Hospital stops ops after circumcision ruling

Well this is a step forward although some parents may try to circumcise their kids themselves if hospitals are prohibited from doing the operation. At least those parents will become criminals and recognized as such.

I asked my husband about this. There is a move in the US too not to circumcise as much, he says. The only problem with not circumcising is that a man has to be very careful of washing himself in order not to pick up sexually transmitted diseases.

One would have to be so careful. It may be a health risk not to get circumcised,

if you're not a compulsive washer!

¦quot;The only problem with not circumcising is that a man has to be very careful of washing himself in order not to pick up sexually transmitted diseases. One would have to be so careful. It may be a health risk not to get circumcised, if you're not a compulsive washer!¦quot;

Zotta, Male and female genitalia need the same care: you wash only what you see! Being too careful, being a compulsive washer or following stupid advice will lead to the removal of the normal flora (non-disease causing bacteria), which need to stay on/in the genitalia to crowd out any pathological bacteria trying to find a foot-hold there. Removing the normal flora, as happens with taking antibiotics or with too much washing, or washing with soap, very often leads to infections, such as yeast as you might know.

Sadly, because in past decades only few males ended up keeping their foreskins, professionals were and continue to be ignorant about the structure and function of the foreskin. All they ever learned was how to do a circumcision. That is slowly changing, thank God, because non-medical circumcision in its very essence is sexual mutilation, an act of savagery, and should be illegal

So, only wash the outside of the genitalia with soap and water, never use soap to clean the inside, including the preputial space, the inner foreskin, or the glans penis. In other words, care for the penis as you would for the its female equivalent, the clitoris.

"The only problem with not circumcising is that a man has to be very careful of washing himself"

Just to be clear - the current debate in Germany is not about hygiene or anything like that. Boys have never been routinely circumcised for "hygienic reasons" in German hospitals like in the US. People are circumcised either for clear medical reasons (an illness) or for religious reasons. That helps explain why a majority of Germans apparently supports the ruling - they are not affected by it at all. The ruling only affects people who do it for religious reasons, i.e. Jews and Muslims. Personally, I oppose the ruling because it severely interfers with religious freedom.

As I have said before, odd that "your" God would require that you mutilate your genitals to be considered a religious and worthy person............

Also the amount of women who prattle on about hygiene under the foreskin. I am dam sure there would be huge outcry if we started to discus and ask whether women wash their vulva and labia properly, regularly and thoroughly!!!!!

One would assume that if the government is going to protect a child from their parent's choice to circumcise them, the government will also protect the child from their parent's choice to abort them. Furthermore, where does the government stand on a parent's choice to pierce the child's ears or any other body part? Pick a side and be consistent.

"I oppose the ruling because it severely interfers with religious freedom"

Religious freedom does include the 'right' to mutilate children? I don't think so.

"It may be a health risk not to get circumcised".

Sure... you can even become a zombie ;) Mann... Too much 'Sex and the city', I am afraid.

"Personally, I oppose the ruling because it severely interfers with religious freedom. "

Your or that of your child???

Sighting that men should be circumcised for health reasons, we should equally be discussing the circumcision of women for the same reason...................

Time to outlaw all body modifications, then.

no more plastic surgery, gals. :)

If (big IF) man is made in God's image why is the foreskin there in the first place ?.

If as I believe the only original reason for circumcision was to stop sand rubbing in painful places,because remember where all this religious rubbish started.

Yes ban it ,it is wrong to inflict your religion on anyone let alone a child.

The religion of "climate change" has castrated many men.

@Eric1

Balls

Is piercing the ears of babies also forbidden?

What about aesthetic procedures?

Ist stop ban circumcision..

next stop abolish religion..

Well,

there is a way to respect the religion and to keep the baby from medical hazard, at least in Israel there are people who are Urologist as their speciality and got on the same time a religious recognation , they do it in the hospidals under medical conditions,also in Sweden the law does not allow that tradition with the reason that the baby has rights on his body and just with 18 years old he has legally the right to decide on his body, well it is an enourmus Philosophic, medical ,theology issue and of course it comes to questions like where are the limits of the religion freedom,talking from medical view it is a simple medical procedure which very low comlication rate if done by experts ,and scientificly reduce dramaticlly the possibility of penis cancer.

