Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
HIV risk halved by circumcision
Posted 14 December 2006 - 10:17 AM
So, Paul says that Christ will avail you nothing if you're circumcised, but it's healthy?
Posted 14 December 2006 - 10:24 AM
While the facts revealed in this study are no doubt true, they are also irrelevant. A much more effective and much less invasive protection against HIV is already available.
Let's hear it for Bill Clinton and Bill Gates trying to stem the tide of AIDS in Africa.
And fuck the Pope.
Posted 14 December 2006 - 12:37 PM
So they have speculation, but has it been proven? Besides, even if this is true, wouldn't that make men more susceptible to other diseases? I'd also like to know, what about the risk of infection from said diseases during the time it takes to heal? Having a huge open gash on the surface can't possibly be good for you.
Uncircumcised men are thought to be more susceptible because the underside of the foreskin is rich in Langerhans cells, sentinel cells of the immune system, which attach easily to the human immunodeficiency virus, which causes AIDS. The foreskin also often suffers small tears during intercourse.
Posted 14 December 2006 - 01:44 PM
Posted 14 December 2006 - 02:52 PM
Posted 11 April 2007 - 11:50 AM
There's really no good reason whatsoever to go through with the procedure, because 50% is not a guarantee. Wearing a condom cuts the risk of STDs by 99%, and you don't have to chop off a piece of dick either.
Posted 11 April 2007 - 11:59 AM
Parents of newborn boys may be influenced by this study though.
Posted 11 April 2007 - 02:14 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users