This is a good article. Click here for more information.
Page semi-protected


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Sexual effects of circumcision)
Jump to: navigation, search
Circumcision central Asia2.jpg
A circumcision performed in Central Asia, c. 1865–1872
ICD-9-CM V50.2
MeSH D002944
OPS-301 code 5-640.2
MedlinePlus 002998
eMedicine 1015820

Male circumcision is the removal of the foreskin from the human penis.[1][2][3] In the most common procedure, the foreskin is opened, adhesions are removed, and the foreskin is separated from the glans. After that, a circumcision device may be placed then the foreskin is cut off. Topical or locally injected anesthesia is used to reduce pain and physiologic stress.[4] For adults and children, general anesthesia is an option and the procedure may be performed without a specialized circumcision device. The procedure is most often an elective surgery performed on babies and children for religious or cultural reasons.[5] In other cases it may be done as a treatment for a condition or for preventative reasons. Medically it is a treatment option for problematic cases of phimosis, balanoposthitis that does not resolve with other treatments, and chronic urinary tract infections (UTIs).[1][6] It is contraindicated in cases of certain genital structure abnormalities or poor general health.[2][6]

The positions of the world's major medical organizations range from considering elective circumcision of babies and children as having no benefit and significant risks to having a modest health benefit that outweighs small risks. No major medical organization recommends either universal circumcision for all males (aside from the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) for areas with high rates of HIV), or banning the procedure.[7] Ethical and legal questions regarding informed consent and human rights have been raised over the circumcision of babies and children for non-medical reasons, for these reasons the procedure is controversial.[8][9]

Evidence supports that male circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection among heterosexual men in sub-Saharan Africa.[10][11] Therefore, the WHO recommends considering circumcision as part of a comprehensive HIV prevention program in areas with high rates of HIV such as Sub Saharan Africa.[12] Evidence for a health benefit against HIV for men who have sex with men is less clear.[13][14] Likewise, the effectiveness of using circumcision to prevent HIV in the developed world is also unclear.[15] Circumcision is associated with reduced rates of cancer causing forms of human papillomavirus (HPV),[16][17] UTIs, and cancer of the penis.[4] Prevention of those conditions is not a justification for routine circumcision of infants.[1][18] Studies of its potential protective effects against other sexually transmitted infections have been unclear. A 2010 review found circumcisions performed by medical providers to have a typical complication rate of 1.5% for babies and 6% for older children, with few cases of severe complications.[19] Bleeding, infection, and the removal of either too much or too little foreskin are the most common complications cited.[19] Complication rates are higher when the procedure is performed by an inexperienced operator, in unsterile conditions, or in older children.[19] Circumcision does not appear to have a negative impact on sexual function.[20][21]

An estimated one-third of males worldwide are circumcised.[5][19][22] The procedure is most common in the Muslim world and Israel (where it is near-universal for religious reasons), the United States, and parts of Southeast Asia and Africa.[5] It is relatively rare in Europe, Latin America, parts of Southern Africa, and most of Asia.[5] The origin of circumcision is not known with certainty; the oldest documented evidence for it comes from ancient Egypt.[5] Various theories have been proposed as to its origin including as a religious sacrifice and as a rite of passage marking a boy's entrance into adulthood.[23] It is part of religious law in Judaism[24] and is an established practice in Islam, Coptic Christianity, and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.[5][25][26] The word circumcision is from Latin circumcidere, meaning "to cut around".[5]

Indications and contraindications

Routine or elective



Medical indications

Circumcision may be used to treat pathological phimosis, refractory balanoposthitis and chronic or recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs).[1][6] The World Health Organization promotes circumcision to prevent female-to-male HIV transmission in countries with high rates of HIV.[12] The International Antiviral Society-USA also suggests circumcision be discussed with MSM who engage in primarily insertive anal sex, especially in areas where HIV is common.[28]




Circumcision surgery with hemostats and scissors


Removal of the foreskin

For infant circumcision, devices such as the Gomco clamp, Plastibell and Mogen clamp are commonly used in the USA.[4] These follow the same basic procedure. First, the amount of foreskin to be removed is estimated. The practitioner opens the foreskin via the preputial orifice to reveal the glans underneath and ensures it is normal before bluntly separating the inner lining of the foreskin (preputial epithelium) from its attachment to the glans. The practitioner then places the circumcision device (this sometimes requires a dorsal slit), which remains until blood flow has stopped. Finally, the foreskin is amputated.[4] For older babies and adults, circumcision is often performed surgically without specialized instruments,[29] and alternatives such Unicirc, Prepex or the Shang ring are available.[30]

Pain management

The circumcision procedure causes pain, and for neonates this pain may interfere with mother-infant interaction or cause other behavioral changes,[31] so the use of analgesia is advocated.[4][32] Ordinary procedural pain may be managed in pharmacological and non-pharmacological ways. Pharmacological methods, such as localized or regional pain-blocking injections and topical analgesic creams, are safe and effective.[4][33][34] The ring block and dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) are the most effective at reducing pain, and the ring block may be more effective than the DPNB. They are more effective than EMLA (eutectic mixture of local anesthetics) cream, which is more effective than a placebo.[33][34] Topical creams have been found to irritate the skin of low birth weight infants, so penile nerve block techniques are recommended in this group.[4]

