From: fo6a001 my first email address-at-rrz.uni-hamburg.de
Subject: Re: Male Circ. - The Third Perspective
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 13:41:41 +0200
A RE-INTERPRETATION of OSTER
Statistics and the self resolving possibilities of phimosis
Dr. Med. Werner Schoeberlein says that "in medical
examinations of 3,000 young men, mostly of an age between
18 and 22 years. . . . A phimosis was found in 8.8%." (1)
Beauge M.D. reports "nearly 10%" of young men between
the ages of "18 to 22" had phimosis. He was "in charge for
over ten years of the routine examination of college freshmen"
he recommended "treatment for 30 to 40 boys annually". He
says he had "observed several hundred cases", l feel we
may conservatively calculate that his study involved
at least 4,000 men.(2)
If phimosis (according to Oster) is self resolving, why do
Beauge and Schoeberlein report such high figures?
Either, 1) Coupled with Oster's yearly careful attempts at
retraction, he says "the boys received regular instruction
about preputial hygiene". This instruction started previous
to puberty, and it may have helped to relieve phimosis to
some extent, Or, 2) boys with sexual inhibitions stay away
from school when they know their penis will be examined, . . .
. . or 3) he was wrong.
I feel we can discount the idea that the relationship foreskin
to glans develops eratically around the age of 16-18, and the
proximity in Europe suggests there is no important dietary
difference or any basic anatomical difference (as there is
between say the Chinese, and Europeans).
Have you any other suggestions? what other
possibilities are there?
Beauge reports that instruction over normal methods of
masturbation cured many of his patients. This would correlate
with Oster's regular instruction, with attention to the retraction
of the foreskin. Surely if Beauge was correct, the sooner such a
process could begin with a young boy, the more possibility it
would have of working.
I suspect that a phimose or frenulum breve which had been
stretched in youth would need a more permanent cure in later
years, particularly in old age as the preputial skin tightens again.
This would at least give an individual time to think.
Anyone want to comment? - or shall we presume this
re - interpretation is correct?
1) Dr. Med. Werner SCHOEBERLEIN
"Bedeutung und Haufigkeit von Phimose und Smegma" Muenchener
Medizinische Wochenschrift 7, pages 373 - 377 (1966)
2) Michel BEAUGE M.D. "Traitment Medical du Phimosis Congenital
de L'adolescent" Thesis for the University Diploma of Andrology.
Faculty of Medicine, Saint-Antoine University. Paris V1.
University Year 1990-1991
3) Jacob OSTER:"Further Fate of the Foreskin" Archives
of Disease in Childhood (published by the British
Medical Association), April 1968. 43:p.200-203.
Saitmacher studied only 229 boys (ages 14-19) and found 8.7%
where "the foreskin could be retracted only with difficulty
or with pain"
4) Dr. med. F. SAITMACHER : "Sozialhygienische Betrachtung
zu einer routinemaessigen Zirkumzision maennlicher Saeuglinge"
Das Deutsche Gesundheitswesen Jahrgang 15 Heft 23
Pages 1217-1220 (1960) p.1218.
Apart from the above four studies, are there any others which
review the statistics??