Decline in circumcisions costing health care system billions, study finds

goodfoobar · 2019-03-25T13:15:36+00:00

boys who are not circumcised are more prone to ...

The article than goes on to list many points which are false.

more prone to sexually transmitted diseases

The US has high rates of circumcision and high rates of STD's while Europe has lower rates of circumcision and much lower rates of STD's.

Bacteria and viruses can get trapped in the extra layers of skin left on the penis.

This is due to premature forced foreskin retraction. The foreskin is fused to the glans(head) at birth and remains so until puberty. Do not force retract it will only cause problems.

Ryan McAllister, ... NotJustSkin.org, argues that medical costs rise when babies are circumcised. He said many boys need operations to correct botched circumcisions

The article states that more medical procedures is the reason for rising medical costs but then downplays the measurable cost of correcting botched circumcisions.

prevent the spread of HIV

This claim is based on broken African studies. Find men that test HIV negative then circumcise half of them. Go back a year later then test again. The risk went from something like 3% to 2.5%. The circumcised men could not have sex for 6-8 weeks while they healed and were around medical clinics that had condoms available. Apparently there were more factors that can account for the small risk drop.

Some doctors said more needs to be done to make people aware of the benefits of circumcision

All the "benefits" they list are based on lies and half truths.

Some men get conditions where the foreskin tightens or scars and won't move.

It is called phimosis. It happens in less then 1% of intact adult males and is treatable with steroid cream which is successful about 87% of the time. For those cases where it is not successful a cut can be done on the ridged band which opens things up enough to allow movement. No tissue removal required!

This article was published in 2012 but many of these myths persist today.

tenchineuro · 2019-03-25T14:10:28+00:00

$2 billion is how much uncircumcised males have cost American medical system

There is no source for this number. I suspect it's lost profits from circumcisions not performed.

furchfur · 2019-03-25T13:08:39+00:00

Tthe HIV rate in the USA is higher than any country in Europe. So I do not know where they get their numbers from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate

PleasantHuman · 2019-03-25T12:44:29+00:00

so now cutting off our dicks is being done for profits?!

peepeeandpoopooman · 2019-03-25T12:06:31+00:00

it shows that financial profit is basically why the health system wants it to continue.

US men- your Government cares more about its wallet than it does about your (and your male kids) ding-dongs

2019-03-25T15:50:15+00:00

Another woman spouting false facts to support male genital mutilation, shocker.

2019-03-25T17:12:53+00:00

Circumcision is modern day foot binding. Anyone who doesn’t care about mutilating male genitals can burn in hell.

2019-03-25T15:35:15+00:00

So that's the real reason there's resistance to doing away with circumcision. It never occurred to me there was a profit motive for circumcision.

furchfur · 2019-03-25T13:09:18+00:00

COPY OF ARTICLE:

A 20-year decline in male circumcision has cost the country $2 billion in medical costs that could have been prevented, Johns Hopkins researchers say in a study released Monday.

In what is believed to be the first look at the economic impact of male circumcision on the health care system, the Hopkins scientists say that boys who are not circumcised are more prone to sexually transmitted diseases and other health problems over a lifetime that are costly to treat.

"The economic evidence is backing up what we already know medically," said Dr. Aaron Tobian, a Hopkins health epidemiologist and pathologist and senior researcher on the study.

The findings are the latest in a continuing debate over the health benefits of a procedure that was once common practice in the United States — and comes as the Academy of American Pediatrics prepares to announce updated guidelines on male circumcision next week.

Circumcision became controversial in the 1970s when the rate of procedures began to decline. Today, about 55 percent of the 2 million baby boys born each year are circumcised, compared with a peak of 79 percent in the 1970s and 1980s.

The Academy of American Pediatrics, which advises doctors on medical procedures, has taken a neutral stance on the issue for years. It last updated its position in 2005, reaffirming a stance from 1999 that there wasn't enough scientific evidence to show medical benefit to recommend circumcision.

Studies have long shown that when babies are not circumcised, where the foreskin on the tip of the penis is removed, they are at risk for health problems in the long run. Bacteria and viruses can get trapped in the extra layers of skin left on the penis.

Research has found that circumcision reduces the number of infant urinary tract infections. Men who are uncircumcised are more at-risk for cancer-causing HPV, HIV, herpes, bacterial vaginitis and other sexually transmitted diseases, studies have found.