For infants, non-pharmacological methods such as the use of a comfortable, padded chair and a sucrose or non-sucrose pacifier are more effective at reducing pain than a placebo,[34] but the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states that such methods are insufficient alone and should be used to supplement more effective techniques.[4] A quicker procedure reduces duration of pain; use of the Mogen clamp was found to result in a shorter procedure time and less pain-induced stress than the use of the Gomco clamp or the Plastibell.[34] The available evidence does not indicate that post-procedure pain management is needed.[4] For adults, general anesthesia is an option,[35] and the procedure requires four to six weeks of abstinence from masturbation or intercourse to allow the wound to heal.[29]


Sexually transmitted diseases

Human immunodeficiency virus

Main article: Circumcision and HIV

There is strong evidence that circumcision reduces the risk of men acquiring HIV infection in areas of the world with high rates of HIV.[10][11] Evidence among heterosexual men in sub-Saharan Africa shows an absolute decrease in risk of 1.8% which is a relative decrease of between 38 percent and 66 percent over two years,[11] and in this population studies rate it cost effective.[36] Whether it is of benefit in developed countries is undetermined.[15]


The WHO and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) state that male circumcision is an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention, but should be carried out by well-trained medical professionals and under conditions of informed consent (parents' consent for their infant boys).[5][12][38] The WHO has judged circumcision to be a cost-effective public health intervention against the spread of HIV in Africa, although not necessarily more cost-effective than condoms.[5] The joint WHO/UNAIDS recommendation also notes that circumcision only provides partial protection from HIV and should not replace known methods of HIV prevention.[12]

The available evidence does not indicate that circumcision provides HIV protection for heterosexual women.[4][39][40] Data is lacking regarding the effect circumcision may have on the transmission rate of men who engage in anal sex with a female partner.[38][41] It is undetermined whether circumcision benefits men who have sex with men.[14][42]

Human papillomavirus


Circumcision is associated with a reduced prevalence of oncogenic types of HPV infection, meaning that a randomly selected circumcised man is less likely to be found infected with cancer-causing types of HPV than an uncircumcised man.[44][45] It also decreases the likelihood of multiple infections.[17] No strong evidence indicates that it reduces the rate of new HPV infection,[16][17][46] but the procedure is associated with increased clearance of the virus by the body,[16][17] which can account for the finding of reduced prevalence.[17]

Although genital warts are caused by a type of HPV, there is no statistically significant relationship between being circumcised and the presence of genital warts.[16][45][46]

Other infections

Studies evaluating the effect of circumcision on the incidence of other sexually transmitted infections have reached conflicting conclusions. A 2006 meta-analysis found that circumcision was associated with lower rates of syphilis, chancroid and possibly genital herpes.[47] A 2010 review found that circumcision reduced the incidence of HSV-2 (herpes simplex virus, type 2) infections by 28%.[48] The researchers found mixed results for protection against trichomonas vaginalis and chlamydia trachomatis and no evidence of protection against gonorrhea or syphilis.[48] Among men who have sex with men, reviews have found poor evidence for protection against sexually transmitted infections other than HIV,[13][42] with the possible exception of syphilis.[42]

Phimosis, balanitis and balanoposthitis

Phimosis is the inability to retract the foreskin over the glans penis.[49] At birth, the foreskin cannot be retracted due to adhesions between the foreskin and glans, and this is considered normal (physiological phimosis).[49] Over time the foreskin naturally separates from the glans, and a majority of boys are able to retract the foreskin by age three.[49] Less than one percent are still having problems at age 18.[49] If the inability to do so becomes problematic (pathological phimosis) circumcision is a treatment option.[1][50] This pathological phimosis may be due to scarring from the skin disease balanitis xerotica obliterans (BXO), repeated episodes of balanoposthitis or forced retraction of the foreskin.[51] Steroid creams are also a reasonable option and may prevent the need for surgery including in those with mild BXO.[51][52] The procedure may also be used to prevent the development of phimosis.[6] Phimosis is also a complication that can result from circumcision.[53]

An inflammation of the glans penis and foreskin is called balanoposthitis, and the condition affecting the glans alone is called balanitis.[54][55] Most cases of these conditions occur in uncircumcised males,[56] affecting 4–11% of that group.[57] The moist, warm space underneath the foreskin is thought to facilitate the growth of pathogens, particularly when hygiene is poor. Yeasts, especially Candida albicans, are the most common penile infection and are rarely identified in samples taken from circumcised males.[56] Both conditions are usually treated with topical antibiotics (metronidazole cream) and antifungals (clotrimazole cream) or low-potency steroid creams.[54][55] Circumcision is a treatment option for refractory or recurrent balanoposthitis, but in recent years the availability of the other treatments have made it less necessary.[54][55]

Urinary tract infections

A UTI affects parts of the urinary system including the urethra, bladder, and kidneys. There is about a one percent risk of UTIs in boys under two years of age, and the majority of incidents occur in the first year of life. There is good but not ideal evidence that circumcision reduces the incidence of UTIs in boys under two years of age, and there is fair evidence that the reduction in incidence is by a factor of 3–10 times.[4][58][59] Prevention of UTIs does not justify routine use of the procedure, however.[1] Circumcision is most likely to benefit boys who have a high risk of UTIs due to anatomical defects,[4] and may be used to treat recurrent UTIs.[1]



