.

[e-smile]

Do you really not understand the difference between 'Relative Risk' and 'Absolute Risk'?
5497 Circumcised - VS - 5497 Uncircumcised (control)
64 Infected (1.18%) - VS - 137 Infected (2.49%)
Absolute Risk reduction = 1.3%
I'm pretty sure 1.3% matches anyone's definition of 'a little'.

also nothing there is proving that the risk is lower directly because of circumcision.

 

[Wwanderer]

also nothing there is proving that the risk is lower directly because of circumcision.

True, no *proof*, but that it is circumcision has a reasonable mechanism, which @Sudsy explained above. And most importantly, the consequence function is exceedingly asymmetric. In other words, getting circumcised carries virtually no probability of a fatal outcome, but there is at least a modest probability that not being circumcised does (for sub-Saharan Africans).

-Ww

 

[Sudsy]

For the record, I'm not at all advocating circumcision for prophylactic purposes - you can achieve the same effect by simpling giving your John Thomas a wipedown afterwards.

It does, however, make a significant difference in regions where access to clean water and other hygiene supplies is limited.

 

[e-smile]

True, no *proof*, but that it is circumcision has a reasonable mechanism, which @Sudsy explained above. And most importantly, the consequence function is exceedingly asymmetric. In other words, getting circumcised carries virtually no probability of a fatal outcome, but there is at least a modest probability that not being circumcised does (for sub-Saharan Africans).

-Ww

I also take in consideration the reason behind circumcision in Africa : Islam. this religion is very strict toward sexual relations outside of marriage and the muslim women are under high surveilance from their families.
so maybe because of that the circumcised people in Africa have less random sex than the non circumcised ones.
a guy who had unprotected sex with 5 women in his life has less chances to get an STD than one who had it with 100 women.

 

[Wwanderer]

I also take in consideration the reason behind circumcision in Africa : Islam. this religion is very strict toward sexual relations outside of marriage and the muslim women are under high surveilance from their families.
so maybe because of that the circumcised people in Africa have less random sex than the non circumcised ones.
a guy who had unprotected sex with 5 women in his life has less chances to get an STD than one who had it with 100 women.

It is a reasonable point, but from experience in non-African Islamic countries, I can tell you that the religious doctrines you mention do NOT stop many Muslim men from being quite promiscuous. But I think we basically agree that we don't know the reason behind the correlation with any great certainty, and indeed there could be multiple reasons. However, I'd still come back to the asymmetric consequence function: getting circumcised carries no significant fatal risks and arguably no major disadvantages at all, but not getting circumcised may well increase the risk of contracting a disease which is one of the leading contributors to "years of life lost" causes of death in that part of the world. This leads to an obvious conclusion, imo.

-Ww

 

[roots reggae]

I am, obviously had no choice, and to tell the truth, if I had the choice, even now, not sure what it would be.
Both of my sons are natural. It might sound a bit strange, however my wife makes most of the medical decisions for the family.

 

[Wwanderer]

For the record, I'm not at all advocating circumcision for prophylactic purposes - you can achieve the same effect by simpling giving your John Thomas a wipedown afterwards.

It does, however, make a significant difference in regions where access to clean water and other hygiene supplies is limited.

I agree with this. Prophylactic circumcision is probably not warranted in First World contexts.

In addition to the difficulties of hygiene in some areas and for some populations, condoms can also be in short supply.

-Ww

 

[MacMackerson]

I'm pretty sure 1.3% matches anyone's definition of 'a little'.

1.3% chance of catching a cold or my flight arriving late is 'a little' to me

1.3% chance of HIV infection or my flight crashing is not 'a little' to me

but fair enough different people have different risk profile. I can't argue with that.

I would very much like to see the evidence of that.

Sub Saharan African HIV Infected Population = 25.8 mil
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs360/en/

Circumcision Rate in Africa = 62% (This is the weakest source and probably refers to all of africa rather than sub saharan africa so lets reduce it to 50% to be conservative)
http://www.thebody.com/content/art39464.html

Reduction in Overall Prevalence from Circumcision 0% -> 50% = 30%
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2731851/

25.8 / (1/0.7-1) = 11.1 mil more HIV infections napkin math

If circumcision reaches 80% coverage (or uncoverage!) it would prevent 3.8 million new infections between 2010 and 2025. The WHO probably didn't use napkin math.
http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/fact_sheet/en/



Now after all of that I have to admit I honestly don't care about much about circumcision. I came on this thread late and thought it was interesting no one mentioned the link between disease and circumcision. I get that it isn't personally relevant for people living in Japan and rest of the western world where sanitation is taken for granted.

Also, my dick being prettier was a joke. I would not put money on my dick winning a beauty contest.

 

[MacMackerson]

I also take in consideration the reason behind circumcision in Africa : Islam. this religion is very strict toward sexual relations outside of marriage and the muslim women are under high surveilance from their families.
so maybe because of that the circumcised people in Africa have less random sex than the non circumcised ones.
a guy who had unprotected sex with 5 women in his life has less chances to get an STD than one who had it with 100 women.

