[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Paul B. at 19 Dec 2002 13:03:13: Inevitable circ problems
As an answer to: Re: Post circ problems, (apologies for length) written by Ter at 18 Dec 2002 00:13:43:
> The possibility of there being problems where blood vessels were tied off or damaged nerves is very interesting. ... perhaps this would have an influence on glans sensitivity.
Naturally, every operation of significance results in damage to these three elements where the incision is made. Disruption to nerve function is automatic and only partially reversible - the best chance of nerves "re-programming" would be of course in infancy (or at least, if they never learn any alternative, then whatever is there after surgery is automatically "normal"!), and disruptions such as "scrambling" the sensations - feeling hot or cold for touch, are common as nerves re-grow and re-connect at random.
Arteries and veins generally re-develop from those remaining - there is a fair degree of "redundancy" in most (but not all) body areas. Quite obviously, even when the penis is "ringbarked" by circumcision, blood circulation is maintained and re-established from the deeper supply travelling with the corpora. You may or may not develop some degree of "varicosity" (distension) from the blocking of veins that formerly traversed the area.
And the nerve supply of the glans is derived from the dorsal nerves travelling just on the tunica (coats) of the corpora cavernosae, maintained OK unless the knife slips badly! So whilst the glans is OK, you will have peculiar sensation for a distance from the scar line and of course you have lost the sensation from the foreskin removed.
> I think it may be time to ask a medical type person about this possibility. ... any qestions I've asked of the medical profession of late have been met with blank stares.
You must understand the frame of reference of the surgeons who perform circumcisions. With rare exceptions, they have no illusions about offering to improve on a properly working foreskin. People come to them with a complaint about the foreskin, whether cosmetic or some irritation, and the deal is - the surgeon removes it. That's what he does - you wanted it off, you got it off. You wouldn't have gone to him otherwise - if for example, you had a skin problem, you'd have gone to a dermatologist. It is essentially you who determines for yourself, that whatever the consequences of the loss of the foreskin may be, that they are worth it for the benefit you had determined from the removal of your foreskin.
Either the doctor has an unquestioning belief that the foreskin is undesirable, in which case he has also concluded that "the end justifies the means", or else he understands the value of the foreskin, but presumes you do not (ergo: you would not have asked to have it removed if you thought it was important), but in either case, there is no obvious need to research, discuss or even mention consequences that should be obvious from any surgery.
I point this out to explain why it should be that the doctors have little to offer by way of suggestion. Circumcision is "the cure" once and for all, and being such, there is little further that can be done other than to repeat it (or a variation, such as cutting a fraenulum).
What else did you ask? As to the haematomata, it is neither possible nor desirable to try and remove them. Regarding the excess sensitivity - hmmm, I can only observe that it will settle when it chooses, and in the same fashion, any attempt to alter it bears the risk of doing more harm than good.