Disingenuous doctors want to scare people from circumcision

A handful of Norwegian doctors and nurses, have – in concert with colleagues in other Nordic countries –  redoubled their efforts to outlaw circumcision. Whereas before arguments focused on the right of the child, and attempts to liken circumcision of boys to genital mutilation of girls, they now employ much dirtier and more dangerous methods to sway the public. Now, they manipulate published research and use selective language to create the impression that circumcision leads to severe side effects in between 1 – 35% of the cases, is painful and causes pain throughout life, causes disfigurement of the penis with potential disastrous effects for adult sexual life. They falsely claim that looking after the welfare of the child is the exclusive realm of the State, and that as such, and to be in compliance with international declarations, the Nordic governments should ban the practice.

Anyone who has ever performed an essay critique can easily punch hole in the manipulated facts and emotional arguments, designed to create an impression that parents who choose to circumcise their male offspring before the age of 18, are cruel and incapable of looking after their children properly. But the bogus arguments are designed to suit a particularly fertile soil, that mud-heap of unrecognized and unchallenged anti-Semitism and rabid racism in our society.

Here are some examples of the disingenuousness found in the article:

“The pain and risk involved in the procedure can never be eliminated” – carefully drafted sentence to give the impression that pain persists throughout life. In another paragraph the word irreversible has been used, which further cements the impression that circumcision is a cruel practice.

“A recently published study published in the Danish Medical Journal revealed a complication rate of 5.1% in circumcisions performed by pediatric surgeons”…:  Not only do the authors of this op-ed conceal that the study they cite is a retrospective study, a statistical method known for its weaknesses, such as having to rely on the record keeping of others (the study cited have selected cases from 1996 – 2003, the cutoff points have not been disclosed or discussed in the paper, a significant weakness of the discussion), and that you require a very large sample for rare outcomes, just to mention some. The authors of the Aftenposten oped, have also concealed a major argument in the discussion of the Danish Medical Journal study: “Given that ritual circumcision in childhood is legal and accepted as a fundamental part of traditional values of humankind, the best thing we can do to protect these asymptomatic healthy boys against complications is probably to focus on high surgical and anaesthesiological standards.”

“International studies report anything from 1 to 35% complications after the procedure”: If the spread is so great, then most would agree that the methods, selection, statistical tools, in fact every detail of the studies were so flawed that it is not clear what they wanted to measure in the first place.

“To remove the foreskin, it must first be detached from the penile head. Both this detachment and later removal of the foreskin is painful many days after the procedure, even with local anesthesia”: I wonder if any of the authors have seen a circumcision, or even a foreskin. In the Jewish Brit Milah, the foreskin is not drawn back, but drawn above the glans penis. It is this loose skin fold, which easily folds back, or stretches forward, which is clipped off, the whole procedure taking 10 -15 seconds maximum. There is no prior detachment from the frenulum, so where the authors go the idea from is a bit of a mystery.

The illustration accompanying the Aftenposten oped, shows a Jewish Brit Milah, whereas the Danish article cited seems to refer to ritual circumcision for Muslim boys, since the spread of age is from 0 – 16 years. Also the method described in the study has nothing to do with the method used for Brit Milah in infants. It may be that the illustration was not selected by the authors, but by the editors of Aftenposten. Nevertheless, the picture makes an explicit reference to Judaism, yet the method described for circumcision is not a Jewish practice. With all the negatively laden words in the article and this bogus referral to Judaism, an impression is made that it is the Jewish ritual which is harmful. I have no knowledge how the different Muslim denominations organize their circumcision ceremonies, other than that there is no specific requirement for age, or any requirement for a specific qualification as in Judaism, but it stinks to high heaven that in the multiculti paradise so desperately sought after by certain elites, one of the most fundamental rites of passage for identity in the Muslim tradition is singled out in such a shameful way. Discrimination comes to mind. The coupling to Judaism is both bogus and anti-Semitic.