Circumcision has a protective effect against the risks of penile cancer in men, and cervical cancer in the female sexual partners of heterosexual men. Penile cancer is rare, with about 1 new case per 100,000 people per year in developed countries and higher incidence rates per 100,000 in sub-Saharan Africa (for example: 1.6 in Zimbabwe, 2.7 in Uganda and 3.2 in Swaziland).[61] Penile cancer development can be detected in the carcinoma in situ (CIS) cancerous precursor stage and at the more advanced invasive squamous cell carcinoma stage.[4] Childhood or adolescent circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of invasive squamous cell carcinoma in particular.[4][61] There is an association between adult circumcision and an increased risk of invasive penile cancer; this is believed to be from men being circumcised as a treatment for penile cancer or a condition that is a precursor to cancer rather than a consequence of circumcision itself.[61] Penile cancer has been observed to be nearly eliminated in populations of males circumcised neonatally.[57]

Important risk factors for penile cancer include phimosis and HPV infection, both of which are mitigated by circumcision.[61] The mitigating effect circumcision has on the risk factor introduced by the possibility of phimosis is secondary, in that the removal of the foreskin eliminates the possibility of phimosis. This can be inferred from study results that show uncircumcised men with no history of phimosis are equally likely to have penile cancer as circumcised men.[4][61] Circumcision is also associated with a reduced prevalence of cancer-causing types of HPV in men[17] and a reduced risk of cervical cancer (which is caused by a type of HPV) in female partners of men.[6] As penile cancer is rare (and may become increasingly rare as HPV vaccination rates rise), and circumcision has risks, the practice is not considered to be valuable solely as a prophylactic measure against penile cancer in the United States.[4][18][57]

There is some evidence that circumcision is associated with lower risk of prostate cancer. A 2015 meta-analysis found a reduced risk of prostate cancer associated with circumcision in black men.[62] A 2016 meta-analysis found that men with prostate cancer were less likely to be circumcised.[63]

Adverse effects

Neonatal circumcision is generally safe when done by an experienced practitioner.[64][65] The most common acute complications are bleeding, infection and the removal of either too much or too little foreskin.[4][66] These complications occur in approximately 0.12% of procedures, and constitute the vast majority of all acute circumcision complications in the United States.[66] Minor complications are reported to occur in three percent of procedures.[64] Severe complications are rare.[67] A specific complication rate is difficult to determine due to scant data on complications and inconsistencies in their classification.[4] Complication rates are greater when the procedure is performed by an inexperienced operator, in unsterile conditions, or when the child is at an older age.[19] Significant acute complications happen rarely,[4][19] occurring in about 1 in 500 newborn procedures in the United States.[4] Severe to catastrophic complications, including death, are so rare that they are reported only as individual case reports.[4][65] Other possible complications include buried penis, chordee, phimosis, skin bridges, urethral fistulas, and meatal stenosis.[65] These complications may be avoided with proper technique, and are most often treatable without requiring a hospital visit.[65]


The circumcision procedure may carry the risks of heightened pain response for newborns and dissatisfaction with the result.[31] Newborns that experience pain due to being circumcised have different responses to vaccines given afterwards, with higher pain scores observed.[68]

Sexual effects

The highest quality evidence indicates that circumcision does not decrease the sensitivity of the penis, harm sexual function or reduce sexual satisfaction.[20][69][70] A 2013 systematic review found that circumcision did not appear to adversely affect sexual desire, pain with intercourse, premature ejaculation, time until ejaculation, erectile dysfunction or difficulties with orgasm. However, the study found that the existing evidence is not very good.[71] Another 2013 systematic review found that the highest-quality studies reported no adverse effects of circumcision on sexual function, sensitivity, sensation or satisfaction.[21]

Psychological effects

Behavioral effects have been observed following infant circumcision including changes in sleep patterns, irritability, changes in feeding, and parental bonding.[72] Some men who were circumcised as an infant involuntarily described their feelings about the procedure using the terms "violation, torture, mutilation and sexual assault".[73]


Rate of male circumcision by country[5]
  >80% prevalence
  20-80% prevalence
  <20% prevalence
  Not available

Circumcision is one of the world's most widely performed procedures.[74] Approximately 37% to 39% of males worldwide are circumcised, about half for religious or cultural reasons.[75] It is most often practiced between infancy and the early twenties.[5] The WHO estimated in 2007 that 664,500,000 males aged 15 and over were circumcised (30–33% global prevalence), almost 70% of whom were Muslim.[5] Circumcision is most common in the Muslim world, Israel, South Korea, the United States and parts of Southeast Asia and Africa. It is relatively rare in Europe, Latin America, parts of Southern Africa and Oceania and most of Asia. Prevalence is near-universal in the Middle East and Central Asia.[5][76] Non-religious circumcision in Asia, outside of the Republic of Korea and the Philippines, is fairly rare,[5] and prevalence is generally low (less than 20%) across Europe.[5][77] Estimates for individual countries include Taiwan at 9%[78] and Australia 58.7%.[79] Prevalence in the United States and Canada is estimated at 75% and 30% respectively.[5] Prevalence in Africa varies from less than 20% in some southern African countries to near universal in North and West Africa.[76]

