It's official -- it's best to get cut, boys

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
What the CDC actually says

This does not dispute in any way what I have said. It's just worded differently -- nothing can provide absolute protection. Condoms can break or otherwise not be used correctly.

Your comment though, implies that I am lying. Which is actually very incorrect and somewhat scum-ish of a tactic.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/condoms.pdf

Laboratory studies have demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially
impermeable barrier to particles the size of STD pathogens.

Thus, a correctly used condom is not something effective in the "85% range" as you've thrown around.

If a well educated member of a modern society can be so misguided what can we expect from members of societies with less education.

It's amazing that you can't read, and as somebody who supposedly studies this stuff doesn't know what he's talking about.

Do you understand the basics of how condoms work, Mr. STD Expert? Because right now it seems like you don't.

Condoms, when used correctly, are BY FAR the most effective protection against HIV. By design, STD pathogens cannot penetrate a condom used correctly. That's fact, and I'm sorry if it irks you.

There is the issue of not using a condom correctly, but that is another issue entirely and covered under the "education" bit.

Circumcision simply plays ZERO role. It plays NO ROLE in preventing the spread of HIV if a condom is used. That negates the whole purpose of using circumcision as a tool to combat HIV unless you are practicing unsafe sex.

So the problem here should be obvious.

[Asher]

Is anyone else here blown away that a really old uber-jew is arguing with a young gay male about condoms and HIV?

[Stuie]

I don't see much use for the appendix - sometimes they burst and cause death. Remove them all at birth.

[Winston]

I must say that I hate the way this is being reported as supportive of circumcision practices. By extension, you could argue that circumcising people's necks would do away with every single disease known to man. Or why not amputate people's limbs at birth so they won't break them later on in life. It's utterly ridiculous.

[Pekka]

RIght, and because this statistical 'benefit' is so small, that it just makes ... no real difference.

It's always the cut people who bring out the AIDS thing, isn't it? In 99% it is. Well, I think the people who have more to say are the ones with uncut penis, because they can 'reap the benefits' and get their penis cut, yet they choose not to in vast majorities.. why not? Take away the pain the procedure inflicts. Then? Still, only few people signing up. Yup.

Clear case of penis envy. It's like shoutign 'hey everyone, let's shorten our penises so mine starts to look huge!'

[Asher]

From the study's Q&A...

Male circumcision is a surgical procedure with recognized risks. There have been multiple reports of serious complications and adverse events following improperly performed male circumcision, including serious infection, severe loss of blood, mutilation, penile amputation and death. These serious complications are due to poor training of those performing circumcision, lack of appropriate surgical equipment, and lack of patient follow-up.

Furthermore, the procedure requires some time for healing, and during that time there is a break in the epithelial (skin) surface of the penis. This incision site may be a portal for HIV entry and until fully healed, it may increase the risk of HIV infection. For this reason, men in the trials were cautioned to not resume sexual activity until the incision was fully healed and checked by the physician.

As with most prevention strategies, adult male circumcision is not completely effective at preventing HIV transmission. Millions of circumcised men have become infected with HIV through heterosexual exposure to the virus. Men who receive adult male circumcision may perceive that they are at decreased risk for transmission and, therefore, may not maintain other risk reduction strategies. Modest increases in the number of sexual partners could negate the protective effect and increase the rate of HIV transmission in a community. Adult male circumcision will be most effective when integrated into a comprehensive prevention strategy which includes the ABCs (Abstinence, Be Faithful, and Condoms) of HIV prevention.

[SlowwHand]

I'll take the 50% reduction the sawbones posted.

[Pekka]

I'll feel safer with a condom

[Winston]

Let's all walk around with surgical scar tissue at the tip of our manhood, so that noone will have to feel inferior or freakish.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Winston
Let's all walk around with surgical scar tissue at the tip of our manhood, so that noone will have to feel inferior or freakish.

Now that you bring it up...

My opinion is that women who have had the experience of both, tend to prefer men who are circumcised. I think this is much more to do with psychological issues than physical ones. I believe that the most likely reason for this is because when circumcised, a penis looks as it would in its sexually excited state, with the glans (head) of the penis exposed and this is more sexually desirable and exciting from a female point of view. Anecdotally, it is also said that men that are circumcised are able to make love for longer before ejaculating and are therefore likely to be able satisfy women who generally take a little longer to reach a climax. On the down side, it is said (perhaps by uncircumcised men) that those who are circumcised, enjoy or derive less pleasure from sex as their glands are less sensitive since they are always exposed. As a circumcised man, I would have to say that it would be difficult for me to imagine enjoying sex even more than I do already! It is also quite possible that women tell men that they prefer whatever the man with whom they are making love to has in his pants, so as not to give him even more of a complex than he probably already has.

Answers pointed out that in Europe, about 10% were circumcized, far below that of Americans.

From what I could gather, Canadians just looked dazed and said "Huh?".

No, that last part is a lie.

[Asher]

Uncircumcised penises can look just like circumcised, or can look natural. It's a feature.

[SlowwHand]

The last part was NOT a lie.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Asher
Circumcision simply plays ZERO role. It plays NO ROLE in preventing the spread of HIV if a condom is used.

Evidence?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Pekka
RIght, and because this statistical 'benefit' is so small, that it just makes ... no real difference.

You're smarter than this. Given the way diseases spread, a change in percentage from 1% to 2% can have an enormous long-term effect on the number of people infected.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Evidence?

Laboratory studies have demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially
impermeable barrier to particles the size of STD pathogens.

If HIV can't get in through a properly used condom, I'm sure you can connect the dots.