[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Paul B. at 21 Feb 2003 09:16:04: Circumcision definitely "not indicated"
As an answer to: Circumcision "not indicated" written by Rood at 21 Feb 2003 06:27:46:
>Found this article from Australia while investigating http://www.bmezine.com/:
>It's found at: http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5994010%255E953,00.htm on 19 Febuary 2003.> The article gives the lie to the notion that circumcision is indicated in cases of "phimosis. It suggests that 'phimosis' is usually an excuse given by doctors and parents to the insurance companies to facilitate payment for unnecessary circumcision, when the use of steroid 'creams' and stretching will accomplish a solution in 4-6 weeks time.
Yep, that's to what I alluded in this message.
The real doctors in this country know the significance of (the damage due to) circumcision, and know it is primarily a social problem.