Although stretching is (also) part of the salve-treatment, stretching on its own can be another method of treating a phimosis. If circumcised people are able to restore their entire foreskin by stretching (over the span 4 years), you also can stretch the foreskin in scope.
You’ll find (by reading all of the replies I’ve written) that I agree with you. That’s why the idea that surgery should be considered before anything else isn’t my argument. I’m arguing that it is a medical procedure and has multiple valid uses, unlike female circumcision.
-
-
If you to argue that, I would argue then that it should be used as a last resort 'treatment', never as a prophylactic procedure. I'd like doctors to stop recommending it so quickly. It gives people the impression it's the best way to treat these problems.
-
It’s not presented like that, they ask you and according to HIPAA they have to give you the pros and cons. Educate the parents, don’t blame the doctors for doing their job. It’s not like they enjoy extra work.
-
Doctor's jobs are not performing unnecessary surgeries or genital mutilations. And doctors have the ethics education to know what they are doing is wrong.
-
They don’t just “perform it”, they *have* to ask the parents. Blame them, not the poor doctor who has to listen to the baby wail.
-
A doctor has an obligation to do no harm. In this case, he's harming for a profit.
-
They get paid per minute of surgery not per surgery and in some hospitals get paid hourly, nice slogan though.
-
Circumcision is the most common surgery in America. About a million cuts per year, and each one costs the parent hundreds of dollars. The foreskin may then be sold afterwards for hundreds more yet. Circumcision is absurdly profitable. Like $600 for a 15 minute surgery?pic.twitter.com/it7giSaWTv
-
So educate the parents and then they’ll opt out. Or restructure the American healthcare system, which is a different debate. Either way, the doctors aren’t to blame for the parent’s informed decisions.
- 69 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Female circumcision has preventative uses which are not actually legitimate. And the definition is so broad that removing cancer on a vaginal lip would be considered female circumcision.
-
Could you explain what you meant here?
-
In Britain, an adult woman who voluntarily got a clitoral piercing is included in FGM stats.
-
Yeah, but... why do I need to know this? Have you misunderstood a part of my argument? I don’t like circumcision for no reason. I’m just bothered by the idea of a circumcision ban.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Here's evidence that female genital cutting can also have medical benefits: https://journals.lww.com/jpelvicsurgery/Abstract/2013/03000/Labioplasty_for_Hypertrophic_Labia_Minora.12.aspx … No one is against therapeutic circumcision (such instances are extremely rare anyway). We're against forced, non-therapeutic circumcision, regardless of sex.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If a study of clinically-provided female circumcisions proved that female circumcision prevents UTIs, would you support it as a prophylactic?https://journals.lww.com/jpelvicsurgery/Abstract/2013/03000/Labioplasty_for_Hypertrophic_Labia_Minora.12.aspx …
Thanks. 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.