Legitimate or just misinformation ?

  • Context: Medical 
  • Thread starter Thread starter thorium1010
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the legitimacy and implications of a study analyzing the cost-effectiveness of male circumcision, particularly in relation to health outcomes such as HIV transmission. Participants express skepticism about the evidence presented in the article and the broader context of circumcision practices.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the evidence supporting the claim that circumcision has medical benefits, suggesting that societal factors complicate the interpretation of data.
  • One participant notes that the article implies a causal relationship between circumcision rates and healthcare spending without providing sufficient evidence.
  • Another participant mentions existing research indicating that circumcision may reduce HIV transmission in areas with high prevalence, but acknowledges that condoms are more effective.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of strong correlations between circumcision and health benefits, with one participant expressing a strong personal opposition to non-consensual genital mutilation.
  • Several participants inquire about the socioeconomic backgrounds of the study subjects, suggesting that this could influence the results.
  • There is a general sentiment that the conclusions drawn in the articles referenced may not be adequately supported by the evidence presented.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the validity of the study and the implications of circumcision, with no consensus reached on the benefits or drawbacks of the practice. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the strength of the evidence and the interpretation of the findings.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the studies referenced, including potential biases and the difficulty in controlling for various societal factors that may influence health outcomes related to circumcision.

Biology news on Phys.org
This seems like an incredibly biased article. AFAIK there are no real medical benefits to circumcision and there is a difficulty in separating societal factors from the practice (short on time atm so can't grab papers).
 
Definitely news to me that it could be beneficial to your health.

The article seems to be saying "There are less circumcisions, and there are people spending more money on medical care". They say nothing that indicates a causal relationship whatsoever.

The article actually tries to suggest that circumcision prevents HIV.

...

Looked at the comments as well and I think the whole discussion is a bit loopey. There are some countries that have less circumcision and more health problems and some countries that have more circumcision and more health problems.

They pointed out in the comments that in Europe fewer men are circumcised and there are fewer supposedly related health problems. But there's also free health care in a lot of countries in Europe as well as probably hundreds of things that are impossible to control for. Until someone can actually prove a causal relationship I will consider the discussion silly and think that parents should make the decision they feel comfortable with.
 
Last edited:
That's interesting! Do we know if all the men in that study come from similar economic/social backgrounds?
 
RabbitWho said:
That's interesting! Do we know if all the men in that study come from similar economic/social backgrounds?
I've not read the whole article but apparently that has been taken into account. It is a good point though.
 
I tried to search for key words that might mention it like "background" and such. It said at one stage that one study focused on factory workers and volunteers.
 
Ryan_m_b said:
There is research to show that in countries with high HIV prevalence circumcision decreases transmission, though not as effectively as condoms.
Male circumcision and risk of HIV infection in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Weiss, Helen A.; Quigley, Maria A.; Hayes, Richard J

Aside from this I'm unaware of any strongly correlated benefits. Personally I find circumcision (or any non-consensual genital mutilation for that matter) utterly abhorrent.

Thanks for the links. I was kind of shocked at the way they draw conclusion without any strong evidence backing their study.
 

Similar threads

Love eggs? Maybe you should consider this
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
8K
Medical FDA antidepressant warnings of suicide risk among kids may have the opposite effect
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Medical Another Red Meat Consumption Study
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Medical Study shows: listening to the Beatles actually makes you younger
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Open Access Scientific Publications
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
764
Medical Targeting microbial metabolites to treat autism
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
COVID Medical Science, Medical Ethics, COVID-19
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Are the COVID Vaccines Unusually Ineffective?
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
10K
Can Medical Tests Determine My Body Energy and Motivation Levels?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Death toll from radiation exposure wrt. Chernobyl?
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K