@ITAMAR

Where do you get "scientificly reduce dramaticlly the possibility of penis cancer. "

from? I "normally " effects men over 60 and the U.K. does not even have national figures for it. Because it is so rare and in the U.K. most men keep their foreskins at least did so before the mass immigration from Muslim countries in the 60's.

If the law makers wants to protect our young ones, i think they should do it thoroughly and properly.

What use is it to forbid circumcision on religious grounds while being soft or easy with kids and teens piercings, tattoos, and implants? " At the moment, there is no minimum age. As a result, patients under 20 account for about 10% of all cosmetic procedures, according to the Association of German Plastic Surgeons. These include operations like breast enlargements, nose jobs and abdominal liposuction." http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/10057/

Just saying!

so, can an adult male opt to be circumcised for non medical reasons under this law??

Yes, absolutely. No questions asked. Even more than once, if he/she decides that is what they want.

Englishted

Penis cancer is really rare but very aggreesive. acording the American Cancer Society there is 1 men to 100000 in a year.

Even if you treat it in early stages[there are 4 clinical stages] the survival rate is 65% for 5 years.

All the text books of Oncology underline the high incidence of Penil cancer in uncircumsided men , talking allways as you mentioned before that that cancer is rare , but inside the group of people affected by that cancer there is an high incidence of that malignant disease in uncirumsided men, that fact is known and wriiten in all oncology text books.

yours

ITAMAR

I am M.D.

So ITAMAR, MMM.DDDD.,

1. The incidence of penile cancer in newborns and infants is virtually zero.

2. Circumcised men also get penile cancer.

3. In men, the incidence of breast cancer is higher than the incidence of penile cancer. Why aren't you advocating routine mastectomies in men? Remember that breasts are 100% useless in men. On the contrary, the prepuce is highly useful in sexual activity.

4. The issue here is consent. Unless there is an imminent need for medical this procedure, circumcision is unethical. By definition, routine circumcision is ALWAYS non therapeutic and therefore unethical. It is in its very essence genital mutilation, an act of savagery.

By the way, reading and studying text books written by M.D.s are a poor investment of time. Most M.D.s are clueless about research, statistics, and data interpretation.

But then again, you knew that. You have alternate reasons to support circumcision.

May Germany be blessed and all those who defend children and the rights of the helpless and the weak be blessed. May all be guided rightly and become loving and kind. May the EU and Germany and all those who side with them be blessed.

How could 200 boys in Berlin need medical circumcision? this is statistically impossible, and a clear case of insurance fraud. The so called religious parents getting the operation done for religious reasons but using medical grounds to get it done for free. This is fraud against our health insurance but will anyone investigate, I bet not. Will any of the doctors over diagnosing the medical need for this procedure be disbarred or even investigated?

The court's decision only reaffirms my opinion that the Jews should have never returned (or immigrated) to Germany after the WWII. Of course, I feel sorry for the German Muslims too. What I find most pathetic is that the poliicians had claimed that the decision did not target any particular faith. LOL!

@Henry List

A well written and good comment ,thanks.

Hennry List

I brought the scientific facts without mention that the medicine indicated the circumcision as medical therapeutic act.

Men breast ca is very rare ,very aggresive too, needs a masivve thorax wall excision and chemotherapy aggressive one,poor survival rate in 5 years.

Reading text book is my duty as Physician ,I guess also in your country the doctors do the same.

Mastectomy is not done any more ,today the procedure is tumerctomy and post op rt or chemotherapy or both.

Consent is a legal question and every country make its own rules

And no statistic is one of the important tools in medicine to understand the diseases and to treat them.

I have never said that I support circumcision as a medical method to avoid penil cancer in men,I gave the scientific facts as they are so do not put in my mouth words I have never said,you have the facts do it what ever you like that is your right and everybodies right

"I brought the scientific facts without mention that the medicine indicated the circumcision as medical therapeutic act."

By definition, routine infant circumcision is never therapeutic. Some claim that it is prophylactic. If circumcision is needed for medical reason, which is less than extremely rare, it is referred to a medical circumcision.

"Men breast ca is very rare ,very aggresive too, needs a masivve thorax wall excision and chemotherapy aggressive one,poor survival rate in 5 years."

Yet no one argues for routine infant mastectomies in boys!

"Reading text book is my duty as Physician ,I guess also in your country the doctors do the same."

One should read textbooks written by experts, not those who think they are experts.

