Circumcision and cancer

Grinder
Grinder Member Posts: 487 Member
edited August 2018 in Prostate Cancer #1

I don't know if anybody has been following the outrage on social media over circumcision, but I thought this might add a curious element to the discussion...

Circumcision reduces the risk of prostate cancer by up to 60% - but is most effective when done after the age of 35

  • Men circumcised as babies have a 14% reduced risk of prostate cancer
  • Those who have the procedure after the age of 35 have a 45% reduced risk
  • Black men who are circumcised are 60% less likely to get the disease
  • Circumcision reduces the risk of sexually transmitted infections and these have been linked to the development of prostate cancer
  • Researchers say it is unclear why procedure is more effective after age 35

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2643870/Circumcision-reduces-risk-prostate-cancer-60-effective-age-35.html

I post this realizing that I was circumcised as an infant, caught chlamydia std twice in college, had a recurring Staph infection and acute prostatitis over a twelve year period, severe BPH symptoms, and Gleason 6 PC...

So there's that.

Comments

  • LeoJ
    LeoJ Member Posts: 13
    edited August 2018 #2
    Circumcision and cancer

    Did God or failing that, evolution, get it wrong where infant boys are concerned?

    The Australian SBS is a taxpayer funded government broadcster that prides itself on its independence and is charged to remain so (ie independent).  Hopefully this is viewable by all.  Copy the link and post into your browser if it doesn't open.

     http://www.sbs.com.au/news/insight/tvepisode/first-cut

     

  • Grinder
    Grinder Member Posts: 487 Member
    #3
    RP

    Well, I have good news for the disgruntled victims of circumcision! 

    Get a radical Prostatectomy and your business will get shortened and voila! you have a foreskin again!

    Honest! I now have an inch long foreskin after my prostatectomy!

    Like this guy:

    Elwyn Moir was circumcised as a baby and isn’t happy about it. Now 28 years old, he believes his circumcised penis is not as sensitive as an intact one and he grew up feeling angry and violated at the decision.He is currently in the process of trying to 'restore" his foreskin. He thinks circumcision is a personal choice that should be made by consenting adults.

    I am sure Elwyn will be delighted to have a foreskin again after he has a prostatectomy because of prostate cancer.

    Seriously though, after being circumcised, and now having what is effectively an excessive foreskin... It seems to make no difference one way or another to me.

    I am guessing the only time it makes a difference is when a doctor or mohel takes more than just the tip of the circle off.  That's a problem with the doctor or his method, not the procedure.

  • RobLee
    RobLee Member Posts: 269 Member
    #4
    Circumcision and the return of the foreskin

    Like many western males I too was circumcised as an infant, and both of our sons were as well.  In school and in the army I only remember seeing one or two guys with the curious pointy pecker. As I suppose most guys would, I always just considered myself to be ordinary.

    But now after another "ordinary" old man's disease (PCa) and after RP, what's left of my shaft... given that I don't see much of it anymore these days due to the Lupron... tends to withdraw into a snake nest of hairs, pressed inward by the pad that I must wear in my shorts. The little head seems to be pretty useless these days.  And since I need to squeeze the AUS just to pee, I may as well just have a short length of tubing down there with a shut off clip.

    It's done its job though over the decades... made a lot of women happy and fathered two wonderful sons. If he wants to retire and just withdraw into the weeds, then so be it.  I see no need to do anything about it.

Discussion Boards