The rates of routine neonatal circumcision over time have varied significantly by country. In the United States, hospital discharge surveys estimated rates at 64.7% in the year 1980, 59.0% in the year 1990, 62.4% in the year 2000, and 58.3% in the year 2010.[80] These estimates are lower than the overall circumcision rates, as they do not account for non-hospital circumcisions,[80] or for procedures performed for medical or cosmetic reasons later in life;[5][80] community surveys have reported higher neonatal circumcision.[5] Canada has seen a slow decline since the early 1970s, possibly influenced by statements from the AAP and the Canadian Pediatric Society issued in the 1970s saying that the procedure was not medically indicated.[5] In Australia, the rate declined in the 1970s and 80s, but has been increasing slowly as of 2004.[5] In the United Kingdom, rates are likely to have been 20–30% in the 1940s but declined in the late 40s. One possible reason may have been a 1949 British Medical Journal article which stated that there was no medical reason for the general circumcision of babies.[5] The overall prevalence of circumcision in South Korea has increased markedly in the second half of the 20th century, rising from near zero around 1950 to about 60% in 2000, with the most significant jumps in the last two decades of that time period.[5] This is probably due to the influence of the United States, which established a trusteeship for the country following World War II.[5]





The history of the migration and evolution of the practice of circumcision is followed mainly through the cultures and peoples in two separate regions. In the lands south and east of the Mediterranean, starting with Sudan and Ethiopia, the procedure was practiced by the ancient Egyptians and the Semites, and then by the Jews and Muslims, with whom the practice travelled to and was adopted by the Bantu Africans. In Oceania, circumcision is practiced by the Australian Aborigines and Polynesians.[81] There is also evidence that circumcision was practiced among the Aztec and Mayan civilizations in the Americas,[5] but little detail is available about its history.[23][74]

Middle East, Africa and Europe



Though secular scholars consider the story to be literary and not historical,[82] circumcision features prominently in the Hebrew Bible. The narrative in Genesis chapter 17 describes the circumcision of Abraham and his relatives and slaves. In the same chapter, Abraham's descendants are commanded to circumcise their sons on the eighth day of life as part of a covenant with God.



The Circumcision of Jesus Christ, by Ludovico Mazzolino


Genghis Khan, and the following Yuan Emperors in China forbade Islamic practices such as halal butchering and circumcision.[85][86] This led Chinese Muslims to eventually take an active part in rebelling against the Mongols and installing the more tolerant Ming Dynasty.


Indigenous peoples



Christopher Columbus reported circumcision being practiced by Native Americans.[23] It was also practiced by the Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans. It probably started among South American tribes as a blood sacrifice or ritual mutilation to test bravery and endurance, and its use later evolved into a rite of initiation.[74]

Modern times

Circumcision did not become a common medical procedure in the Anglophone world until the late 19th century.[88] At that time, British and American doctors began recommending it primarily as a deterrent to masturbation.[88][89] Prior to the 20th century, masturbation was believed to be the cause of a wide range of physical and mental illnesses including epilepsy, paralysis, impotence, gonorrhea, tuberculosis, feeblemindedness, and insanity.[90][91] In 1855, motivated in part by an interest in promoting circumcision to reduce masturbation, English physician Jonathan Hutchinson published his findings that Jews had a lower prevalence of certain venereal diseases.[92] While pursuing a successful career as a general practitioner, Hutchinson went on to advocate circumcision for health reasons for the next fifty years,[92] and eventually earned a knighthood for his overall contributions to medicine.[93] In America, one of the first modern physicians to advocate the procedure was Lewis Sayre, a founder of the American Medical Association. In 1870, Sayre began using circumcision as a purported cure for several cases of young boys diagnosed with paralysis or significant motor problems. He thought the procedure ameliorated such problems based on a "reflex neurosis" theory of disease, which held that excessive stimulation of the genitals was a disturbance to the equilibrium of the nervous system and a cause of systemic problems.[88] The use of circumcision to promote good health also fit in with the germ theory of disease during that time, which saw the foreskin as being filled with infection-causing smegma (a mixture of shed skin cells and oils). Sayre published works on the subject and promoted it energetically in speeches. Contemporary physicians picked up on Sayre's new treatment, which they believed could prevent or cure a wide-ranging array of medical problems and social ills. Its popularity spread with publications such as Peter Charles Remondino's History of Circumcision. By the turn of the century, in both America and Great Britain, infant circumcision was near universally recommended.[23][89]

After the end of World War II, Britain moved to a nationalized health care system, and so looked to ensure that each medical procedure covered by the new system was cost-effective and the procedure for non-medical reasons was not covered by the national healthcare system. Douglas Gairdner's 1949 article "The Fate of the Foreskin" argued that the evidence available at that time showed that the risks outweighed the known benefits.[94] Circumcision rates dropped in Britain and in the rest of Europe. In the 1970s, national medical associations in Australia and Canada issued recommendations against routine infant circumcision, leading to drops in the rates of both of those countries. The United States made similar statements in the 1970s, but stopped short of recommending against it — simply stating that it has no medical benefit. Since then they have amended their policy statements several times with the current recommendation being that the benefits outweigh the risks, but they do not recommend it routinely.[23][89]

