WHO (World Health Organisation) "Neonatal and child male circumcision: a global review". 39,356 words pushing MGM — only 11 of which describe 2 "possible" functions of the foreskin.

Consilio_et_Animis · 2018-04-06T23:00:31+00:00

2.4. Physiology of the foreskin in neonates and boys

"Circumcision removes some, or all, of the foreskin from the penis (Figure 2). The foreskin is a continuation of skin from the shaft of the penis that covers the glans penis and the urethral meatus. There is debate about the role of the foreskin, with possible functions including keeping the glans moist and protecting the developing penis in utero (56).

So that's it folks, only 11 words on the "possible" functions of the foreskin. And one of those is the totally bizarre "protecting the developing penis in utero".

Oh yeah, like the eyelids "protect the developing eyeballs" and the labia lips "protect the developing vaginal canal".

And of course the description of the foreskin is equally pathetic; it's just some "skin".

codaclouds · 2018-04-07T00:11:34+00:00

this is a 100% criminal organization. and not only on this topic, as any research into it leads only to lies, fraud, death and suffering and the ultimate conclusion that their main goal is to make you sicker and sicker until they kill you, all while siphoning off as much money as possible in the process.

ThirdTurnip · 2018-04-07T00:20:00+00:00

I don't have time to read the whole document, but I wasn't encouraged by what I read in its conclusions.

2018-04-07T00:48:58+00:00

That's 2 more functions than the clit

2018-04-07T08:31:40+00:00

They should rename themselves the WBSO (World Bullshit Organization)

93re2 · 2018-04-07T08:29:21+00:00

Helen Weiss led a team composed of Natasha Larke, Daniel Halperin and Inon Schenker in researching, drafting and finalising this report.

Sigh.

AnotherDAM · 2018-04-07T18:43:49+00:00

The report is 8 years old, which means the research is much older than that.

You will not be able to change the minds of the researchers, who in all likelihood came to teh table with deep prejudices; however, you might be able to choke off the funding.

This report was commissioned and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Pressure media to discuss why BMGF is pouring money into quack methodology; what is their political agenda, et c.

Comments