One idea at a time
The long-form case lives under Why this matters. These blog posts focus more on personal opinions about news as well as personal observations that don't fit into the primary arguments
Who’s really being selective about circumcision’s risks?
The UTI benefit and the phimosis risk make almost every list. Meatal stenosis, which is far more common and essentially only happens to circumcised boys, almost never does. The AAP used to mention this increased risk from circumcision and the protective benefits of the foreskin.
The most American thing about circumcision: nobody has to explain it
In households that circumcise for religious reasons, the practice gets discussed and defended every generation. In secular American ones, it's mostly just inherited — and some men reach adulthood never having learned their own status.
The system assumes someone will notice issues. But when exactly, and how?
A circumcision complication can only get caught by someone looking. Past early childhood, in the US medical system, almost nobody structurally is.
Some doctors involved in writing the AAP's circumcision policy no longer stand by it
Two architects of the AAP's 2012 statement now say it wasn't really a medical conclusion. The same Academy just told states to stop letting culture override vaccine science. It can't have both.
Why don’t medical websites ever mention the loss of the gliding sheath?
One of the easiest, most undeniable mechanical differences there is to observe — and one that almost never gets a mention in mainstream circumcision information.
No posts in this topic yet — check back soon, or browse another.