When doing these trials they try to control for the sorts of things you mention as much as possible. That is the randomized, controlled part of the name. Isolating the thing they are testing as much as possible. It isn't perfect but its the best we have to make sense of a messy world.

If you don't believe it provides 'evidence' I got nothing (other than snarky comments about science being hard)

 

[e-smile]

It is a reasonable point, but from experience in non-African Islamic countries, I can tell you that the religious doctrines you mention do NOT stop many Muslim men from being quite promiscuous. But I think we basically agree that we don't know the reason behind the correlation with any great certainty, and indeed there could be multiple reasons. However, I'd still come back to the asymmetric consequence function: getting circumcised carries no significant fatal risks and arguably no major disadvantages at all, but not getting circumcised may well increase the risk of contracting a disease which is one of the leading contributors to "years of life lost" causes of death in that part of the world. This leads to an obvious conclusion, imo.

-Ww

that's true and I didn't say it stops, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to think it may have lowered the number of partners for some of the test candidates.

that being said I agree and I don't think there is any major disadvantage nor a particular trauma in being circumcised.

 

[TheScientist]

until i found out it reduces the sensitivity a lot.

Some recent controlled studies have shown this isn't true. Nonetheless I'm sure this urban legend will live forever due to this being one of the ugliest argued topics on the Internet.

Of course we prefer it

As @Wwanderer said before, some women do. Others don't. My personal experience has been that the women I've been with or have spoken to on the mater tend to prefer it. In the case of the American women (white, black, asian, hispanic, other) may have simply been unaccustomed to dealing with a foreskin so expressed a preference for circ'd partners. The Japanese women I've been with have said that it was もとかわいい. Obviously the world is full of different people which is part of what makes life and sex fun.

 

[User#8628]

1.3% chance of catching a cold or my flight arriving late is 'a little' to me

1.3% chance of HIV infection or my flight crashing is not 'a little' to me

Its still the same percentage and its small. I wouldn't ruin great stuff like flying and sex for a chance less than two percent.

 

[User#8628]

Some recent controlled studies have shown this isn't true. Nonetheless I'm sure this urban legend will live forever due to this being one of the ugliest argued topics on the Internet.

Maybe research is true. (Not always, its difficult to produce solid proof) But from my personal experience i'd definitely say that its more sensitive.
What else explains why Japanese and some other guys with foreskin react so much more excited, pump less hard and cum much faster than the guys with foreskin i've met?
I'd never wanna deny my sons or any man the joy i've seen guys with foreskin have during sex, even though cumming quit can be selfish. (Only if they just finish off without paying attention to the girl's orgasm after.)


I don't have much preference for looks but jerking someone with foreskin off is easier and it's fun to gentle play with.

 

[e-smile]

Maybe research is true. (Not always, its difficult to produce solid proof) But from my personal experience i'd definitely say that its more sensitive.
What else explains why Japanese and some other guys with foreskin react so much more excited, pump less hard and cum much faster than the guys with foreskin i've met?
I'd never wanna deny my sons or any man the joy i've seen guys with foreskin have during sex, even though cumming quit can be selfish. (Only if they just finish off without paying attention to the girl's orgasm after.)


I don't have much preference for looks but jerking someone with foreskin off is easier and it's fun to gentle play with.

the guys sensitivy and how fast he may come depends a lot on the excitement and other psychologic and hormonal factors. circumcised men aren't all the same and even the same person won't be sensitive the same way everytime.

 

[User#8628]

the guys sensitivy and how fast he may come depends a lot on the excitement and other psychologic and hormonal factors. circumcised men aren't all the same and even the same person won't be sensitive the same way everytime.

Certainly some circumcised men cum faster than others. A few were also quite quick.
It just amazes me how much faster Japanese guys usually cum than guys from countries where circumcition is more common and i thought it might be a link.

 

[TheScientist]

Maybe research is true. (Not always, its difficult to produce solid proof)

Unfortunately the full paper is behind a paywall so I can't link it here but I did have a chance to read the paper and it was a double blind study measuring various physiological reactions with a large sample of men both cut and uncut. While I am not a professional scientist, I do know bunkum and fudge when I see it and this was not that.

What else explains why Japanese and some other guys with foreskin react so much more excited, pump less hard and cum much faster than the guys with foreskin i've met?

Unfortunate this too is an often repeated urban legend. The presence or absence of a foreskin is not directly correlated with the time before ejaculation with men. Again this has been shown with gold standard multiple studies. Other studies have shown that "how men fuck" is in fact often very cultural and sometimes possibly connected to patterns of ethnic physiology.

In the end if you like uncut, fine. If you don't want to have your kids circ'd thats fine too. But the fact is you don't have a penis yourself and it seems are not up the research. I honestly don't mean this in an insulting way in the least, again, I completely respect your preferences, I just ask that you don't contribute to urban legends.

 

[User#8628]

Unfortunately the full paper is behind a paywall so I can't link it here but I did have a chance to read the paper and it was a double blind study measuring various physiological reactions with a large sample of men both cut and uncut. While I am not a professional scientist, I do know bunkum and fudge when I see it and this was not that.



