Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to women

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Steve Hayes - 23 Jul 2009 06:02 GMT

Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to women http://su.pr/1rVic4

Some have advocated universal male circumcision because some studies have
shown that it could statistically reduce the rate of HIV transmission and Aids
infection.

But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
counterproductive.

Signature

Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Reply to this Message

Martin - 23 Jul 2009 11:20 GMT

>Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to women http://su.pr/1rVic4
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
>counterproductive.

Post this to alt.circumcision. Everyone there will be your friend for
life. :)

Signature

<http://www.hiv-poz.co.uk/>
5,305 days and counting...

Reply to this Message

Peter Brooks - 23 Jul 2009 11:50 GMT

> Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to womenhttp://su.pr/1rVic4
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
> counterproductive.

It's a bad idea, the early studies have been shown to be flawed.
There's no justification for it at all.

Reply to this Message

Bodie - 15 Nov 2009 15:47 GMT

On Jul 23, 7:02 am, Steve Hayes <hayesm...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to womenhttp://su.pr/1rVic4
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
> counterproductive.

It's a bad idea, the early studies have been shown to be flawed.

Only certain studies.
Other studies support it.

Reply to this Message

AGG - 23 Jul 2009 12:38 GMT

> Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to women http://su.pr/1rVic4
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
> counterproductive.

***Your second paragraph is ludicrous. True, people are not statistics, but
everything in the world, including people, constitute a statistic of some
sort.

Reply to this Message

Catherine Jefferson - 23 Jul 2009 14:10 GMT

<snip>

> But people are not statistics and such a course of action could be
> counterproductive.

I'll leave discussions of the issue of circumcision and HIV to health
professionals, but "...people are not statistics..." is something we
need to repeat -- to ourselves and to our politicians, regardless of
which country we live in.

Under His mercy,

Signature

Catherine Jefferson <ariel@devsite.org>
Personal Home Page * <http://www.devsite.org/>
The SpamBouncer * <http://www.spambouncer.org/>

Reply to this Message

Moira de Swardt - 25 Jul 2009 10:25 GMT

> Circumcision of HIV+ males increases risk to womenhttp://su.pr/1rVic4
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> Blog:http://methodius.blogspot.com
> E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

The studies done, if I remember correctly, were done in groups where
infant circumcision is the (religious) norm. Again, if I remember
correctly, the studies showed only a marginal "improvement" (20% is
the figure I seem to recall) over the non-circumcised group. Even at
the time and amongst the small sample it was a theory that the
religious beliefs of the groups may have also played a role in the
lower percentage of HIV.

The only accurate way of preventing the spread of HIV is through the
threefold process of knowing one's HIV status, taking ARVs (reduce
viral load) if one is HIV positive and TO USE A CONDOM FOR EACH AND
EVERY SEX ACT NOT SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO END IN PREGNANCY. (Even in
a monogamous marriage).

Reply to this Message