And so on, and so on. The whole oped reeks of lack of knowledge, lack of understanding, and an intense desire to root out religion, culture (which is ironic in this multi-cultural day and age), identity. Worst of all, the oped reveals a lack of respect for minorities and their right to religious and cultural freedom. And dont get me started on doctors who make referral to abortions when there is nothing wrong with the fetus, other than perhaps the wrong sex, or about the many and much more harmful side effects and complications routine surgical procedures, or the hygiene in many a hospital. MRSA anybody?

lifted from aftenposten.no, poor google translate

Ritual circumcision of boys violates medical ethics

There is no health reason to circumcise young boys in the Nordic countries.

Jan Petter Odden , CEO of Norwegian children Medical Association , Astrid Grydeland Ersvik , Manager, Area of nurses in Norway , Hans Skari , head , pediatric surgery association, Anja Smeland , Head , Paediatric Nursing Association , Trond Markestad , professor , head of the Council for Medical Ethics , Anne Lindboe , ombudsman and pediatrician .
Published: 17.okt . 2013 11:04 Updated : 18.okt . 2013 2:52 p.m.

Conditions in adult males may suggest circumcision , for example, can reduce the transmission of HIV through sexual contact , is of little relevance in our part of verden.Forebygging of urinary tract infections is also used as an argument in the debate . One must circumcise about 200 babies to save one urinary tract infection , a condition that can be easily treated with antibiotics. The procedure satisfies therefore the stringent requirements for preventive surgery, especially when done on people who can not consent.

In the U.S. , one of two countries in the world that has not signed the Convention , the growing health and economic savings due to possible reduced HIV transmission through sexual contact used as medical argument to circumcise young boy babies. European children medicate disagree with this and believe that the lack of health benefits in childhood , in addition to the pain and risks of the procedure allows the procedure to wait until the boy can decide for yourself .

How painful and risky?
To remove the foreskin must first be detached from the head of the penis . Both this solution and the further removal of the foreskin is painful for many days afterwards , even with local anesthesia .

In this country, it is assumed that approx. 2000 male babies circumcised each year. Acute complications include bleeding , infection , damage to the penis head and anesthesia -related complications. Medical complications such as deformities , scarring and small penis ( buried penis ) can lead to a need for new surgery . In extreme cases , fortunately very rare, seen partial or total destruction of the penis .

In Norway , we lack good studies on short – and long-term consequences of ritual circumcision of male children . A recently published study in the Danish Medical Journal showed a complication rate of 5.1 percent after circumcisions performed by pediatric surgeons at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen. International studies show anywhere from less than 1 to 35 percent complications after the procedure .

Norwegian boy died
We do not know exactly how many Norwegian boys with complications after circumcision , but there is reason to believe that the numbers are similar to the Danish . Recent death of a baby boy in Oslo two days after the circumcision done by a doctor, another was hastily taken to hospital because of life-threatening complications after the procedure . At Oslo University Hospital pediatric surgeons treat  5-10 children per year of complications after ritual circumcision . We do not know the numbers from other hospitals or doctors’ surgeries .

Why should boys decide ?
Circumcision is an important symbol of their own faith and culture for many parents and their sons. However ritual entails cutting away part of the most intimate on the body of a healthy child , a life-long marking body. The pain and risks of the procedure can never be eliminated completely , even with optimal medical treatment. Since any medical benefits belonging to adulthood , the boy should even get to take the election when he is old enough.

In the Nordic countries there is an increasing proportion multicultural children , and we get feedback from mothers who feel pressured to perform the procedure. More worrying is the feedback from the guys who feel labeled and forced into a cultural identity they do not know themselves at home – and that means that they will not shower or participate in sports.
Knowledge and human rights
Neither the CRC and other human rights instruments provide clear answers to the question of ritual circumcision . Different rights, religious freedom and children’s right to participation and bodily integrity, to be balanced and weighted.

