Current circumcision is presented to parents as a preventative measure. I don’t agree with it, but it has reason to be, from a few medical papers. So I’m saying don’t target the doctors, change the parents’ minds on why a foreskin is worth the higher rates of infection.
I’m not ignoring them, I’m saying that despite best efforts infections still happen and can recur. And in that situation you need to prevent further infection by circumcision. Not antibiotics. I’ve already said why twice.
-
-
This never happens. You're fabricating. Fallacy of appealing to fear. You have no empirical evidence supporting you.
-
No empirical evidence behind antibiotic resistance? An appeal to fear? Nice attempt at fitting a fallacy to the argument there, but it doesn’t work if I actually do have empirical evidence. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b&ei=8b_KW4qeF6WYvQTmspugCw&ins=false&q=superbug+rates+study&oq=superbug+rates+study&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.3..33i160.23159.23841..24196...0.0..0.311.1586.2-4j2......0....1.........0i71j0i22i30j33i21.oS_atK0gpPU …
-
No empirical evidence of a baby suffering from chronic infections to the point that all other remedies failed and permanent tissue loss was needed.
-
The study I gave you and you refused to look at because you disagree with two entirely different research groups in agreement because you think they’re wrong (with no proof).
-
I read everything you cited. None of it justified forced genital mutilation of kids.
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.