[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by chImp at 01 May 2003 21:37:35: Re: To PaulB nr2: That sensitivity study
As an answer to: Re: To PaulB nr2: That sensitivity study written by Ralesk at 01 May 2003 21:16:17:
I believe the study itself was solely about the glans, but it was the journalists who wrote all the errors in that article (most notably the probability theory error. It can only be right if you replace the sentence "more likely to be circumcised" with "less likely to be intact".).
>I don't know what they tested, I'm also wondering about that. Does it really seem so that they haven't measured anything about the foreskin's sensitivity? It was just a glans comparison --- as if the foreskin would just be a dead flap of skin hanging off one's cock.