Studies that suggested circumcision as an additional HIV prevention method, explained their findings by pointing out some biological research. This research indicated that the keratinized outside of the foreskin protects the penis, however during intercourse when erections occur, the skin gets pulled back and therefore exposes the not keratinized inside skin of the foreskin, which is rich on Langerhans cells (Szabo 2000, p. 1593). This cell is known for being susceptible in acquiring HIV as well as other viruses (Szabo 2000, p. 1593). According to this study circumcised penises contain less Langerhans cells, which decreases the chances of HIV contraction. Others studies from North America and Africa provided further evidence in support of the
…show more content…
Although studies showed that circumcision provided health benefits, there has been debates about when would be the best time to circumcise, in consideration of individuals age. Some studies showed that the best time to circumcise is early in men’s life since it brings greater protection against HIV transmission, seemingly due to the thickening of the skin located on the head of the penis (Rennie 2007, p.357). Another advantage of early circumcision is that it avoids future loss of daily life activities such as work and schools (Rennie 2007, p.357). Neonate’s circumcision has been widely debated as it is seen to be an unethical practice that relates to consent. In regards to that it seems to be more appropriate to ask for older children’s consent, especially when it comes to irreversible surgery involving the genital area. The advantages of that age are that the parents or guardians who would like the child to be circumcised are able to influence the choices by informing them about sexuality and HIV (Rennie 2007, …show more content…
Also the complexities involving agreement and parental consent are avoided. Although this study gives much evidence about the benefits of circumcision in preventing the spread of HIV, there are also many studies that show the contrary to those results. Pointing out that the implementation of male circumcision for HIV prevention could possibly cause others problems to arise.
Studies who do not support circumcision as a HIV prevention method, states that there is insufficient evidence to the efficiency of circumcision as well as that this method of prevention does not take into consideration of other possible risk factors. The arguments begin by pointing out that the three RCCTs were terminated early due to satisfactory results that indicated HIV reduction in circumcised men. Because of incomplete results researches claimed that it is too soon to measure long term effectiveness (Green 2010, p.479). Analyzes conducted in sub Saharan Africa concluded that circumcision is not connected to HIV prevention (Green 2010, p.479). The
Although studies showed that circumcision provided health benefits, there has been debates about when would be the best time to circumcise, in consideration of individuals age. Some studies showed that the best time to circumcise is early in men’s life since it brings greater protection against HIV transmission, seemingly due to the thickening of the skin located on the head of the penis (Rennie 2007, p.357). Another advantage of early circumcision is that it avoids future loss of daily life activities such as work and schools (Rennie 2007, p.357). Neonate’s circumcision has been widely debated as it is seen to be an unethical practice that relates to consent. In regards to that it seems to be more appropriate to ask for older children’s consent, especially when it comes to irreversible surgery involving the genital area. The advantages of that age are that the parents or guardians who would like the child to be circumcised are able to influence the choices by informing them about sexuality and HIV (Rennie 2007, …show more content…
Also the complexities involving agreement and parental consent are avoided. Although this study gives much evidence about the benefits of circumcision in preventing the spread of HIV, there are also many studies that show the contrary to those results. Pointing out that the implementation of male circumcision for HIV prevention could possibly cause others problems to arise.
Studies who do not support circumcision as a HIV prevention method, states that there is insufficient evidence to the efficiency of circumcision as well as that this method of prevention does not take into consideration of other possible risk factors. The arguments begin by pointing out that the three RCCTs were terminated early due to satisfactory results that indicated HIV reduction in circumcised men. Because of incomplete results researches claimed that it is too soon to measure long term effectiveness (Green 2010, p.479). Analyzes conducted in sub Saharan Africa concluded that circumcision is not connected to HIV prevention (Green 2010, p.479). The