9/15 #i2 When US doctors like Dr Freedman get on #twitter to engage in circumcision discussions, it’s not uncommon for them to reveal their ignorance, saying things like:
-
-
10/15 “OB/GYNs don’t circumcise” (
@markwwilsonmd), “boys aren’t circumcised w/out consent” (@janem1276). And my personal favorite: equating the foreskin w/a skin tag (@Dr_DoNoHarm) (winner of the award for most hypocritical twitter handle)#i21 reply 2 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
11/15
#i2 For all his sneering at “advocacy,” it’s Dr Freedman, not intactivists, who has “scientifically untenable” views & avoids objective discussion of the anatomical facts relating to the foreskin & the (un)ethical nature of its amputation from a healthy child’s body.1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
12/15
#i2 It’s Dr Freedman who’s deathly afraid of having an open, fair & thorough debate of the medical & ethical arguments relating to non therapeutic neonatal circumcision b/c he knows full well it’s a debate he would badly lose.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
14/15
#i2 Can’t wait to see if the presentation (or a video of it) is publicly posted so unbiased physicians & bioethicists can review & comment on it. I know it sounds naive, but my challenge to Dr Freedman is to not just imagine, but actively bring about a day…1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
15/15 When all doctors follow the cardinal principles of medical
#ethics & boys, just like girls, can be welcomed peacefully to a world in which their natural bodies are accorded the respect they deserve.#i2@AmerAcadPeds#tweetiatrician#putkids1st#ACOG2 replies 1 retweet 7 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @cooney21 @AmerAcadPeds
Wasn’t it Dr Freedman who recanted through explaination of the AAP circ conclusion more benefits than risks but. only when in the context of a religious household.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
He didn't recant, but his 2016 Pediatrics-published essay is very telling, e.g., "Protecting this option [nontherapeutic infant circumcision] was not an idle concern at a time when there are serious efforts in both the United States and Europe to ban the procedure outright."
#i22 replies 3 retweets 2 likes
As @briandavidearp has suggested, this is a concession that the work of Dr Freedman & the rest of the 2012 #AAP Circumcision Task Force was far from a dispassionate search for the truth. Its true aim was "[p]rotecting this option" to circumcise. #i2
-
-
Replying to @cooney21 @Gregory_Malchuk and
It was not a coincidence that no one who considers non therapeutic child circumcision to be ethically problematic was a member of the
#AAP Task Force. The Task Force wasn’t about to let dissenters, medical facts, or#bioethics get in the way of their pre-ordained conclusion.#i21 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @cooney21 @Gregory_Malchuk and
What
#AAP Task Force did was inconsistent w/good science. They tried to shoehorn cherry-picked evidence to fit a politically-required conclusion. That's why the rest of the world's nat'l pediatric & medical societies to have considered the issue disagree#i2#AndrewFreedmanBias0 replies 4 retweets 4 likes
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.