Circumcision Not a Cure-all for AIDS
Circumcision may result in false belief that safe-sex practices are no longer necessary. The result could be a worsening of the incidence of HIV infection, especially for women.
(PRWEB) July 31, 2005 -- Circumcision may result in false belief that
safe-sex practices are no longer necessary. The result could be a worsening of
the incidence of HIV infection, especially for women.
A paper, read at a
conference in Brazil, claims that male circumcision has the potential to reduce
female-to-male transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The "Wall
Street Journal" reported that the "Lancet," the pre-eminent medical journal in
the world, refused to publish the paper for unknown reasons.
The
researchers said circumcision might help in reducing HIV transmission
women-to-men. What they don't say is that male circumcision doesn't protect
women from HIV. An infected circumcised man having sex with a woman is just as
likely to spread the disease as an intact man. The same goes for any male
partner with whom he has sex. The problem is that men and women may erroneously
believe that circumcision is like a condom, which then leads to unprotected sex
and transmission of the virus.
Robert Bailey, the scientist who
sponsored the study, has been promoting circumcision to prevent HIV transmission
since 1989. The world medical community thus far has not accepted his published
studies. The present study, which was conducted in South Africa, is his latest
effort. In such cases, one must be aware of possible researcher
bias.
UNAIDS has cautioned against circumcision.
If circumcision were
promoted as a way of preventing HIV infection, people might abandon other safe
sex practices, such as condom use. This risk is far from negligible - already,
rumors abound in some communities that circumcision acts as a "natural condom. A
sex worker interviewed in the city of Kisumu in Kenya summed up this
misconception, saying, "I can sleep with circumcised men without a condom
because they don't carry a lot of dirt on their penis." While circumcision may
reduce the likelihood of HIV infection, it does not eliminate it. In one study
in South Africa, for example, two out of five circumcised men were infected with
HIV, compared with three out of five uncircumcised men. Relying on circumcision
for protection is, in these circumstances, like playing Russian roulette with
two bullets in a (five-shot) revolver rather than three.
The World Health
Organization (WHO) said they were concerned that demand for circumcision, as a
result of misinterpreting this study, may encourage healers and witch-doctors,
which could boost the risk of HIV infection rather than prevent it due to using
contaminated instruments. They also fear a false security from having been
circumcised, and reduced sensitivity in the penis may cause an increase in
risky, sexual behavior and a decline in condom use leading to increased
transmission of the virus.
Circumcision itself is believed to be a vector
for transmission of HIV in Africa due to the unsanitary condition of African
hospitals, clinics, and traditional circumcisors.
Many South African
tribes, such as the Xhosa, practice male circumcision as a cultural ritual, yet
South Africa has an extremely high incidence of HIV-positive males. Male
circumcision apparently has not worked in South Africa. Recently, authorities in
Eastern Cape Province arrested a ritual circumciser who was circumcising
numerous youths with the same non-sterile knife.
Circumcision is a
radical operation that amputates significant erogenous tissue from the penis.
Many people call forced or coerced circumcisions an assault and male genital
mutilation.
Men must be warned of loss of sensation – resulting in
decreased erectile power, difficulty in ejaculating, and decreased sexual
satisfaction, before consent for the surgical amputation is obtained.
Two
similar studies have not yet been published. Bailey's present study has not yet
been peer-reviewed. The three studies must be carefully reviewed before a
determination of the value of circumcision in preventing female-to-male HIV
transmission, and even then, legal and ethical issues about self-determination
must be addressed before advocating the procedure.
Even if the studies
prove true and accurate, Africa cannot afford to circumcise all its males. A
safe circumcision costs $15, compared to the already-proven methods for stopping
the spread of HIV/AIDS, education and condom use, which cost
$1.
Circumcision has many risks, including infection, penile loss,
hemorrhage, hypovolemic shock, and death. The claimed benefit must be balanced
against these very real risks.
# # #
Source : http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/7/prweb267228.htm