Sandra Bullock laughs about having a "penis facial" - Privileged and wealthy, beauty obsessed people can pay $650 to have "Epidermal Growth Factor" injected into their faces. This is harvested from foreskins taken from non-consenting babies, usually without the full informed consent of the parents.

More information:

https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/the-penis-facial-is-the-latest-disturbing-beauty-treatment/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/penis-facial_n_5b02df5be4b0463cdba4a6fa/amp

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/43bxgm/the-beauty-industry-is-part-of-a-baby-foreskin-flesh-trade-anti-circumcision-activists-warn

Evaluation of circumcisions "health benefits":

The United States combines a high prevalence of STDs and HIV infections with high circumcision rates. The situation in most European countries is the reverse: low circumcision rates combined with low HIV and STD rates. America has the highest STD rate in the developed world.

Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/std-rates-by-country

Circumcision has been repeatedly proven harmful and to have very limited medical benefit. The VMMC Drive (Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision Drive) in Africa has shown no appreciable, attributable benefits (5) in a recent review. Here are direct quotes from a study published in nature 26 October 2021:

"As summarized above, surveillance data indicate that HIV incidence was declining in most of the priority ESA countries before the large-scale rollout of VMMC began [12,13,14]. Moreover, these data provide no evidence of substantial changes in the downward trending trajectories of HIV incidence to support the argument that VMMC has had a significant role in reducing HIV infections in priority countries. Although a recent systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that VMMC is “an important evidence-based intervention for the control of generalized HIV epidemics”, [9] as presented below, we did not find convincing evidence that VMMC has had a significant effect on reducing HIV incidence at the population level."

"Borgdorff et al. [25] used data from a health and demographic surveillance system (HDSS) in Kenya to determine trends in HIV prevalence and incidence between 2011 and 2016. They found that, overall, HIV incidence declined over the surveillance period. They also found that while having a circumcised male partner was protective for women and girls, the protective effect of circumcision was not significant for incident HIV infection among men and boys. Borgdorff et al. [25] concluded that “the decline of HIV prevalence and incidence cannot be directly attributed to increasing ART and VMMC coverage. Other explanatory factors might include the natural history of the HIV epidemic in eastern Africa, which showed declines of HIV incidence even before the onset of large-scale ART use and expanding VMMC coverage”. This claim is consistent with the data presented in the preceding section and, as further illustrated below by Makhema et al. [26], suggests that there are likely many factors responsible for reductions in HIV incidence where they occur, and it is simplifying and misleading to assert (since the evidence is weak) that VMMC initiatives are a major determinant among these factors."

Studies have recently been released where 800,000 Belgium men were studied (3,500 circumcised), and those that were circumcised had a significantly greater chance of acquiring STIs (6).

"In this national cohort study spanning more than three decades of observation, non-therapeutic circumcision in infancy or childhood did not appear to provide protection against HIV or other STIs in males up to the age of 36 years. Rather, non-therapeutic circumcision was associated with higher STI rates overall, particularly for anogenital warts and syphilis."

Another recent study with 500,000 participants in Ontario, Canada, also found no link between circumcision and HIV (7).

This is in keeping with all previous research up to present day. No health benefits for circumcision have been proven, except for the stopping of 1 UTI in 111 males across the span of a lifetime (8)(treatable with anti-biotics), treatment resistant phimosis which occurs in less than 0.5% of males (9), and recurrent balantis which is also exceptionally rare and usually treatable with non-surgical methods (10) (lifetime incidence of balantis is 3 - 11% of population, easily treatable with improved hygiene or by using less irritating chemicals).

All other rebuttals of health benefits can be found here:

https://np.reddit.com/r/Intactivism/comments/hxmbpn/refutations_of_the_alleged_benefits_of_infant/

https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/

https://www.circumstitions.com/

https://np.reddit.com/r/OneY/comments/qm4uq4/a_copy_pasta_essay_i_made_about_circumcision/

More studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34564796/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34551593/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-021-00484-x

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/109846/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17441692.2016.1184292#

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278023840_Critique_of_African_RCTs_into_Male_Circumcision_and_HIV_Sexual_Transmission

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2012/05/when-bad-science-kills-or-how-to-spread-aids/

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11606-019-05554-x

Go to r/intactivism to learn more about the ethical and scientific arguments surrounding circumcision