Article

Review: A critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision for HIV prevention in developed countries.

a School of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute , University of Sydney , NSW , Australia.
AIDS Care (Impact Factor: 1.6). 03/2012; DOI: 10.1080/09540121.2012.661836
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Abstract A potential impediment to evidence-based policy development on medical male circumcision (MC) for HIV prevention in all countries worldwide is the uncritical acceptance by some of arguments used by opponents of this procedure. Here we evaluate recent opinion-pieces of 13 individuals opposed to MC. We find that these statements misrepresent good studies, selectively cite references, some containing fallacious information, and draw erroneous conclusions. In marked contrast, the scientific evidence shows MC to be a simple, low-risk procedure with very little or no adverse long-term effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sensation during arousal or overall satisfaction. Unscientific arguments have been recently used to drive ballot measures aimed at banning MC of minors in the USA, eliminate insurance coverage for medical MC for low-income families, and threaten large fines and incarceration for health care providers. Medical MC is a preventative health measure akin to immunisation, given its protective effect against HIV infection, genital cancers and various other conditions. Protection afforded by neonatal MC against a diversity of common medical conditions starts in infancy with urinary tract infections and extends throughout life. Besides protection in adulthood against acquiring HIV, MC also reduces morbidity and mortality from multiple other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and genital cancers in men and their female sexual partners. It is estimated that over their lifetime one-third of uncircumcised males will suffer at least one foreskin-related medical condition. The scientific evidence indicates that medical MC is safe and effective. Its favourable risk/benefit ratio and cost/benefit support the advantages of medical MC.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
309 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We critically evaluate a recent article by Van Howe involving 12 meta-analyses that concludes, contrary to current evidence, that male circumcision increases the risk of various common sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Our detailed scrutiny reveals that these meta-analyses (1) failed to include results of all relevant studies, especially data from randomized controlled trials, (2) introduced bias through use of inappropriate control groups, (3) altered original data, in the case of human papillomavirus (HPV), by questionable adjustments for "sampling bias," (4) failed to control for confounders through use of crude odds ratios, and (5) used unnecessarily complicated methods without adequate explanation, so impeding replication by others. Interventions that can reduce the prevalence of STIs are important to international health. Of major concern is the global epidemic of oncogenic types of HPV that contribute to the burden of genital cancers. Meta-analyses, when well conducted, can better inform public health policy and medical practice, but when seriously flawed can have detrimental consequences. Our critical evaluation leads us to reject the findings and conclusions of Van Howe on multiple grounds. Our timely analysis thus reaffirms the medical evidence supporting male circumcision as a desirable intervention for STI prevention.
    ISRN urology. 01/2014; 2014:684706.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in HIV-infected people has led to a dramatic decrease in the incidence of opportunistic infections and virus-related malignancies such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Kaposi sarcoma, but not cervical or anal cancer. Advanced-stage cervical cancer is associated with a high incidence of urological complications such as hydronephrosis, renal failure, and vesicovaginal fistula. Adult male circumcison can significantly reduce the risk of male HIV acquisition. Although HAART does not completely eradicate HIV, compliance with medication increases life expectancy. HIV infection or treatment can result in renal failure, which can be managed with dialysis and transplantation (as for HIV-negative patients). Although treatment for erectile dysfunction-including phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection therapy, and penile prosthesis-can increase the risk of HIV transmission, treatment decisions for men with erectile dysfunction should not be determined by HIV status. The challenges faced when administering chemotherapy to HIV-infected patients with cancer include late presentation, immunodeficiency, drug interactions, and adverse effects associated with compounded medications. Nonetheless, HIV-infected patients should receive the same cancer treatment as HIV-negative patients. The urologist is increasingly likely to encounter HIV-positive patients who present with the same urological problems as the general population, because HAART confers a prolonged life expectancy. Performing surgery in an HIV-infected individual raises safety issues for both the patient (if severely immunocompromised) and the surgeon, but the risk of HIV transmission from patients on fully suppressive HAART is small.
    Nature Reviews Urology 10/2013; · 4.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this review was to assess the trend in the US male circumcision rate and the impact that the affirmative 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement might have on neonatal circumcision practice. We searched PubMed for the term circumcision to retrieve relevant articles. This review was prompted by a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found a slight increase, from 79% to 81%, in the prevalence of circumcision in males aged 14 to 59 years during the past decade. There were racial and ethnic disparities, with prevalence rising to 91% in white, 76% in black, and 44% in Hispanic males. Because data on neonatal circumcision are equivocal, we undertook a critical analysis of hospital discharge data. After correction for underreporting, we found that the percentage had declined from 83% in the 1960s to 77% by 2010. A risk-benefit analysis of conditions that neonatal circumcision protects against revealed that benefits exceed risks by at least 100 to 1 and that over their lifetime, half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin. Other analyses show that neonatal male circumcision is cost-effective for disease prevention. The benefits of circumcision begin in the neonatal period by protection against infections that can damage the pediatric kidney. Given the substantial risk of adverse conditions and disease, some argue that failure to circumcise a baby boy may be unethical because it diminishes his right to good health. There is no long-term adverse effect of neonatal circumcision on sexual function or pleasure. The affirmative 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics policy supports parental education about, access to, and insurance and Medicaid coverage for elective infant circumcision. As with vaccination, circumcision of newborn boys should be part of public health policies. Campaigns should prioritize population subgroups with lower circumcision prevalence and a higher burden of diseases that can be ameliorated by circumcision.
    Mayo Clinic Proceedings 01/2014; · 5.79 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
87 Downloads
Available from
May 27, 2014