10 PM PDT by July 4th
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Circumcising men routinely across Africa could prevent millions of deaths from AIDS, World Health Organization researchers and colleagues reported on Monday.
They analyzed data from trials that showed men who had been circumcised had a significantly lower risk of infection with the AIDS virus, and calculated that if all men were circumcised over the next 10 years, some two million new infections and around 300,000 deaths could be avoided.
Researchers believe circumcision helps cut infection risk because the foreskin is covered in cells the virus seems able to easily infect. The virus may also survive better in a warm, wet environment like that found beneath a foreskin.
So if men were circumcised, fewer would become infected and thus could not infect their female partners.
The human immunodeficiency virus or HIV, which causes AIDS, now infects close to 40 million people and has killed another 25 million. It mostly affects sub-Saharan Africa and the main mode of transmission is sex between a man and a woman.
Several studies have suggested that men who are circumcised have a lower rate of HIV infection. This has been especially noticeable in some parts of Africa, where some groups are routinely circumcised while neighboring groups are not.
Last year, Dr. Bertran Auvert of the French National Research Agency INSERM and colleagues at WHO found that circumcised men in South Africa were 65 percent less likely to become infected with the deadly and incurable virus.
His team then did an analysis to see what would happen if all African men were circumcised.
"In West Africa, male circumcision is common and the prevalence of HIV is low, while in southern Africa the reverse is true," they wrote in the current report, published in the Public Library of Science Medicine.
"This analysis shows that male circumcision could avert nearly six million new infections and save three million lives in sub-Saharan Africa over the next twenty years," they wrote.
Overall, they project that universal male circumcision would reduce the rate of infections by about 37 percent.
"Male circumcision alone cannot bring the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa under control. Even circumcised men can become infected, though their risk of doing so is much lower," the journal cautioned in a commentary.
It's got less to do with friction, and more to do with the number of nerve endings that are stimulated.
Not for a man.
LMAO! My stomach hurts.
What's wrong with... "no glove, no love".
Read the article. in Africa, the disease is primarily hetero spread.
You're using hyperbole.
The United States could have a larger incidence of multiply used needle drug use. Also--contrary to common stereotypes, and arson suit--Europe could actually be more hetero than the United States (San Francisco and Key West both vie for capital, for example). Drug use--and reusing needles--are probably the main reason why the United States has a larger incidence of hiv.
I remember the Biblical story (it's been a while since I read it), where one of the Patriarch's daughter's was raped by a neighboring tribe. The Jews threatened war, then as part of the peace treaty, demanded that all the men of the other tribe be circumcised. After the Jews circumsized them, they killed them all while they were too sore to get up and walk.
I can hear it now, it's another plot by the Jews to take over the world.
and, IMO..our drug habit is worse here....thus HIV can spread easier......
talk about barbaric...yet men oogle and pay billions just to see some bimbo with surgically implanted breasts size XXX .......now, let's talk about barbaric rituals.....
barbaric would also include vasectomies and hysterectomies and abortions of course...yet, those procedures are the norm now.....
" back in 1450 that the foreskin both protects the penis from damage and heightens sexual pleasure. "
I didn't realize that men HAD a problem protecting their penis' or with sexual pleasure.
I've heard from several different women, who swear that cancer of the cervix is caused by having intercourse with an uncircumsized man. Anybody else hear of this?
I doubt that the science behind this is as settled as the article implies.
Comparing the rates of cervical cancer in the populations of the US and Europe might get you an answer to that. In Europe, hardly any males are circumcised. Reverse situation in the US.
From what I have read it is not nearly so clear cut (sorry). Uncircumcised males are substantially more likely to have detectable penile HPV infection (human papilloma virus causes cervical cancer) but the actual incidence of cervical cancer in wives of males who are not circumcised has been studied, and it is not significantly different than wives of circumcised males, except for some measured increase among the "high risk" men who had many sex partners, visited prostitutes, etc.
If memory serves the penile infection rate as detected by swab among uncircumcised men is about 20%, compared to about 5% for circumcised men. I am not entirely confident about that, as those numbers are significantly lower than others I have heard. Also, I still don't know what percentage of women get HPV infections by methods other than intercourse.
Mmmm hmmmm.....Mars/Venus, all that! ;-)
Right, but wouldn't that just make a circumcised man who needs "extra stimulation" just ...ahem... take more time with one lady than jump around to many? Wouldn't quality outweigh quantity?
Again, lessening the spread of AIDS?
Bump for the answer.
Bump for the answer.
Junk science. Muslims get less AIDS not because of circumcision but because of their life style.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.