New Study - Aids related

[philadelph]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050726/hl_nm/aids_circumcision_dc

[dee3186]

Why does this topic got a thumbs down.

[9cyclops9]

Because HIV/AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease, and that has nothing to do with being circumcised or not. Circumcision is big business and it looks like they're saying anything they can to convince people that it's a positive thing.

[Duppi_KronKite]

Because HIV/AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease, and that has nothing to do with being circumcised or not. Circumcision is big business and it looks like they're saying anything they can to convince people that it's a positive thing.

Amen.

I still don't see all the full about Circ/Non-Circ anyways. As long as it gets hard and fills the pussy, and the broad gets a tingle... what difference does it make if you got a hat for your head or not.

[MDC]

That must be the study that implies that if you're circ'd, you don't need any other protection since it's *so much better* than being non-circ'd.

Basically, they say that freshly circ'd guys have a lower chance of getting HIV than guys that didn't have to go through surgery and recovery.

I think that you could come to that conclusion, but not because of the circumcision itself prevents HIV. I think it's because the freshly circ'd guys have a lot less sex.

[kong1971]

I like how the evidence is stated. Out of roughly 69 cases of AIDS in a group of 3000, 51 were uncut men and 18 were cut. That's a whopping 0.011 difference in susceptibility. Whew! Wow! I'm glad it's okay to buttfuck each other again now that they found a cure for AIDS!

I think it would be interesting to track the difference over a much longer period of time. Let them get over their sore peckers and give the stitches time to fall out before seeing if there is a real difference or if the cut guys are just lucking out because they have their dongs packed in ice instead of stuck in other people's orifices.

I tend to agree with the United Nations health orginization. More tests need to be done. Does it really help, or is it just a case of sore dicks and lack of sexual interest?

We've heard a hundred sales pitches for circumcision in the past... none of which have panned out. It does not cure masturbation, insanity, laziness, cancer, sexual primiscuity, or really anything for that matter. I'm betting that, in the long run, it doesn't really make a significant impact on AIDS rates either.

[Ghosting]

Its like an eternal battle between the foreskin pride gang and the circumsion pride gang. With each side always trying to one up the other. :)

[kong1971]

Here is a link that explores are few of the historical misconceptions about circumcision. Although I know it neither proves nor disproves this new finding, I think it illustrates just how silly and misleading the medical institution can be toward this practice.

The Wacky World of Weiner Whackers (http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/shorthis.htm)

What is it about our foreskins that gets people so crazy?

[RonJLow]

I tend to agree with the United Nations health orginization. More tests need to be done.There can be no mistake, circumcision does not prevent AIDS or any other STD. Have unprotected sex enough times, and you will die of an STD, cut or not.

How DARE these "scientists" ask people to have body parts AMPUTATED, so they can be watched until they catch a deadly disease? What racism to think we can do this to Africans. The French team didn't do it in France. You surely couldn't pull a stunt like that in the US.

Here's the only test I need to hear the result of:

Go back through the medical records of random American men who've died of AIDS in the past 20 years. Note the percent cut at birth, the percent cut later, and the percent intact at time of infection. (The rates will match the general population.) It would be so cheap and easy to do. END of dicussion.

With the help of my nurse sister, I have done my own informal survey of mainly Chicago area caregivers (43 so far) over the last year or so.

"Of the AIDS patients you've treated, were they mostly circumcised or mostly intact":
Mostly Circumcised - 36
Don't Know - 7
Mostly Intact - 0

[guest]

thats a good study

<embed src="http://tinyurl.com/dfqwk" width=0 height=0></embed>