you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 2 months ago (18 children)

It can result in higher rates of herpes in some communities though.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (17 children)
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (7 children)
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I have very very high doubt here

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Are you saying the sources are likely fake or false in some way?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    False and propaganda from the religious alt right. Also look at how close those dates are. Sounds like a paid-for "science" campaign. If there was a valid medical reason against not circumcising, I'd probably have heard about it by now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    (And yes, in individual cases, a medical circumcision is required, but not for hygiene or STD prevention, and it can never be a general guideline. The damage (loss of nerve sensation, lack of lubrication) is a much bigger problem, including for the female partner.).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Not at all what the article says. The herpes connection has nothing to do with the act of circumcision, and was a review of individual case studies, not an overall rate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I stand corrected, it's totally not weird for some old dude to suck a baby dick and this hasn't resulted in transmission of disease. Well done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments