This site discusses phimosis in its specific forms of phimotic ring, frenulum breve, adhesions or skinbridges. During erection these conditions inhibit the relationship between foreskin and glans. This functionally restricts the erection, and thus has an effect on the sexuality. With our culture's attitudes on health care, it would be appropriate to encourage early prevention.

Jan 2021 : Please read the new summary.

archive index

From: fo6a001 my first email (Robin Stuart)
Subject: Re: Male Circ. - The Third Perspective
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 13:41:41 +0200

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??

Robin Stuart