Those parts aren’t affected by infections, the tissue on the inside of the urinary tract is.
-
-
The problem is it is so recommended, not even as a treatment but as prophylaxis. This isn't done for children who have recurring issues, this is done before there are even a chance for issues to form, it's done to infants in the first few days. Though you call it a strawman >>
-
2>
@Vegaytarier has valid points there, though poorly presented, removal of any body part that could lead to or become diseased will prevent that disease, but we draw the line on every other normal body part, until there is an issue that needs to be treated surgically. We don't>> -
3> remove tonsils until there are issues of tonsillitis, or an appendix until appendicitis, there is no body part we routinely remove from someone who doesn't ask for it to be removed because they might get an infection except the foreskin, and the accepted rate is 1 UTI >>
-
4> prevented per over 100 circumcisions, this rate comes from the technical report behind the 2012 recommendation by
@AmerAcadPeds, which is the most pro circumcision medical body. This means 99 infants that are circumcised see no UTI benefit for every 1 that is helped.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.