The bizarre american history of circumcision : 1896 Dr. R.N. Tooker wrote a popular book, All About The Baby, which advised mothers that circumcision of baby boys was “advisable in most cases.” He recommended the operation mainly for preventing “the vile habit of masturbation.” 1894: Dr. Peter C. Remondino in the National Popular Review advocated; “the wholesale circumcision of the Negro race is an efficient remedy in preventing their predisposition to discriminate raping so inherent in that [Negro] race.”
People are always amazed to learn about circumcision facts and myths. Are there real benefits to consider when making the circumcision decision, or is it just an illusion? As hard as circumcision promoters try to make the practice of genital cutting to be the “norm”, you may be surprised to learn that much of what many Americans think of as “fact” is actually just cultural “groupthink.” While some beliefs are rooted in ancient religious practices, most of what American’s believe is the “norm” has only existed in recent times when it comes to circumcision. In fact, you would be amazed at how many things you think are true that are simply false. Something important to consider when you review circumcision facts and myths.
Circumcision Controversy: The decision to circumcise is a controversial topic for many people, with strongly held opinions on both the for and against sides. Those for circumcision speak to alleged medical benefits and tradition. Those against it raise issues of risk, complications, loss of the sensitive foreskin, pain, trauma, psychological harm, and rights of individual consent. For those against, the benefits do not outweigh the risks. Find extra info on circumcision.
Circumcision’s psychological damage largely stems from the traumatic pain infant’s suffer during the procedure. Research has demonstrated the hormone cortisol, which is associated with stress and pain, spikes during circumcision (Talbert et al., 1976; Gunnar et al., 1981). Although some believe that babies “won’t remember” the pain, we now know that the body “remembers” as evidenced by studies which demonstrate that circumcised infants are more sensitive to pain later in life (Taddio et al., 1997). Research carried out using neonatal animals as a proxy to study the effects of pain on infants’ psychological development have found distinct behavioral patterns characterized by increased anxiety, altered pain sensitivity, hyperactivity, and attention problems (Anand & Scalzo, 2000). In another similar study, it was found that painful procedures in the neonatal period were associated with site-specific changes in the brain that have been found to be associated with mood disorders (Victoria et al., 2013).
Intaction was founded in 2010 out of the strong concern that the American “fee for service” medical and insurance business, its trade associations, PACS, and lobbyists, “the medical industry complex,” were intent on escalating their promotion of infant circumcision. Hospitals, insurance companies, and doctors profit from circumcisions. However Americans were starting to challenge the conventional wisdom of circumcising their sons. Seventeen states dropped Medicaid coverage for infant circumcision, deeming it unnecessary and cosmetic. The medical industry complex and its surrogates responded by launching a counterattack to prevent this threat to their income streams and maintain the status quo they built over many decades. (The most conspicuous evidence of this effort culminated in the 2012 AAP Circumcision Policy Statement – which blatantly stated three times, “Financing Newborn Male recommendation: newborn male circumcision warrant(s) third-party (insurance) reimbursement of the procedure.”) Read even more info on https://intaction.org/.