A family says their newborn son nearly bled to death and is fighting for his life after he was circumcised at a New York City hospital.
Tim and Gabrielle Groth said their son, Cole, underwent the circumcision at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan, where he was born on March 31.
Being intact is also preventative for some stds, iirc, but I couldn’t find anything to support that
I looked into this claim a couple of years ago. I couldn’t find any well executed study that showed this. It’s mainly a talking point that people who argue for circumcision claim is true, but I couldn’t find any scientific support for this.
I was unclear. Circumcision predisposes you to STD transmission iirc, but I also couldn’t find anything.
Because its the opposite actually. Circumcision reduces risk, inclusive of STIs as well as UTIs. Its a significant, but partial, reduction in risk. This has only been shown with PiV sexual activity and not with PiA sexual activity, which could be an important factor.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8579597/
Adult circumcision works out well, including for a family member who did it in his 30s due to severe phimosis (which is also linked to penile carcinoma).
I think the only appropriate answer to circumcision is not at birth, only for a clear medical need until they are an adult, and at that point it’s their decision.
But I doubt you’ll find anything peer reviewed that suggests an increase in STIs after circumcision, I’ve only ever seen the opposite, and I did a lot of reading on it before my son was born.
This is the correct way of looking at it. At birth should not be the time to do this… it should be done later in life, by the person’s own choosing.
Largely beneficial for UTIs, which is the leading infection in young boys. UTIs in young children are often hard to diagnose before spreading to the kidneys
Then later in life when getting too old to wash yourself the benefit returns again