Much of the answer should be in the medical consequences of the procedure. The pain , the risk and the irreversible circumcision of male children , we believe that surgery may be contrary to the CRC Articles 12 and 24 Article 12 deals with children’s right to participation . In Article 24 states that children must be protected against tradition-bound rituals that can be harmful to their health. We believe that the child’s best interests must prevail over the right of adults to exercise their religious or tradition-bound rituals.

A growing recognition
UN Human Rights Council has urged all countries to abolish intervention that compromises children’s privacy and dignity , and that does not respect the rights of children . International NGO Council on Violence Against Children , heavily adviser organ of the UN, raised last year revealed that circumcision without consent is a gross violation of boys’ physical integrity and the right to protection from violence.

To introduce ritual circumcision as a free service to the hospital , is a bad idea. This will legitimize and maintain the practice as it exists today . It can also increase the pressure on those who do not want to perform the procedure. Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly defines in a recent resolution ritual circumcision of boys as a violation of their physical integrity and urges Member States to work for the boys’ right to be consulted . The Nordic children Ombudsmen recommend an age limit . And here at home have requested Norwegian Centre for Human Rights at the Faculty of Law in Oslo a thorough analysis of the human rights issues concerning ritual circumcision of boys – which requires an assessment of the medical conditions of the intervention .

Children’s best is the government ‘s responsibility
To introduce ritual circumcision as a free service to the hospital , is a bad idea. This will legitimize and maintain the practice as it exists today . It can also increase the pressure on those who do not want to perform the procedure. To perform the procedure in a hospital , is no guarantee against pain and complications. The procedure should be in a transitional period done in private clinics the user fee . To minimize risk , it should only be performed by experienced physicians and with optimal pain relief.

We want a respectful dialogue between all interested parties on how best to ensure the boys full impact of this issue . We encourage our new government to educate the communities where circumcision is a tradition of children’s rights and the health consequences of the procedure. The government must initiate the necessary measures to ensure that boys even get to decide whether to circumcise .

20 comments for “Disingenuous doctors want to scare people from circumcision

  1. Mark Lyndon
    October 19, 2013 at 7:14 am

    It’s hard to know Where to start, so I’ll keep this short.

    Why is it disingenuous to say “The pain and risk involved in the procedure can never be eliminated”, and what makes you think that gives the impression that pain persists throughout life? What’s wrong with using the word “irreversible”?

    Whether the foreskin is drawn back or above, it still has to be separated from the glans. This was not the case in the original Jewish version of circumcision btw, where only the overhang was cut off.

    This is about protecting children, not “rooting out” religion. No-one would have a problem with adults choosing to be circumcised themselves for whatever reason.

    Not all Jewish people believe in circumcision. Brit Shalom is an alternative naming ceremony to celebrate the birth of baby boys to Jewish families. These are just some of the sites run by Jewish people opposed to infant circumcision:

    http://www.jewishcircumcision.org
    http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org
    http://www.circumcision.org
    http://www.beyondthebris.com
    http://www.britshalom.org

  2. Roland Day
    October 19, 2013 at 10:00 am

    Article 20(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (1997) forbids removing tissue from persons who cannot consent.

    http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm

    Circumcision of children removes tissue from person who cannot consent and is totally unethical.

    The Nordic ombudsmen for children are acting properly to protect children.

  3. October 19, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    then why, pray tell, is circumcision expressly permitted in the EU? I think you have got your facts wrong, and also your ethics. Just to humor me, what is your stance on abortion?