The Hopkins researchers, who published their results online in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, say the cost to treat these long-term health problems is putting extra financial strain on the medical system. The majority of the costs are in the treatment of HIV, the study found.

Opponents of circumcision say that it is a painful, unnatural procedure that in the long term results in decreased sexual pleasure and in psychological problems. They point to studies that debunk the link to sexually transmitted diseases and criticized the latest findings by Hopkins.

"To totally ignore all the harm circumcision does and say we're going to save money is a limited and distorted view of what this is all about," said Ronald Goldman, executive director of the Circumcision Research Center in Boston.

Ryan McAllister, a biophysicist at Georgetown University and coordinator at Takoma Park-based NotJustSkin.org, argues that medical costs rise when babies are circumcised. He said many boys need operations to correct botched circumcisions and may suffer emotional duress. He said circumcision is no more than a cosmetic surgery.

"People forget it is a child's penis you are operating on," McAllister said. "They said it's just a snip when it is much more."

The push for circumcision has gained an international platform as a way to prevent the spread of HIV in Africa after several studies showed infection rates decreased rapidly. The area beneath the foreskin of the penis is believed to have a higher density of target cells for HIV.

In America, support has been declining for circumcision, a ritual for years performed for cultural, medical and religious reasons. Some families are choosing to forgo the procedure for personal reasons. Eighteen states have stopped paying for babies of poor families to have the procedure under Medicaid. Maryland is not among those states.

The Hopkins researchers think the drop in coverage is contributing to the long-term rise in medical costs as states seek short-term savings. State Medicaid plans account for two-fifths of all births. A circumcision costs on average $254, which may seem expensive to a family trying to make ends meet.

The Hopkins analysis found that when a male is not circumcised it costs $313 more in medical expenses to treat conditions he would not otherwise have suffered.

The researchers said that if male circumcision rates dropped to those in Europe, where 10 percent of male babies get the procedure, there would be a 12 percent increase in men infected with HIV and 29 percent in those who contract HPV.

A European rate of circumcision in the United States could add $4.4 billion in avoidable medical costs in the next decade, the Hopkins study found.

The Hopkins researchers hope to use their findings to support a push for more funding and acceptance of the procedure. The research dovetails with a push to encourage the federal Medicaid program to mandate payment for circumcision rather than leave it optional for states. They want private insurance to cover the procedure as well.

"I think all barriers for male circumcision should be removed," Tobian said.

Some doctors said more needs to be done to make people aware of the benefits of circumcision and that the Hopkins study could help.

Dr. Brad Lerner, chief medical officer at MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, called the Hopkins study powerful.

He said he has seen infections in men who are uncircumcised and who may not clean under the folds of the skin well enough. Some men get conditions where the foreskin tightens or scars and won't move. Lerner has recommended circumcision in older patients who have health issues.

He agreed with the Hopkins researchers that states should fund circumcisions.

"If you have a population that takes care of themselves, that does perform excellent hygiene and performs safe sexual practices, they will have lower risk," Lerner said. "We're talking more about Medicaid population which may not be as health-conscious, and that is a concern."

Dr. Richard Colgan of the University of Maryland School of Medicine said he leaves the decision of circumcision up to the parents.

"Certainly, I don't think this is a slam-dunk, carte blanche to now strong-arm parents to get their children circumcised," said Colgan, an associate professor and a doctor in family medicine. "It is one of several pieces of information that can be used by families to make the decision that is right for them."

2019-03-26T02:54:51+00:00

my body my choice.

deja_ale · 2019-03-26T13:30:36+00:00

Better start cutting out the breasts of children because treating their cancer as adults is more costly than cutting it out of them as a child.

If the lack of logic and methodology that was used in this article was used the rest of medicine and brought to the extreme we would be slaughtering every baby being born because it is more cost efficient than a human that could get sick.

thwip62 · 2019-03-27T02:03:28+00:00

Obesity is a huge problem in America, yet they're singling out intact cocks as a strain on the American healthcare system, such as it is?

Vuraxis · 2019-03-25T16:52:02+00:00

What? This makes no sense.

2019-03-25T17:55:03+00:00

I can't read it, it's not avalible in sweden:(.

Title	Decline in circumcisions costing health care system billions, study finds
Author	JohnKimble111
Upvotes	63
Comments	20
Date	March 25, 2019 8:20 AM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/b57xbq/decline_in_circumcisions_costing_health_care/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/decline-in-circumcisions-costing-health-care.881068 https://theredarchive.com/post/881068

Comments