Long-time readers, if any remain, know that I’m again routine infant circumcision.
I won’t rehash those arguments here, except to say that the latest study shows circumcision offering no protection whatsoever against HIV/AIDS transmission for US minorities.
Why the procedure might be 50-60 percent effective for African men and not at all for US men seems a bit of a mystery–at least I wasn’t able to ascertain the difference from the article–but overall it attacks one of the few arguments for circumcision I find reasonable. (Keeping one’s pants on and/or having a single partner remains many times more effective.)
I continue to believe circumcision medically invasive and generally unwarranted. I think we’ll look back on the procedure one day and try to figure out–much like we do now with treatments like medicinal mercury or bleeding a patient–what in the world we were thinking. The last thing circumcision should be for baby boys–at least in the United States, but probably world-wide–is routine.