tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post1818959939748756049..comments2024-01-17T13:16:10.378-08:00Comments on Joseph4GI: The Future of This BlogJosephhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-60968608588486604312021-06-13T01:13:05.797-07:002021-06-13T01:13:05.797-07:00Thing is, the AAP *tried* to come out “endorsing” ...Thing is, the AAP *tried* to come out “endorsing” newborn circumcision in 2012, but it fell short. Perhaps maybe OB-GYNs and Pediatricians saw it as a green light to push the procedure, but anyone who actually read the 2012 policy statement would know that it was a non-recommendation at best, conflicted at worst.<br /><br />While the AAP did try to say that “the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks” in 2012, their conclusion was that “the benefits aren't great enough to recommend" infant circumcision.<br /><br />And, as if that weren’t enough, it was also been written that “the true incidence of complications after newborn circumcision is unknown,” further confounding their own “benefits outweigh the risks” mantra.<br /><br />Still, a lot of physicians, and yes, web publications and parenting forums up and ran with it.<br /><br />Never mentioned are implications of reaping profit from non-medical surgery on healthy, non-consenting minors. It conflicts with the “parental choice” narrative. Without medical or clinical indication, doctors have no business performing surgery on healthy, non-consenting minors, let alone be giving parents any kind of “choice.”<br /><br />I am confident that sooner or later this is going to come back and bite physicians who perform male infant genital mutilation in healthy, non-consenting minors in the rear.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-53144265508601090862021-06-07T08:39:11.736-07:002021-06-07T08:39:11.736-07:00Thanks for your reply Joseph. My impression is tha...Thanks for your reply Joseph. My impression is that RIC was slowly declining in America until 2012 when AAP came out endorsing newborn circumcision for its potential Medical benefits. After that OB-gyns and Pediatricians felt encouraged to sell the procedure even more vigorously. Wich they did. Circumcision is also promoted in various online publikations like WebMD, Baby Gaga and others, all telling parents that genital surgery on their newborns is a legit choice to make. Of course those online publicatiins are strongly biased in favour of circumcision. However, they all mention, (with småll letters) that all potential benefits of circumcision also can be obtained without surgery. Wonder if Doctors inform patients about that.Per Lindstrandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14093914814687855562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-34803841170289429342021-04-20T09:16:50.566-07:002021-04-20T09:16:50.566-07:00Well, the forced genital cutting of minors is neve...Well, the forced genital cutting of minors is never really optimistic, really, is it... :-/<br /><br />Well, surveys say one thing, but real numbers don't lie, and, if the CDC is to be believed, male infant circumcision has fallen to 56.9% or so, from where it used to be at 90%. There is a picture of a slide taken at a conference where a CDC spokesman gave a presentation, I forget his name... Berschaoui or something like that, where the number he gave was like 37%. Of course, from his perspective the situation is "dire," and he was actually trying to make the case that the CDC and other medical organizations needed to increase their efforts to sell circumcision to more parents.<br /><br />I don't think the numbers are at 80%. I'd say 60% is probably a happy medium. But we need to be clear on that there is a difference between the rate of male infant circumcision and the percentage of circumcised men in the US. Pro-circumcision advocates like to point to this as an "ah-hah" moment where intactivists are "inconsistent." If male infant circumcision were to completely cease right now, 80% of US males would still be circumcised; they don't simply disappear.<br /><br />Yes, male doctors are circumcised, and female doctors have circumcised husband and/or are mothers are circumcised children, but if more parents say "no," then what are they going to do?<br /><br />The thing with OB/GYNs and other practitioners is that oftentimes they're not the ones who perform the mutilation; it's staff they hire, and staff are told to "do their jobs or find employment elsewhere." It's not doctors pushing pseudo-medicine on parents, its staff they hire. And, of course, staff want to keep their jobs, so they do as they're told. And if parents tell employers that someone tried to give them factual information, nurses or other employees could face being reprimanded or worse, termination.<br /><br />As I've written elsewhere, doctors and nurses have financial incentive to push circumcision on everybody. Hospitals can charge up to $3,000 in fees. For "a simple 10 minute procedure." It's no wonder doctors and nurses push it.<br /><br />The CDC run by Thomas Frieden was pushing to increase male infant circumcision in Africa, and presumably in the US as well. With a name like Walensky, I somehow doubt this is changing any time soon. (See my latest post, immediately after this one.)<br /><br />A medical establishment that profits from male infant circumcision, being headed in large part by people with the conflict of interest of being adherents of a religion that commands the forced genital mutilation of minors is what intactivists are up against, and it's a pessimistic prospect indeed.<br /><br />On the positive side, numbers are falling, which is why the pro-circumcision crowd is frantic. That only means that intactivists do have an uphill battle.<br /><br />But as I've said on this post, more parents ARE becoming informed and refusing this for their children, and there's nothing doctors can do, unless they actually go ahead and make it policy to circumcise all boys without their parent's permission.<br /><br />Doctors and nurses etc. are not going to stop pushing this until it's a liability rather than an asset. Parents need to speak out, and so do men who aren't happy their rights were violated. Light needs to be shine on the fact that this whole thing is based on deliberate misinformation and lying by omission.<br /><br />So yes, in away, there are a lot of aspects of this fight for which to feel pessimistic, but intactivists have made strides. I invite you to look at parenting forums where the topic is brought up. More people are speaking out. More parents are deciding to stand up to pushy doctors and nurses. And thank goodness. Look for "Your Whole Baby" on Facebook. Tons of parents on there seeing the light.<br /><br />Search for "the circumcision blame game" article on my blog for a related post.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-66467781427510117962021-03-27T05:13:34.180-07:002021-03-27T05:13:34.180-07:00Is there a reason for pessimism among people in Am...Is there a reason for pessimism among people in America who work against genital surgery on male infants?<br />Quite resently I listnened to a conversation between Intact America´s Georgeanne Chapin and Brendon Marotta. They were dicussing a new surwey how doctors and medical personel are selling circumcision to new parents. The belief that circumcision has become less popolar in recent years is not supportet by that survey, newborn circumcision seems more common than ever before, leaving only 20 % (as an average) of newborn American boys with intact genitalia. Also Terryfing to know that 40% of parents were undecided and talked into cutting their sons by doctors and nurses.<br />As a result of this survey Intact America is going to focus on changing hospital policy on circumcision.<br />Sorry to say but I am also pessimistic , male doctors are generally circumcised, female doctors have circumcised partners and brothers. Little reason why they by a sudden should change their mind and discourage parents from cutting their sons.<br />Are American hospitals overstaffed? I find it hard to believe that in any other country, busy OB-doctors could find time to perform unnessecary surgery on precious babies they have helped into the world.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Per Lindstrandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14093914814687855562noreply@blogger.com