An association between circumcision and reduced heterosexual HIV infection rates was suggested in 1986.[23] Experimental evidence was needed to establish a causal relationship, so three randomized controlled trials were commissioned as a means to reduce the effect of any confounding factors.[95] Trials took place in South Africa, Kenya and Uganda.[11] All three trials were stopped early by their monitoring boards on ethical grounds because those in the circumcised group had a lower rate of HIV contraction than the control group.[11] Subsequently, the World Health Organization promoted circumcision in high-risk populations as part of an overall program to reduce the spread of HIV,[12] although some have challenged the validity of the African randomized controlled trials, prompting a number of researchers to question the effectiveness of circumcision as an HIV prevention strategy.[96][97][98][99] The Male Circumcision Clearinghouse website was formed in 2009 by WHO, UNAIDS, FHI and AVAC to provide current evidence-based guidance, information, and resources to support the delivery of safe male circumcision services in countries that choose to scale up the procedure as one component of comprehensive HIV prevention services.[100][101]

Society and culture

Cultures and religions



Main article: Brit milah


According to traditional Jewish law, in the absence of a grown free Jewish male expert, a woman, a slave, or a child, that has the required skills, is also authorized to perform the circumcision, provided that she or he is Jewish.[103] However, most streams of non-Orthodox Judaism allow female mohels, called mohalot (Hebrew: מוֹהֲלוֹת‎‎, the plural of מוֹהֶלֶת mohelet, feminine of mohel), without restriction. In 1984, Deborah Cohen became the first certified Reform mohelet; she was certified by the Berit Mila program of Reform Judaism.[104]

Some contemporary Jews in the United States choose not to circumcise their sons.[105] They are assisted by a small number of Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis, and have developed a welcoming ceremony that they call the brit shalom ("Covenant [of] Peace") for such children, also accepted by Humanistic Judaism.[106][107]

This ceremony of brit shalom is not officially approved of by the Reform or Reconstructionist rabbinical organizations, who make the recommendation that male infants should be circumcised, though the issue of converts remains controversial[108][109] and circumcision of converts is not mandatory in either movement.[110]


Main article: Khitan (circumcision)
Children in Turkey wearing traditional circumcision costumes



The New Testament chapter Acts 15 records that Christianity does not require circumcision; Christianity does not forbid it either. The Catholic Church currently maintains a neutral position on the practice of non-religious circumcision,[113] although in 1442 it banned the practice of religious circumcision in the 11th Council of Florence.[114] Coptic Christians practice circumcision as a rite of passage.[5][25][115][116] The Ethiopian Orthodox Church calls for circumcision, with near-universal prevalence among Orthodox men in Ethiopia.[5] In South Africa, some Christian churches disapprove of the practice, while others require it of their members.[5]

African cultures


Australian cultures


Filipino culture

In the Philippines, circumcision known as "tuli" is sometimes viewed as a rite of passage.[119] About 93% of Filipino men are circumcised.[119]

Ethical and legal issues

A protest against infant circumcision



Generally, circumcision on a minor is not ethically controversial or legally questionable when there is a clear and pressing medical indication for which it is the accepted best practice to resolve. Where circumcision is the chosen intervention, the physician has an ethical responsibility to ensure the procedure is performed competently and safely to minimize potential harms.[8][9] Worldwide, most legal jurisdictions do not have specific laws concerning the circumcision of males,[5] but infant circumcision is considered legal under the existing laws in countries such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.[120] A few countries have passed legislation on the procedure: Germany allows non-therapeutic circumcision,[121] while non-religious routine circumcision is illegal in South Africa and Sweden.[5][120]




Economic considerations

The cost-effectiveness of circumcision has been studied to determine whether a policy of circumcising all newborns or a policy of promoting and providing inexpensive or free access to circumcision for all adult men who choose it would result in lower overall societal healthcare costs. As HIV/AIDS is an incurable disease that is expensive to manage, significant effort has been spent studying the cost-effectiveness of circumcision to reduce its spread in parts of Africa that have a relatively high infection rate and low circumcision prevalence.[123] Several analyses have concluded that circumcision programs for adult men in Africa are cost-effective and in some cases are cost-saving.[36][124] In Rwanda, circumcision has been found to be cost-effective across a wide range of age groups from newborn to adult,[46][125] with the greatest savings achieved when the procedure is performed in the newborn period due to the lower cost per procedure and greater timeframe for HIV infection protection.[15][125] Circumcision for the prevention of HIV transmission in adults has also been found to be cost-effective in South Africa, Kenya, and Uganda, with cost savings estimated in the billions of US dollars over 20 years.[123] Hankins et al. (2011) estimated that a $1.5 billion investment in circumcision for adults in 13 high-priority African countries would yield $16.5 billion in savings.[126]