  4. October 19, 2013 at 3:37 pm

    I am not sure what your level of knowledge with medical essay writing. A golden rule is to not stretch the arguments and veer into emotional gobbledygook. Also, when sources are referred to it is customary to cite truthfully and to not create impressions which were not present in the cited article. It is absolutely disingenuous to use language and linguistic constructions to create impressions persisting pain, even if you are not conversant with Norwegian, your English reading comprehension skills ought to be more advanced that what you appear to have in this instance.
    As for selective brith and the handful of mini-clubs you are mentioning. I am very glad that you have a place to have your tea and all of that, but I beg of you to let me and the vast majority of the Jewish people (and I somehow imagine that many a run of the mill Muslim would side with me too) to decide how and when to give our offspring the their cultural, religious and humanistic identity. Its none of your business, and as you know, not only is circumcision a pillar of Judaism, but so too is freedom of choice. Back off!
    And while you are rummaging there in the back, get an anatomy book, or go study a penis with a foreskin and you shall soon see that it is not attached to the glans by other means than the frenulum, and that it is in fact a double layered skin where only the outer layer is cut off. The glans is left alone.

  5. Eric R.
    October 20, 2013 at 1:26 am

    Leave it to the Jew-hating scum who troll all circumcision boards like these two Nazis above to cloak their desire to exterminate Jews and Judaism in the most innocent of terms.

    Forget it guys. It’s not going to happen. We Jews will obliterate the world with nuclear weapons before we go down.

  6. de Bacle
    October 20, 2013 at 1:28 am

    If their concern is children welfare, why don’t they invest their time in challenging Norwegian society for the estimated 60,000- 70,000 children that secretly practice selfmutilation (razor blades and what not) ?

    Why do they vomit such emotional energy on less that 10 boys a year (less than five ?) being circumcised in this minority ethnic group in Norway ?

    If a bunch of Medical Doctors, pediatric and surgeon specialists get so much of their facts wrong, it begs the question what motivated such a forceful manifestation of protest, that they write an op-ed together, in the first place.

    Is this just yet another expression of Norwegian cowardliness and bigotry ?
    Jump the bandwagon ?
    The train is running and here is an easy way to get you name in print ?

    How come the doctors and Aftenposten direct their implicit attack on the Jewish ritual (since it is the infant circumcision that is the main target) to which there is massive evidence of it being virtually harmless – (When performed by a Jewish Mohel). Are all the non-Jewish Americans also included in their despicabe lying distrsions ?

  7. October 20, 2013 at 3:59 am

    Talk for yourself Eric, this Jew has no wish to exterminate anybody, and certainly not with atomic weapons. I just beg to be allowed to exercise my human rights as I see fit and I will walk very roughshod over the toes of anybody who tries to tell me how to live life. but lets be serious, no killing or threats thereof is conductive to anything at all.

  8. Martin
    October 20, 2013 at 5:27 am

    I do not wish to add any further to the medical advice offered by the Prof. surely that is sufficient.

    The main and in my view, only point worth considering, is this perpetuates yet another threat to the Jewish religion. Throughout the ages, even the so called civilised Greeks and Romans attempted to ban male circumcision of young boys at the age of 8 days old. This threat continues to the present day. Let us not forget the many Aryan German medical staff and their “occupied” collaborators who assisted them in conducting medical experiments and operations without the barest of necessities for safety, hygiene and pain on the Jewish people and gypsies. The modern medical professional (and I use this in the lightest of terms) that is so concerned at Jewish circumcision today, would no doubt have assisted their Nazi masters with full co-operation. They are no better than the Nazis of old.

    These people want freedom of speech without the freedom of reply. These people want freedom of hate, without the freedom of individual consent. Let us be totally honest with each other. This is nothing to do with children whatsoever. This is only a cloak to hide under, in the same manner of cover up in making malicious threats and charges against the Jewish people. Let these medics show compassion and understanding with reality to the large number of alcoholics and drug addicts in Norway, particularly among the young. Oh, they cannot, as the vast majority will be non Jewish.

    As for Eric R, , I would not waste the dropping from my nose on these people let alone a bomb. That is too similar to the Norwegian SV party for my liking. In any case, your suggestion will also wipe out the many innocents, including the particularly brave, independent and decent members of MIFF. Eric, please look up their site to see another type of Norwegian. In fact, they do more for Israel than the Jewish community in Norway.