'Consent is a legal question and every country make its own rules'

And a moral, ethical question. Unfortunately, this very often takes a back seat to earning easy money.

"And no statistic is one of the important tools in medicine to understand the diseases and to treat them."

Yet most MDs are clueless about, yet write books.

"I have never said that I support circumcision as a medical method to avoid penil cancer in men,I gave the scientific facts as they are so do not put in my mouth words I have never said,you have the facts do it what ever you like that is your right and everybodies right "

I appreciate that you do not justify routine circumcision. However, many of your facts are wrong. It might be a good time to buy books from real experts, not self proclaimed experts who are trying to make a buck of their publication.

Henry List

"Some claim that it is prophylactic."-it is not written in no Known medical books.

The medicine school here are as good as in the USA and we use the same books:Harisson for Internal Medicine Schwarz for Surgery ,Walter and Israel for pathology. I am sure these text books are good enough for every M.D.

Ethical .Legal questions are deal in different approach in different countries.

Statistic is one of the important tools in medical research

the way you answer me , you do not belong to my proffessionand your knoweldge is limited.

Itamar, your comments are amusing.

"Some claim that it is prophylactic.-it is not written in no Known medical books."

Either you do not know the meaning of "prophylactic" or you are reading the wrong medical books.

"The medicine school here are as good as in the USA and we use the same books:Harisson for Internal Medicine Schwarz for Surgery ,Walter and Israel for pathology. I am sure these text books are good enough for every M.D." Unfortunately that may be true. Many American medical schools never teach anything about the normal structure and function of the the foreskin, only how to cut it off. However, this is changing. We now have physicians who know better. Hopefully, some of this will eventually get to your side of the world so that children in your country will be kept as God intended them to be.

"Ethical .Legal questions are deal in different approach in different countries."

Unfortunately so. Many women and children from your country can speak to that. Hopefully that will change with proper education.

"Statistic is one of the important tools in medical research."

There is no research without statistical analysis. One must also understand what the various statistical analyses mean for proper interpretation of the data collected. Many physicians are unfortunately clueless in that area.

"the way you answer me , you do not belong to my proffessionand your knoweldge is limited."

Unfortunately, you are clueless.

Henry List

No medical book invoke circumcision as prophilatic therapy to practise on babies.

Schwarz and Harison are the right books basic in medicine also in USA.

As long as I know and I came to Medical Congress in Europe and in US all conventional doctors speak the same scientific language.

Sorry but 97% of the people in Israel do not think as you think and will probably not agree with you.

You underestimated the achievments of the medicine scienceand I think you have not enough knowledge to examine the issue.

"Many physicians are unfortunately clueless in that area."

the research and treatment are subjected to carefull Helsinki permission and FDA licence.

Many treatment save life of people,thing that is for you diffuclt to apprecciate because you are completly against doctors and operations.

I realy do not understand your meaning " you are clueless" but in my long work in emergancy room I saved the life of many people during the last 20 years, how many people did you saved?

Itamar,

¦quot;No medical book invoke circumcision as prophilatic therapy to practise on babies.¦quot;

Routine Infant circumcision is by definition always prophylactic, never therapeutic or medical. Do you not understand the term prophylactic?

¦quot;Schwarz and Harison are the right books basic in medicine also in USA.¦quot;

You are entitled to that opinion. However, if they the authors of this text do not label routine infant circumcision as prophylactic, as you assert, then there is a problem with the authors and their publication.

¦quot;As long as I know and I came to Medical Congress in Europe and in US all conventional doctors speak the same scientific language.¦quot;

They certainly should. All should know and understand the term ¦quot;prophylactic.¦quot;

¦quot;Sorry but 97% of the people in Israel do not think as you think and will probably not agree with you.¦quot;

I will take your word for it. However, that does not make routine infant circumcision beneficial, ethical, or moral.

You underestimated the achievments of the medicine scienceand I think you have not enough knowledge to examine the issue.

You are entitled to your opinion. However, you have no idea about knowledge and achievements in the area of medicine.

"the research and treatment are subjected to carefull Helsinki permission and FDA licence.¦quot;

Doing research under the Helsinki Permission or FDA licensure by no means guarantees proper protocol or execution.