The overall cost-effectiveness of neonatal circumcision has also been studied in the United States, which has a different cost setting from Africa in areas such as public health infrastructure, availability of medications, and medical technology and the willingness to use it.[127] A study by the CDC suggests that newborn circumcision would be societally cost-effective in the United States based on circumcision's efficacy against the heterosexual transmission of HIV alone, without considering any other cost benefits.[4] The American Academy of Pediatrics (2012) recommends that neonatal circumcision in the United States be covered by third-party payers such as Medicaid and insurance.[4] A 2014 review that considered reported benefits of circumcision such as reduced risks from HIV, HPV, and HSV-2 stated that circumcision is cost-effective in both the United States and Africa and may result in health care savings.[128] However, A 2014 literature review found that there are significant gaps in the current literature on male and female sexual health that need to be addressed for the literature to be applicable to North American populations.[129]


  8. ^ a b c d e f Pinto K (August 2012). "Circumcision controversies". Pediatric clinics of North America. 59 (4): 977–986. doi:10.1016/j.pcl.2012.05.015. PMID 22857844. 
  11. ^ a b c d e Siegfried N, Muller M, Deeks JJ, Volmink J; Muller; Deeks; Volmink (2009). Siegfried, Nandi, ed. "Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2): CD003362. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003362.pub2. PMID 19370585. 
  13. ^ a b Millett GA, Flores SA, Marks G, Reed JB, Herbst JH (October 2008). "Circumcision status and risk of HIV and sexually transmitted infections among men who have sex with men: a meta-analysis". JAMA. 300 (14): 1674–84. doi:10.1001/jama.300.14.1674. PMID 18840841. 
  14. ^ a b Wiysonge CS, Kongnyuy EJ, Shey M; et al. (2011). Wiysonge, Charles Shey, ed. "Male circumcision for prevention of homosexual acquisition of HIV in men". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (6): CD007496. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007496.pub2. PMID 21678366. 
  19. ^ a b c d e f Weiss HA, Larke N, Halperin D, Schenker I; Larke; Halperin; Schenker (2010). "Complications of circumcision in male neonates, infants and children: a systematic review". BMC Urol. 10: 2. doi:10.1186/1471-2490-10-2. PMC 2835667Freely accessible. PMID 20158883. 
  21. ^ a b Morris, BJ; Krieger, JN (November 2013). "Does male circumcision affect sexual function, sensitivity, or satisfaction?--a systematic review.". The Journal of Sexual Medicine. 10 (11): 2644–57. doi:10.1111/jsm.12293. PMID 23937309. 
  27. ^ "Referat bestyrelsesmøde den 16. december 2013". Retrieved 4 September 2016. 
  31. ^ a b Perera CL, Bridgewater FH, Thavaneswaran P, Maddern GJ; Bridgewater; Thavaneswaran; Maddern (2010). "Safety and efficacy of nontherapeutic male circumcision: a systematic review". Annals of Family Medicine. 8 (1): 64–72. doi:10.1370/afm.1073. PMC 2807391Freely accessible. PMID 20065281. 
  32. ^ "Professional Standards and Guidelines – Circumcision (Infant Male)". College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia. September 2009. 
  36. ^ a b Uthman OA, Popoola TA, Uthman MM, Aremu O; Popoola; Uthman; Aremu (2010). Van Baal, Pieter H. M, ed. "Economic evaluations of adult male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review". PLoS ONE. 5 (3): e9628. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009628. PMC 2835757Freely accessible. PMID 20224784. 
  37. ^ Weiss HA, Dickson KE, Agot K, Hankins CA; Dickson; Agot; Hankins (2010). "Male circumcision for HIV prevention: current research and programmatic issues". AIDS. 24 Suppl 4: S61–9. doi:10.1097/01.aids.0000390708.66136.f4. PMID 21042054. 
  39. ^ Dinh MH; Fahrbach KM; Hope TJ (March 2011). "The role of the foreskin in male circumcision: an evidence-based review". Am J Reprod Immunol. 65 (3): 279–83. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0897.2010.00934.x. PMC 3091617Freely accessible. PMID 21114567. 
  40. ^ Lei, JH; Liu, LR; Wei, Q; Yan, SB; Yang, L; Song, TR; Yuan, HC; Lv, X; Han, P (5 May 2015). "Circumcision Status and Risk of HIV Acquisition during Heterosexual Intercourse for Both Males and Females: A Meta-Analysis.". PLOS ONE. 10 (5): e0125436. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125436. PMC 4420461Freely accessible. PMID 25942703. 
  42. ^ a b c Templeton DJ, Millett GA, Grulich AE; Millett; Grulich (February 2010). "Male circumcision to reduce the risk of HIV and sexually transmitted infections among men who have sex with men". Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 23 (1): 45–52. doi:10.1097/QCO.0b013e328334e54d. PMID 19935420. 
  45. ^ a b Zhu, YP; Jia, ZW; Dai, B; Ye, DW; Kong, YY; Chang, K; Wang, Y (8 March 2016). "Relationship between circumcision and human papillomavirus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.". Asian journal of andrology. doi:10.4103/1008-682X.175092. PMID 26975489. 