  9. October 20, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    Glad you don’t want to bomb the world into oblivion, McGonagall, but when you talk about human rights, you seem to be missing something. They belong to all humans, regardless of their age or sex, or their parents’ beliefs, and it’s fundamental they they include “security of the person”, that is the right to decide how much of one’s own body one gets to keep. (The normal, healthy, functional, non-renewing parts at any rate.)

    de Bacle seems to be ignoring the many Muslims who circumcise boys, who are included in the Norwegian strictures. They and the international Intactivist movement are unconcerned about the adults’ motivation, only about protecting children, whether male, female or intersex, and regardless of whether their parents are Muslim, American, South Korean, Filipino, Jewish, tribal African, Melanesian, eastern Polynesian or outback Australian.

  10. Eric R.
    October 21, 2013 at 1:59 am

    McG:

    The brit mila banners, combined with Hamas, Hezbollah, the UN, the EU and other assorted Nazi scum, are a loose confederation with the same goal – extermination of the Jews. While I do not advocate nuking a country solely because it bans circumcision (I have explained on this forum, several times, the steps that I think Israel should take in case a country bans it), I mention the nukes to our first two Jew-hating posters because these people think that they can exterminate Jews and destroy Judaism essentially without consequence, as has happened for 2000 years. This is not true anymore.

    You and I both know these two idiots care not one bit about saving little boys. They care about finishing Hitler’s work. It does not hurt to point out to them and to their more violent friends what will happen if they go too far.

  11. October 21, 2013 at 11:29 am

    Phew, its good we agree about at least one thing – that about bombing opponents into smithereens… For the rest, I think we shall just have to disagree, you are entitled to your point of view and I really dont think I can convince you to change your mind.
    Having said that, I reject your arguments, since they are very poorly substantiated. I also reject the idea that the state, activists, NGOs whoever, are going to manipulate international agreements in an apparent attempt to protect the children, and thereby tell me how I am going to live my life.
    In today’s Aftenposten, two opposing oped’s on the topic have been published, apologies for rotten google translate, time is not an asset I have plenty of, but you can get the gist of it. one of the authors has very succinctly punched a hole in your arguments, there is no need for me to try to outdo his eloquence and argumentative strength. Recommended reading.

  12. de Bacle
    October 21, 2013 at 12:02 pm

    Hugh7 writes: “de Bacle seems to be ignoring the many Muslims who circumcise boys, who are included in the Norwegian strictures.”

    The demonizing op-ed is the combined responsibility of Aftenposten and the Doctors, both equally guilty of the combined product. The picture depicts a Jewish Brit-Milah, the emphasis is on Brit-Mila of baby boys, the vilifying demonizing descriptions of the procedure itself, the extraordinary misrepresentation of complications with (Jewish) Brit-Milah, the misrepresentation of the triviality of negative consequences of (a well performed) Brit Mila, the small number of children involved in Norway .. all these and more.. disqualifies the integrity of the Doctors themselves and throws suspiscion on their arguments.

    Doctors at Rikshospitalet in Norway have the responsibility not to lie about Jewish Brit-Mila by including it in descriptions of problems with criminal procedures not at all related to Jewish Brit Mila. The article fumes with “guilt by asosciation” – a dastardly trick in lack of decent well founded arguments.
    If they had even one well thought through and founded argument they could have stuck to that one (e.g. their experience of Muslim procedures in Norway the past 10 years) and “problematized” it alone, and would perhaps gained respect for it.

    Mixing and confusing the issues, stacking half truths and weak arguments on top each other, doesn’t strengthen each half lie, it renders their whole argument rotten.

    The Royal Family of Great Britain throughout the centuries all circumcise their sons (also today), they rely totally on the expert procedures of Jewish “Mohels”. The urological specialists in the most prominent hospitals in the US, France and England frequently consult these for advice on genital issues completely unrelated to Brit-Mila, simply because of their unequivocal supreme expertise.

