Write a Comment

Hugh7

Whenever one man has unprotected insertive anal sex, another (or a woman) has unprotected receptive anal sex, so there is little point in studying that issue. A worse flaw with this study is that most of the circumcised men were in the USA, most of the intact men in Peru, so many other local factors (especially the prevalance of HIV) confound any difference circumcision might make. And several studies have already shown that circumcision offers no protection to gay men. Why flog a dead horse?

December 15, 2010

jeff

if "experts" can rationalize cutting off boys'foreskin at birth as a "preventative health measure", wouldn't removing female mammary glands at birth save far more lives from breast cancer?

December 14, 2010 • fort lauderdale