  47. ^ Weiss, HA; Thomas, SL; Munabi, SK; Hayes, RJ (April 2006). "Male circumcision and risk of syphilis, chancroid, and genital herpes: a systematic review and meta‐analysis". Sexually Transmitted Infections. 82 (2): 101–9; discussion 110. doi:10.1136/sti.2005.017442. PMC 2653870Freely accessible. PMID 16581731. 
  48. ^ a b Wetmore CM, Manhart LE, Wasserheit JN; Manhart; Wasserheit (April 2010). "Randomized controlled trials of interventions to prevent sexually transmitted infections: learning from the past to plan for the future". Epidemiol Rev. 32 (1): 121–36. doi:10.1093/epirev/mxq010. PMC 2912604Freely accessible. PMID 20519264. 
  49. ^ a b c d Hayashi, Y; Kojima, Y; Mizuno, K; Kohri, K (3 February 2011). "Prepuce: phimosis, paraphimosis, and circumcision.". TheScientificWorldJournal. 11: 289–301. doi:10.1100/tsw.2011.31. PMID 21298220. 
  50. ^ Becker K (January 2011). "Lichen sclerosus in boys". Dtsch Arztebl Int. 108 (4): 53–8. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2011.053. PMC 3036008Freely accessible. PMID 21307992. 
  51. ^ a b Moreno, G; Corbalán, J; Peñaloza, B; Pantoja, T (2 September 2014). "Topical corticosteroids for treating phimosis in boys.". The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 9: CD008973. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008973.pub2. PMID 25180668. 
  52. ^ Celis, S; Reed, F; Murphy, F; Adams, S; Gillick, J; Abdelhafeez, AH; Lopez, PJ (February 2014). "Balanitis xerotica obliterans in children and adolescents: a literature review and clinical series.". Journal of pediatric urology. 10 (1): 34–9. doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2013.09.027. PMID 24295833. 
  53. ^ Krill, Aaron; Palmer, Lane; Palmer, Jeffrey (2011). "Complications of Circumcision". ScientificWorldJournal. 11: 2458–68. doi:10.1100/2011/373829. PMC 3253617Freely accessible. PMID 22235177. 
  57. ^ a b c Hayashi Y, Kojima Y, Mizuno K, Kohri K (2011). "Prepuce: phimosis, paraphimosis, and circumcision". ScientificWorldJournal. 11: 289–301. doi:10.1100/tsw.2011.31. PMID 21298220. 
  58. ^ Morris, Brian J.; Wiswell, Thomas E. (2013). "Circumcision and Lifetime Risk of Urinary Tract Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis". The Journal of Urology. 189 (6): 2118–2124. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.114. ISSN 0022-5347. PMID 23201382. 
  59. ^ VA, Jagannath; Z, Fedorowicz; V, Sud; AK, Verma; S, Hajebrahimi (Nov 14, 2012). "Routine neonatal circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infections in infancy" (PDF). The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 11 (11): CD009129. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009129.pub2. PMID 23152269. Retrieved 30 September 2015. 
  60. ^ Jagannath VA, Fedorowicz Z, Sud V, Verma AK, Hajebrahimi S (2011). Fedorowicz, Zbys, ed. "Routine neonatal circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infections in infancy (Protocol)". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (5): CD009129. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009129. 
  61. ^ a b c d e Larke NL, Thomas SL, Dos Santos Silva I, Weiss HA (August 2011). "Male circumcision and penile cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Cancer Causes Control. 22 (8): 1097–110. doi:10.1007/s10552-011-9785-9. PMC 3139859Freely accessible. PMID 21695385. 
  62. ^ Pabalan, N; Singian, E; Jarjanazi, H; Paganini-Hill, A (December 2015). "Association of male circumcision with risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.". Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases. 18 (4): 352–7. doi:10.1038/pcan.2015.34. PMID 26215783. 
  63. ^ Li, YD; Teng, Y; Dai, Y; Ding, H (2016). "The Association of Circumcision and Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.". Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP. 17 (8): 3823–7. PMID 27644623. 
  65. ^ a b c d Krill, Aaron J.; Palmer, Lane S.; Palmer, Jeffrey S. (2011). "Complications of Circumcision". The Scientific World JOURNAL. 11: 2458–2468. doi:10.1100/2011/373829. ISSN 1537-744X. PMC 3253617Freely accessible. PMID 22235177. 
  66. ^ a b "Neonatal Circumcision". American Academy of Family Physicians. 2013. Retrieved 2015-08-03. 
  67. ^ Krill, AJ; Palmer, LS; Palmer, JS (2011). "Complications of circumcision.". TheScientificWorldJournal. 11: 2458–68. doi:10.1100/2011/373829. PMC 3253617Freely accessible. PMID 22235177. 
  69. ^ Morris BJ, Waskett JH, Banerjee J, Wamai RG, Tobian AA, Gray RH, Bailis SA, Bailey RC, Klausner JD, Willcourt RJ, Halperin DT, Wiswell TE, Mindel A (2012). "A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?". BMC Pediatr. 12: 20. doi:10.1186/1471-2431-12-20. PMC 3359221Freely accessible. PMID 22373281. Circumcision in adolescence or adulthood may evoke a fear of pain, penile damage or reduced sexual pleasure, even though unfounded. 