    The Doctors have not consulted the Rabbis in Norway, neither the expert Mohel that was most recently in Norway (Rav Uri Ashkenaz, 12000 documented successful procedures all over the world), neither Israel, American or any other authority besides their own belly buttons.

    The article, the combined transgressions of Aftenposten editors and the Doctors, is yet another anti-Semitic manifestation of the Norwegian elitist establishment and media and will go down as such in the history of Jewish life in Norway.

  13. MiracleRiver
    October 21, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    ” It is this loose skin fold, which easily folds back, or stretches forward, which is clipped off”

    Pray, enlighten me as to what this instrument this Israeli Mohel is holding is required for?

    He claims it is to “tickle” the little baby? Can I buy on on Amazon perhaps?

    http://youtu.be/XN65C9tbLP0?t=4s

  14. October 22, 2013 at 12:44 am

    maybe he just uses this to stir your fairly pervo fantasies, geezer!

  15. MiracleRiver
    October 22, 2013 at 4:17 am

    Here’s another of my “pervo” fantasies:

    “But the mohel with whom I had worked countless times suddenly handed me the knife. He pointed to my squirming son, whose hands and legs were tied to the board. The foreskin had been pulled up over the glans of the penis and was now protruding through a narrow slit of the small, stainless steel clamp….’It’s the greatest honor a father can have,’ he added….There is no greater primal anger than that caused by seeing another male in carnal contact with your wife, in this case the physical intimacy of mother and son. And there is no greater primal envy than that caused by looking down at the person who was brought into the world specifically to be your survivor….The breast provides, but the knife protects. It channels the father’s natural anger and jealousy into one controlled cut. He takes off one small part in order to preserve — and love — the whole….No father should be denied this experience, even vicariously, of inflicting upon his child a ritualized blow so intense as to make him both shake and recoil.” [Birth Rite, by Joshua J. Hammerman,The New York Times Magazine, March 13, 1994.]

  16. October 22, 2013 at 4:27 am

    Fascinating. How your brain works…

  17. martin
    October 22, 2013 at 7:56 am

    I know that Norway has a serious drug problem, as do many western countries. I do believe though, that Miracle River has been on them far too long to make a cohesive argument one way or the other..
    I can only again refer to my point above. This is just another scurrilous misleading attack on the jewish religion. That Norwegians are pushing for this agenda is hardly surprising. What would be surprising is if they had no opinion at all, or were positive towards anything that is Jewish – or Israeli. Medical scum that SS Himmler would have been delighted with had they joined his team. I am sure they too, would have been delighted to have assisted Himmler with his hideous medical experiments.

  18. MiracleRiver
    October 22, 2013 at 9:12 am

    This was hit’s my “pervo” button as well.

    How ’bout you?

    http://www.moralogous.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/massmuslimcirc.jpg

  19. October 22, 2013 at 10:57 am

    get real will you…

  20. MiracleRiver
    October 22, 2013 at 12:30 pm

    I can go on all day like this :-)

    Here, Moses Maimonides, a Rabbi, and a preeminent medieval Spanish, Sephardic Jewish philosopher, astronomer and one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars and physicians of the Middle Ages; states quite clearly that the purpose of mutilating the genitals of little infant boys is to:

    1. Decrease the pleasure of sex
    2. Damage the penis
    3. Cause terrible pain to the baby boy
    4. Reduce the frequency of sexual intercourse
    5. Amputate the protective covering of the penis
    6. Damage the female sexual response, by reducing her emotional and physical attachment to men. He calls this “the strongest of the reasons for mutilating the genitals of infant boys [circumcision]”

    “Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally. This gave the possibility to everyone to raise an objection and to say: How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him. In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision.”

    [Link to full text](http://www.circumstitions.com/Jewish2.html#rambam)
    [Moses Maimonides](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Maimonides)

Comments are closed.