¦quot;Many treatment save life of people,thing that is for you diffuclt to apprecciate because you are completly against doctors and operations.¦quot;

Routine infant circumcision by definition is not lifesaving. In addition, 99.994 % of all males will never have to be circumcised throughout their entire lifetime for medical reasons. Circumcisions should only be performed for medical reasons.

¦quot;I realy do not understand your meaning " you are clueless" but in my long work in emergancy room I saved the life of many people during the last 20 years, how many people did you saved?¦quot;

I have done and continue my share of lifesaving, rest assured. However, non-medical circumcision is never lifesaving by definition and must be eliminated for legal, ethical, and moral reasons. Our children and grandchildren deserve better.

Henry List

," if they the authors of this text do not label routine infant circumcision as prophylactic, as you assert, then there is a problem with the authors and their publication."

No Henry these experts are right they base on the long term medical research-the problem is with your medical knowledge.

No text book in western medicine reccomand today a prophilatic circumcision.it seems that you do not understand my language ,so text books in medicine never write that circumcision is a neceesary procedure to prevent diseases.

"that does not make routine infant circumcision beneficial, ethical, or moral."

I do understand it is your opinion, I respect it but I do not agree with it.

"Doing research under the Helsinki Permission or FDA licensure by no means guarantees proper protocol or execution"- As Physician I do not agree with that.

"Routine infant circumcision by definition is not lifesaving"- I do agree with this I do not recall I have ever written these words ,I meant to critisize your general attitude aagainst medicine and doctors.

. "Circumcisions should only be performed for medical reasons."-I do not agree with that ,circumcision is a religious ritual and does not belong to medical treatment

"medical circumcision is never lifesaving by definition and must be eliminated for legal, ethical, and moral reasons."

I do agree with the first part but when Iwrote it I meant my treatment to cardial patients in emergancy room not of course circumcision-a simple common sense,I do not believe you will be able to eliminate circumcision from millions of believers around the world ,even if you wish it so much,

At least we agree that we do not agree ,I do respect your opinion but I do not accept it.

¦quot;No Henry these experts are right they base on the long term medical research-the problem is with your medical knowledge.¦quot;

Research that presumably shows that routine infant circumcision has medical benefits, including the studies done recently in Africa, have all been showing to have severe flaws. Therefore, the conclusions of those investigations have been rendered invalid. Saying ¦quot;no, no¦quot; does not change that reality. The may want to read up on the critical comments.

¦quot;No text book in western medicine reccomand today a prophilatic circumcision it seems that you do not understand my language .¦quot;

You finally seem to be getting it.

"Doing research under the Helsinki Permission or FDA licensure by no means guarantees proper protocol or execution- As Physician I do not agree with that.¦quot;

Ergo, you are not a medical researcher.

¦quot;I meant to critisize your general attitude aagainst medicine and doctors.¦quot;

Being in the field I am in, I do not have an attitude against medicines and doctors, just unethical application of it.

"Circumcisions should only be performed for medical reasons - I do not agree with that ,circumcision is a religious ritual and does not belong to medical treatment.¦quot;

Ergo you must be for allowing female circumcision, head binding, foot binding, etc. for religious reason. What about human sacrifice for religious reasons?

"[non-]medical circumcision is never lifesaving by definition and must be eliminated for legal, ethical, and moral reasons."

¦quot;I do not believe you will be able to eliminate circumcision from millions of believers around the world ,even if you wish it so much,¦quot;

You do know that many Jews no longer circumcise, including an increasing number in Israel? So there is hope. Forgive me for being an optimist. And Jews have given up animal sacrifice, which is a definite step forward from the Muslims.

By the way, my ancestral tree contains many Jews and Muslims. I am not against circumcision, just against non-medical circumcision of minors. I am also against kosher slaughter, but love the rest of the Jewish customs.

Henry List

Thank you for expressing your opinion,it is always interesting for me to hear other people way of thinking in that matter.

Right now I do take part in a huge research on the receptors of the breast ca cells,but not in the leading group,there are those who are better then me.

There is in Israel a small group who oppose the circumcision, they failed their appeal in the Suprime Court,if it is possibile that one day the law will be indroduced here? I hardly believe it but who knows what will happen after 100 years? I will not live so long to see it.

I said before that no medical text book reccomend cirumcision as prophilatic treatment, you probably did not understood the way I expressed it in English.

Any way I do respect the way you think and your right to fight for your opinion even if I do not accept it.