Unfortunate this too is an often repeated urban legend. The presence or absence of a foreskin is not directly correlated with the time before ejaculation with men. Again this has been shown with gold standard multiple studies. Other studies have shown that "how men fuck" is in fact often very cultural and sometimes possibly connected to patterns of ethnic physiology.

In the end if you like uncut, fine. If you don't want to have your kids circ'd thats fine too. But the fact is you don't have a penis yourself and it seems are not up the research. I honestly don't mean this in an insulting way in the least, again, I completely respect your preferences, I just ask that you don't contribute to urban legends.

Sure, it could have other reasons.
Thanks for the information. (Though no links but i'll take your word.)

I may not have a penis but have surely seen more of them (cut and uncut) than most guys on there. But yes, haven't particulary studied circumcision.

You're not an actual scientist? Your name suggests different, haha.

 

[Wwanderer]

Fwiiw, I don't think that coming more quickly is necessarily better for a man...in the sense of giving him better total physical pleasure. At least for me personally, it can sometimes be too quick...giving a feeling of the whole thing being over before I really got to fully enjoy the experience. This was particularly the case when I was (much) younger. And, of course, this is a common pattern for men...that they come really quickly in their earliest sexual experiences. Anyway, I can't recall ever hearing a guy say that his best sexual experiences are the ones where he comes the quickest. In other words, more sensitivity (whatever the cause, physical or mental) is not necessarily better for the guy afaik.

-Ww

 

[User#8628]

Fwiiw, I don't think that coming more quickly is necessarily better for a man...in the sense of giving him better total physical pleasure. At least for me personally, it can sometimes be too quick...giving a feeling of the whole thing being over before I really got to fully enjoy the experience. This was particularly the case when I was (much) younger. And, of course, this is a common pattern for men...that they come really quickly in their earliest sexual experiences. Anyway, I can't recall ever hearing a guy say that his best sexual experiences are the ones where he comes the quickest. In other words, more sensitivity (whatever the cause, physical or mental) is not necessarily better for the guy afaik.

-Ww

Some guys can go for more rounds so then it isn't a problem.
Sensitivity can be bothersome but being insensitive is not good if you wanna enjoy.
Anyway, this appearanly doesn't have to do with being cut, my excuses.

I recall just reading a comment in the "how did you lose your virginity" thread where a guy called it "the best 5 minutes of my life" so there you have your short time best sex example.

 

[Wwanderer]

Anyway, this appearanly doesn't have to do with being cut, my excuses.

Actually, despite the "studies' (which I'd like to see btw), I wouldn't rule out the possibility that circumcision has an effect on sensitivity and on how fast guys come. A large fraction of published research, especially that involving human subjects, turns out to be wrong after further investigation for a variety of reasons. A research investigation ("a study"), even a set of them, is probably the best evidence we can have for some "fact", but it should rarely be regarded as completely conclusive.

In the present case, I'd be surprised if there are not a large number of important factors, including mental ones, influencing a guy's sensitivity and how fast or slowly he cums.

In other words, you might well be right imo...at least partially.

-Ww

 

[TheScientist]

You're not an actual scientist? Your name suggests different, haha.

I am at heart a "natural philosopher" a scholar of the pleasures of life

"the best 5 minutes of my life"

5 whole minutes?!?! Compared to my first experience thats time for solar systems to be born and compress down to singularies...

 

[e-smile]

Certainly some circumcised men cum faster than others. A few were also quite quick.
It just amazes me how much faster Japanese guys usually cum than guys from countries where circumcition is more common and i thought it might be a link.

it might be ... or not
maybe they cum particularily fast with you because you affect them more than you affect men who don't see blond women as "exotic".
maybe you should try with some people from arab countries (they are circumcised and they'd see you as exotic) so you can compare

 

[Wwanderer]

it might be ... or not
maybe they cum particularily fast with you because you affect them more than you affect men who don't see blond women as "exotic".
maybe you should try with some people from arab countries (they are circumcised and they'd see you as exotic) so you can compare

It certainly would NOT be difficult to find millions of men who would eagerly volunteer to take part in this scientific experiment FOC!

-Ww

 

[User#8628]

it might be ... or not
maybe they cum particularily fast with you because you affect them more than you affect men who don't see blond women as "exotic".
maybe you should try with some people from arab countries (they are circumcised and they'd see you as exotic) so you can compare

I recall one Arab taking veeeeery long, but i don't think i have tried enough to pull a clear conclusion.

Japanese can be very exited which can have several results in bed, also things like erection problems.

This issue should maybe be tested with me and a japanese girl trying with the same guy, haha.

 

[e-smile]

I recall one Arab taking veeeeery long, but i don't think i have tried enough to pull a clear conclusion.

Japanese can be very exited which can have several results in bed, also things like erection problems.

This issue should maybe be tested with me and a japanese girl trying with the same guy, haha.

yeah that would be more relyable as a test