Via Instapundit, I commend this article: the $15 billion anti-AIDS program will be spending money to make circumcision available to African men to protect themselves against AIDS. Please, please, please -- nobody tell Andrew Sullivan. Just don't.
Circumcision has not prevented AIDS in America. But it's going to be different in Africa?
Here is some inaccurate information: "The cells in the foreskin of a penis are especially vulnerable to HIV"
Uh, no they aren't... http://www.cirp.org/news/healthday2007-03-05/
Also:
"The research reinforces studies showing that regions with high circumcision rates generally have lower rates of HIV."
Why don't they show the Brewer Study, published in March 2007, where it was concluded that circumcision in Kenya, Lesotho, and Tanzania actually INCREASES the transmission of AIDS?
That's right; because it would be devastating to the circumcision cause.
What a waste of (OUR) money. What a waste of surgery. What a waste of healthy tissue. What a waste, period.
And I bet that this will somehow translate into circumcising babies again.
This comic shows exactly how circumcision prevents HIV.
Wow, that's idiotic. The AIDS crisis in Africa is due almost entirely to their utterly pathological cultures (not the least of which is the 'virgin cure'). Hacking off a few foreskins will no NOTHING to fix that. I thought medical doctors were supposed to be intelligent. Some are at least---Dr. Dean Edell has mentioned this stupidity many times on his show.
And how much you want to bet that they wouldn't fund FEMALE genital mutilation if that was the "cure"? There are some nice double standards in that area. American feminists rage against female genital mutilation in Africa while our government pays for male mutilation there. It's a truly astounding world we live in.
3 comments:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/19/AR2007081900885.html
Circumcision has not prevented AIDS in America. But it's going to be different in Africa?
Here is some inaccurate information:
"The cells in the foreskin of a penis are especially vulnerable to HIV"
Uh, no they aren't...
http://www.cirp.org/news/healthday2007-03-05/
Also:
"The research reinforces studies showing that regions with high circumcision rates generally have lower rates of HIV."
Why don't they show the Brewer Study, published in March 2007, where it was concluded that circumcision in Kenya, Lesotho, and Tanzania actually INCREASES the transmission of AIDS?
That's right; because it would be devastating to the circumcision cause.
What a waste of (OUR) money. What a waste of surgery. What a waste of healthy tissue. What a waste, period.
And I bet that this will somehow translate into circumcising babies again.
This comic shows exactly how circumcision prevents HIV.
http://www.musiciansunited.org/
Wow, that's idiotic. The AIDS crisis in Africa is due almost entirely to their utterly pathological cultures (not the least of which is the 'virgin cure'). Hacking off a few foreskins will no NOTHING to fix that. I thought medical doctors were supposed to be intelligent. Some are at least---Dr. Dean Edell has mentioned this stupidity many times on his show.
And how much you want to bet that they wouldn't fund FEMALE genital mutilation if that was the "cure"? There are some nice double standards in that area. American feminists rage against female genital mutilation in Africa while our government pays for male mutilation there. It's a truly astounding world we live in.
Thoughtful blog thanks for posting
Post a Comment