Male Circumcision - Hiv Prevention

[Sheryl]

Though there appears to be an arguement here for male circumcision I cannot understand why the 'benefits' would only apply to male-female virginal intercourse. Surely if the HIV/AIDs receptors referred to are in the foreskin, by removing it there should be a reduction in cases all round be it virginal, anal or male-male - why does where it is stuck make a difference ?

It doesn't. Risk of transmission is decreased if the man is circumcized regardless. Although risk for receptive anal sex will still always be higher than for vaginal sex due to a thinner mucosal lining which is more easily torn. Tiny microscopic tears are virtually inevitable suring anal sex, making iot a very efficient means of transmitting the virus is the active partner is infected (and no condom used)

The countries with ultra-high HIV prevalance (and thus the places where increasing rates of circumcision would be beneficial in terms of epidemic control) are all ones where the majority of the hIV transmission is heterosexual, maybe that's where this misunderstanding is coming from.

[Jingthing]

Some of the confusion about this may be happening because the focus of the drive to increase circumcisions is in AFRICA, and in AFRICA the vast majority of HIV infections are vaginal HETEROSEXUAL in nature.

Edited March 27, 2009 by Jingthing

[Orac]

My concern was more that what the OP was stating didn't make sense and appeared to have a sexual bias as he was adamant that it ONLY applied to hetrosexuals. By doing so it automatically made me question the accuracy of the information.

Though I am happily married and therefore have no need to get circumsized I would be interested to hear if it as simple a process for a middle aged man as it appears.

[Sheryl]

Medically simple, yes, but I would think that having experienced life with foreskin into middle age it would feel strange/be a potentially upsetting adjustment afterwards.

One of the reasons some parents decide in favor of circumcision of a boy infant is to avoid the possibility that it might have to be done at a later age when it would be (pyschologically) more traumatic. There are conditions which can occur at any age later on that make it medically necessary.

[Orac]

Medically simple, yes, but I would think that having experienced life with foreskin into middle age it would feel strange/be a potentially upsetting adjustment afterwards.

One of the reasons some parents decide in favor of circumcision of a boy infant is to avoid the possibility that it might have to be done at a later age when it would be (pyschologically) more traumatic. There are conditions which can occur at any age later on that make it medically necessary.

Unless I am misunderstanding something I don't think I am that emotionally attached to my foreskin - I can't believe I would feel any less of a man without it unless the doctor slipped of course. My main concern with be any pain involved and how long it would be 'out of action'.

[Sheryl]

Unless I am misunderstanding something I don't think I am that emotionally attached to my foreskin - I can't believe I would feel any less of a man without it unless the doctor slipped of course. My main concern with be any pain involved and how long it would be 'out of action'.

That's fine. Some men (many, I would say) get quite emotional around the idea of anything in that region being in any way altered.

Type of anesthesia varies. May be general or a local block or a regional block. In any case nothing felt during the procedure. If a local or regional b lock, will have momen tary pain from the injection of the anesthetic (basically the same thing you get at a dentists's office); depending on whether a local or regional block the injection may be in the groin area or in the lower spine. With a general, momentary pain when IV is inserted in your arm. See this re anesthesia:

http://www.medscape.com/medline/abstract/10692761

Afterwards, soreness and swelling for abolut 3 days. Up and about after that but wouldn't want to ride a bike for maybe a month. "Out of commission" sexually also at least a month, possibly two.

There are different surgical techniques in use. A recently developed one apparently better in terms of post-op pain etc:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/583436

Whether or not circumcision in adulthood will affect (long term) sexual function or pleasure has been the subject of some debate, reolution of which is complicated by the fact that many of the men undergoing it are doing so because of a medical problem to begin with. Several studies done on men having it for medical reasons seemed to show an increased incidence of erectile problems afterwards although in a minority of the patrients. A prospective study done on a small greoup of men having it purely as an electivbe procuedure did not find any ill effect, although its sample size was small:

http://www.medscape.com/medline/abstract/14751371

Tons of anecdotal reports floating about, pro and con. If you'd like to hear from TV members who had it done see these threads:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Adult-Circum...hl=circumcision

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Circumcision...ision&st=25

[Sheryl]

Off-topic jokes potentially offensive to gay members have been deleted