This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Dennis Harrison
Vancouver, British Columbia

JAMA. 1997;278(3):202.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Dr Laumann and colleagues¹ conclude that data from the National Health and Social Life Survey do not lend clear support to either side in the circumcision debate. However, by demonstrating that circumcision does not reduce the risk of contracting STDs, the authors may have knocked another prop out from under a medical procedure that already depends on the frailest of support. Moreover, their finding that removal of the foreskin alters patterns of sexual behavior over a lifetime casts further doubt on the appropriateness of circumcising infants too young to give informed consent.

Circumcision is an invasive procedure that is not essential to an infant's welfare and virtually always can be deferred with little or no risk. The finding that circumcision has significant impact in later life adds further credibility to the view that a decision regarding circumcision should be postponed until a man can choose for himself. In 1995 . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?