  70. ^ Friedman, B; Khoury, J; Petersiel, N; Yahalomi, T; Paul, M; Neuberger, A (4 August 2016). "Pros and cons of circumcision: an evidence-based overview.". Clinical Microbiology and Infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. 22: 768–774. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2016.07.030. PMID 27497811. 
  71. ^ Tian Y, Liu W, Wang JZ, Wazir R, Yue X, Wang KJ (2013). "Effects of circumcision on male sexual functions: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Asian J. Androl. (Systematic review). 15 (5): 662–6. doi:10.1038/aja.2013.47. PMC 3881635Freely accessible. PMID 23749001. 
  72. ^ Goldman, R. (Jan 1999). "The psychological impact of circumcision". BJU International. 83 (S1): 93–102. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x. 
  73. ^ Boyle, G. J.; Goldman, R.; Svoboda, J. S.; Fernandez, E. (1 May 2002). "Male Circumcision: Pain, Trauma and Psychosexual Sequelae". Journal of Health Psychology. 7 (3): 329–343. doi:10.1177/135910530200700310. PMID 22114254. 
  74. ^ a b c d e f g Doyle D (October 2005). "Ritual male circumcision: a brief history". The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. 35 (3): 279–285. PMID 16402509. 
  79. ^ Richters J, Smith AM, de Visser RO, Grulich AE, Rissel CE; Smith; De Visser; Grulich; Rissel (August 2006). "Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health". Int J STD AIDS. 17 (8): 547–54. doi:10.1258/095646206778145730. PMID 16925903. 
  81. ^ a b c d e Gollaher (2001), ch. 1, The Jewish Tradition, pp. 1–30
  84. ^ Gollaher (2001), ch. 2, Christians and Muslims, pp. 31–52
  87. ^ Gollaher (2001), ch. 3, Symbolic Wounds, pp. 53–72
  89. ^ a b c Gollaher (2001), ch. 4, From Ritual to Science, pp. 73–108
  94. ^ Gairdner D (1949). "The fate of the foreskin: a study of circumcision." (PDF). Br Med J. 2 (4642): 1433–7. doi:10.1136/bmj.2.4642.1433. PMC 2051968Freely accessible. PMID 15408299. 
  95. ^ Siegfried N, Muller M, Volmink J; et al. (2003). Siegfried, Nandi, ed. "Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (3): CD003362. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003362. PMID 12917962. 
  101. ^ AVAC: Global Advocacy for HIV Prevention. "About male circumcision". Retrieved 1 December 2012. 
  104. ^ Berit Mila Program of Reform Judaism Retrieved 2 February 2015
  106. ^ Reiss, MD, Dr. Mark (2006). "Celebrants of Brit Shalom". Brit Shalom. Archived from the original on 2014-12-13. Retrieved 2007-10-03. 
  111. ^ al-Sabbagh, Muhammad Lutfi (1996). Islamic ruling on male and female circumcision (PDF). World Health Organization. p. 16. ISBN 92-9021-216-0. 
  114. ^ Eugenius IV, Pope (1990) [1442]. "Ecumenical Council of Florence (1438–1445): Session 11—4 February 1442; Bull of union with the Copts". In Norman P. Tanner ed. Decrees of the ecumenical councils. 2 volumes (in Greek and Latin). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-490-2. LCCN 90003209. Retrieved 2007-04-25. it denounces all who after that time observe circumcision 
  118. ^ "The death and deformity caused by male circumcision in Africa can't be ignored". 25 August 2014. Retrieved 13 March 2015. 
  119. ^ a b "Tuli a rite of passage for Filipino boys". May 6, 2011. Retrieved 6 December 2015. 
  122. ^ "Stellungnahme zur Beschneidung von minderjährigen Jungen". 25 July 2012. Retrieved 7 June 2016. 
  124. ^ Grimes, Caris E.; Henry, Jaymie Ang; Maraka, Jane; Mkandawire, Nyengo C.; Cotton, Michael (8 October 2013). "Cost-effectiveness of Surgery in Low- and Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review". World Journal of Surgery. 38 (1): 252–263. doi:10.1007/s00268-013-2243-y. 
  125. ^ a b Binagwaho A, Pegurri E, Muita J, Bertozzi S (Jan 2010). Kalichman, Seth C, ed. "Male circumcision at different ages in Rwanda: a cost-effectiveness study". Public Library of Science. 7 (1): e1000211. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000211. PMC 2808207Freely accessible. PMID 20098721. 
  126. ^ Hankins C, Forsythe S, Njeuhmeli E (Mar 2012). Sansom, Stephanie L, ed. "Voluntary medical male circumcision: an introduction to the cost, impact, and challenges of accelerated scaling up". Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 8 (11): e1001127. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001127. PMC 3226452Freely accessible. PMID 22140362. 
  127. ^ Xu X, Patel DA, Dalton VK, Pearlman MD, Johnson TR; Patel; Dalton; Pearlman; Johnson (Mar 2009). "Can routine neonatal circumcision help prevent human immunodeficiency virus transmission in the United States?". American journal of men's health. 3 (1): 79–84. doi:10.1177/1557988308323616. PMC 2678848Freely accessible. PMID 19430583. 
  128. ^ Tobian, AA; Kacker, S; Quinn, TC (2014). "Male circumcision: a globally relevant but under-utilized method for the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.". Annual Review of Medicine. 65: 293–306. doi:10.1146/annurev-med-092412-090539. PMID 24111891. 
  129. ^ Bossio JA, Pukall CF, Steele S (2014). "A review of the current state of the male circumcision literature.". J Sex Med. 11 (12): 2847–64. doi:10.1111/jsm.12703. PMID 25284631. 


External links