Circumcision was originally a cultural and religious form of genital mutilation. On the say so of the Mid 1800ds medical fraternity of England this procedure was recommended for health reasons, the reasoning was that more then a hundred different diseases ranging from syphilis to insanity were caused by masturbation. The whole English speaking world fell for it. the custom has persisted to some degree especially in the USA where there is strong marketing behind it. Today however all medical authority's proclaim that there is no therapeutic benefit to health in routine circumcision and that in fact the procedure is harmful if anything. Les then 20% OF THE MEN OF THE WORLD HAVE BEEN CIRCUMCISED and most of these mutilations were done in the name of religion and culture.
there is no good reason for this custom which would explain that only organisations that have a financial or religious conflict of interest in the matter promote it. In the mean time the layman that has been mutilated in this way is more likely to promote it as part of the trauma that accompany it.
Different people have different ideas about circumcision. I can honestly tell you that it's healthier than NOT being circumcised.
Circumcision was originally a cultural and religious form of genital mutilation. On the say so of the Mid 1800ds medical fraternity of England this procedure was recommended for health reasons, the reasoning was that more then a hundred different diseases ranging from syphilis to insanity were caused by masturbation. The whole English speaking world fell for it. the custom has persisted to some degree especially in the USA where there is strong marketing behind it. Today however all medical authority's proclaim that there is no therapeutic benefit to health in routine circumcision and that in fact the procedure is harmful if anything. Les then 20% OF THE MEN OF THE WORLD HAVE BEEN CIRCUMCISED and most of these mutilations were done in the name of religion and culture.
there is no good reason for this custom which would explain that only organisations that have a financial or religious conflict of interest in the matter promote it. In the mean time the layman that has been mutilated in this way is more likely to promote it as part of the trauma that accompany it.
Different people have different ideas about circumcision. I can honestly tell you that it's healthier than NOT being circumcised.
You don't necessarily have a problem - circumcision has NO age limit.
Not necessarily. While large mammals like elephants and whales tend to longer pregnancies many of the larger bovine species have gestations that are less than that of a human.
No, it is not necessarily true.
No, not necessarily true, but mixed breed dogs do live longer than pure bred dogs
Merely saying that it is true does not necessarily make it so. Or: Well, not necessarily.
Not necessarily.
not necessarily, no
Not necessarily.
if 2 < x < 6 ; which of the following statements about x are necessarily true, and which are not necessarily true? a) 0 < x < 4
Not necessarily. It will all depend on the statements A and B.
Circumcision is the removal of the foreskin of the penis. If your penis does not have a foreskin (the skin that covers the glans of the penis when it is not erect), then you have been circumcised. Circumcision is common practice in the USA. In Europe the opposite holds true.
True