3> foreskin reduces friction, which would be the greatest cause of these abrasions and tears.) These show no benefits which:
A) make violation of the medical standard, surgery as a last resort acceptable
B) require this to be done on infants given @AmerAcadPeds admits >>
-
-
Replying to @ReyosB @politicoid_us and
4> "The true incidence of complications after newborn circumcision is unknown." and given that many of the issues circumcision causes aren't immediate and aren't connected to the circumcision, like painfully tight erections in adults who have dealt with it all their life. >>
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
You talk a lot, but understand little. You need to understand how medical science works, before you can understand specific research results.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @politicoid_us @ReyosB and
So you're saying
@ReyosB doesn't understand? Which of his tweets' statements were incorrect - and why? Don't try the "I'm superior to you because I understand how medical science works and you don't" approach while ignoring his valid comments. It makes you look pretentious/dumb.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
They weren't valid. They showed a clear lack of understanding of how medical science works.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @politicoid_us @BSR163 and
"Appeal to authority. Appeal to authority. Appeal to authority. REEEEEEE-" Argue on your own merits instead of someone else's. You keep saying we don't understand while you don't reference a single point from the article.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @VaetanThought @BSR163 and
You're confusing an appeal to authority and the citation of research.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @politicoid_us @VaetanThought and
Morris's 'research' is often fabricated. And referenced in his other papers, which are then referenced in other papers... He relies on the fact that his nested references are difficult to validate. Friendly peer reviewers don't stand a chance of cutting through his obfuscations.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BSR163 @VaetanThought and
So you're saying that his coauthors were willing to risk their career publishing fabricated research? Yes or no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @politicoid_us @VaetanThought and
His co-authors can speak for themselves. Quite telling that Royal Australasian College of Physicians said "After extensive review of the literature, the Paed's & Child Health Division of RACP has concluded that there is no medical reason for routine newborn male circumcision."
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Morris says that "the benefits of infant male circumcision to health exceed the risks by over 100 to one". Completely made up. Prof Kevin Pringle, Professor of Paediatrics and Head of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Otago, Wellington, comments:http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2014/04/04/circumcision-health-risks-and-benefits-experts-respond/ …
-
-
Replying to @BSR163 @VaetanThought and
kir Retweeted
kir added,
This Tweet is unavailable.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.