Steep Drop in Circumcision in U.S.
August 17, 2010
A study by CDC researchers on rates of adverse events related to infant male circumcision in the United States has stirred debate on the Internet about the cultural and health values of the procedure.
"Word has gotten out that it's not necessary, it's harmful and it's painful," said Georganne Chapin, executive director of the New York-based non-profit Intact America. Increased attention to so-called female circumcision has also been a factor. "How can you think it's OK to cut little boys, when you are horrified by the idea of cutting little girls?" Chapin asked.
CDC was not involved in the collection of the data, "nor has CDC undertaken any review of this particular data for the purpose of calculating rates," said Elizabeth-Ann Chandler, an agency spokesperson. "As such, we cannot comment on the accuracy of this particular estimate of infant male circumcision."
CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics are reviewing scientific data in advance of issuing new policy recommendations. AAP is likely to move from a neutral stance to a more encouraging one on circumcision, which has health benefits beyond HIV prevention, said Dr. Michael Brady, who served on the AAP task force.
Studies in Africa have shown male circumcision reduces the risk of female-to-male HIV transmission by up to 60 percent.
New York Times
08.17.2010; Roni Caryn Rabin
This article was provided by CDC National Prevention Information Network. It is a part of the publication CDC HIV/Hepatitis/STD/TB Prevention News Update.
Add Your Comment:
Internet search results. Be careful when providing personal information! Before
adding your comment, please read TheBody.com's Comment Policy.)