[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by RJK at 15 Apr 2002 20:37:15: Re: Laumann, et al
As an answer to: Re: Laumann, et al written by Rood at 13 Apr 2002 02:08:10:
>You are certainly correct in stating that reduced sexual dysfunction "...is
>only part of what is presented"Yes, I never claimed otherwise; they obviously havew no pro-circumcision axe to grind.
by the Laumann, et al study from the JAMA, 2 April 1997. The full conclusions of the report are as follows: "...circumcision provides no discernible prophylactic benefit and may in fact increase the likelilhood of STD contraction. That circumcised men have a SLIGHTLY lessened risk of experiencing sexual dysfunction, especially among older men; (emphasis mine)
Yes, but this slightly lessened risk of dysfunction gives the lie to claims that by the time they were 40 circumcised men had 'no more sensation' in the glans penis. Somebody's misinformed, and Laumann et al., with no objective other than finding out the facts of the case, showed statistically that although differences are slight, the advantage for men aged from 45 to 59 is with the circumcised.
and that circumcised men displayed greater rates of experience of various sexual practices."..."These findings suggest the need for continued research...."
>The fact that circumcised men in this survey report greater rates of experience has been attributed to their lack of sensory tissue.Not an attribution made by Laumann et al., however.
Lacking the sensual attributes of the foreskin, circumcised men go to unusual lengths to fulfill their sexual urges.
>Why worry? You have the glans available there in its most functional way!Too true. Why worry?
>>>>Actual definition doesn't matter. The circed are not deprived if that is a concern of yours. There is no way that circumcision would have started in so many divergent parts of the world if it were capable of ruining sex!
>>>>If you are uncirced with an exposed glans that is also fine as the glans does well exposed to air and stays cleaner and less prone to infection'
>>>I'm afraid your information is way out of date. According to the Circumcision Supplement to the prestigious British Journal of Urology, the so called benefits of circumcision are illusory. Instead evidence of the damage, both physical and psychological which can affect the circumcised is overwhelming.
>>You may not have availed yourself of all the current information on circumcision's benefits or lack thereof. The Journal of the American Medical Association (a reasonably prestigious publication) has a study of circumcision in the US by Laumann et al. (hhtp://www.cirp.org/library/general/laumann/) that suggests there are some benefits from circumcision, notably in reduced sexual dysfunction in circumcised men between ages 40 and 59, but this is only part of what is presented.