Is it true that just 1 in 16,667 men will require a circumcision?

Anti-circumcision activists often claim that just 1 out of 16,667 men (0.006%) will require a circumcision for medical reasons. This is one of the most cited intactivist statistics, up there with the 16 functions, 117 deaths, and 20,000 nerve endings. It was even cited by the president of Doctors Opposing Circumcision in a 1996 article in a medical journal. [1] This post will answer the questions: What is the source for this statistic? And is it valid? It's important to note the distinction between circumcision as medically required versus medically beneficial. The 16,667 statistic is based entirely on circumcision as a required therapeutic treatment for phimosis and paraphimosis. It doesn't

Intactivist scholar misunderstands FGM ruling

In this 7-minute video intactivist scholar and so-called ethicist Brian Earp explained last week’s FGM ruling to the intactivist community. In discussing the decision, Earp made two factual errors. First, he said that the present case is about a slight nick in which no tissue was removed. The defense has maintained that the procedure involved "just a scraping of the genitalia". [1] But the April 12, 2017 indictment described a 7 year-old victim whose “labia minora has been altered or removed, and her clitoral hood is also abnormal in appearance”. [2] That injury, classified as FGM Type 2, causes significant harm. Apparently Earp took the defense at its word and didn't review the indictment.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square

created by non-professionals using

  • Facebook App Icon
  • Twitter App Icon