Academic Journals Database
Disseminating quality controlled scientific knowledge

Infant male circumcision: An evidence-based policy statement

ADD TO MY LIST
 
Author(s): David A. Cooper | Michael Lowy | Robin J. Willcourt | Stephen R. Leeder | C. Terry Russell | Eugenie R. Lumbers | Adrian Mindel | Alex D. Wodak | Brian J. Morris | Anthony Dilley | Karen A. Duggan | Leslie Schrieber

Journal: Journal of Biophysical Chemistry
ISSN 2153-036X

Volume: 02;
Issue: 01;
Start page: 79;
Date: 2012;
Original page

Keywords: Male Circumcision | Public Health | Infant Infections | Sexually Transmitted Infections | Cervical Cancer

ABSTRACT
Here we review the international evidence for benefits and risks of infant male circumcision (MC) and use this to develop an evidence-based policy statement for a developed nation setting, focusing on Australia. Evidence from good quality studies that include meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials showed that MC provides strong protection against: urinary tract infections and, in infancy, renal parenchymal disease; phimosis; paraphimosis; balanoposthitis; foreskin tearing; some heterosexually transmitted infections including HPV, HSV-2, trichomonas, HIV, and genital ulcer disease; thrush; inferior hygiene; penile cancer and possibly prostate cancer. In women, circumcision of the male partner protects against HPV, HSV-2, cervical cancer, bacterial vaginosis, and possibly Chlamydia. MC has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, penile sensation or satisfaction and may enhance the male sexual experience. Adverse effects are uncommon (
Why do you need a reservation system?      Affiliate Program