For New Parents
Do your own research!
Information, questions to ask, and links are all listed below.
Please read
Not only what is below but "Graven Images" under "Energy Working" ^
Which is located here;
http://editor.wix.com/html/editor/web/renderer/edit/4b338104-7a8c-4b90-84d8-ef15ef71ee85?metaSiteId=ef4a8f8a-bd01-44d2-8ece-dada433774b6&editorSessionId=2E3BEDE9-AB04-4BB7-9297-0C7BB86BD67D
On Circumcision – Please don't torture your sons. I have done research on this subject many times over the years. Each time I do it I learn more and more and each time I become more and more horrified with the very idea much less with what goes on.
What could cause one human to commit such sexual violence upon another like this? I assure you God didn't order such He created it perfect and saw that it was good. Why then must we mutilate our children by cutting body parts off?
The story is that having a foreskin somehow makes one “dirty” or “unclean” in some way is false, when in fact it is normal and natural.
Circumcision is not a “safe” procedure; it carries with it the risk of bleeding to death. Nor is it pain free, the baby does feel it and it hurts a lot, just as amputating any other part of your body would and they do it without any anesthesia or pain killers, it is a cruel and barbaric act that harms not just the boy (or girl) but both sexes in the long run.
Newborn circumcision has no health benefit.
Intact is NORMAL, the vast majority of the world's men, including most Europeans and Scandinavians, are intact. And before 1900, circumcision was virtually non-existent in the United States as well--except for Jewish and Muslim people, who've been performing genital cutting for hundreds of years for “religious reasons”.
Believe it or not, circumcision was introduced in English-speaking countries in the late 1800s to control or prevent masturbation, similar to the way that female circumcision was promoted and continues to be advocated in some Muslim and African countries to control women's sexuality. As the absurdity of this position became apparent, new justifications, such as the prevention of cervical and penile cancers, received the blessing of the medical establishment. But these are justifications that science has been unable to support. Nor is there any scientific proof that circumcision prevents sexually transmitted diseases.
Also contrary to popular belief, the intact penis requires no special care. Many parents get hung up about how to "clean" the intact penis in an infant. Some are even told to retract the foreskin. This can cause pain and scarring, and it isn't necessary. The foreskin often does not retract naturally until a child is older--sometimes not until he is a teenager as the foreskin is adhered to the head of the penis with the same type of tissue that adheres fingernails to their nail beds.-- But after that a boy can easily stretch and retract his foreskin gently over several months' time.
Removing it requires shoving a blunt probe between the foreskin and the head of the penis and then cutting down and around the whole penis, forcing remaining glans to adapt as an external organ: something it was never meant to be.
The foreskin is not just some "flap of skin", the foreskin is half of the penis's skin. In an adult man, the foreskin is 15 square inches of skin.
Circumcision causes the baby long-term harm, in that removal of healthy tissue from a non-consenting patient is, in itself, harm. Circumcision has an array of risks and side effects.
Here is a short list potential complications.
Meatal Stenosis: Many circumcised boys and men suffer from meatal stenosis. This is a narrowing of the urethra which can interfere with urination and require surgery to fix.
"Doctor Ignorance of Male Anatomy Harms Boys."
Published by Darcia Narvaez Ph.D.
Adhesions. Circumcised babies can suffer from adhesions, where the foreskin remnants try to heal to the head of the penis in an area they are not supposed to grow on. Doctors treat these by ripping them open with no anesthesia.
Buried penis. Circumcision can lead to trapped or buried penis - too much skin is removed, and so the penis is forced inside the body. This can lead to problems in adulthood when the man does not have enough skin to have a comfortable erection. Some men even have their skin split open when they have an erection. There are even more sexual consequences, which we will address in a future post.
Infection. The circumcision wound can become infected. This is especially dangerous now with the prevalence of hospital-acquired multi-drug resistant bacteria.
Death. Babies can even die of circumcision. Over 100 newborns die each year in the USA, mostly from loss of blood and infection (Van Howe 1997 & 2004, Bollinger 2010).
There have even been cases where penises have been removed, "by accident".
As parents you MUST educate yourself, as doctors DO NOT KNOW everything. They only what they are taught in school and there are many things they are not taught for "marketing" purposes.
Learn what you can do to protect boys from medical interference due to failure of medical schools to teach fundamental gross anatomy of male infants, Many medical texts even depict males as naturally circumcised, thus eliminating a normal body part as if it never existed and since doctors themselves are circumcised they inherently see the foreskin as "abnormal" and they have no clue what to do with it.
I will not post any graphic photos here comparing one vs the other, but please check out these photos which are not be suitable for viewing in the work place but are important for educational purposes.
http://www.drmomma.org/2011/08/intact-or-circumcised-significant.html
If you were told “Your baby slept right through it.” You were lied to, because that is not possible without total anesthesia, which is not available. What happens is the babies go into shock, which is actually the body's reaction to profound pain and distress. Nurses often tell the parents "He slept right through it" so as not to upset them. Who would want to hear that his or her baby was screaming in agony?
Myth; You have to get the baby circumcised because it is really hard to keep a baby's penis clean.
Truth: In babies, the foreskin is completely fused to the head of the penis. You cannot and should not retract it to clean it, as this would cause the child pain, and is akin to trying to clean the inside of a baby girl's vagina. The infant foreskin is perfectly designed to protect the head of the penis and keep feces out. All you have to do is wipe the outside of the penis like a finger. (Read more on this at the bottom of page.)
It is harder to keep circumcised baby's penis clean because you have to carefully clean around the wound, make sure no feces got into the wound, and apply ointment.
The foreskin separates and retracts on its own sometime between age 3 and puberty after which retracts on its own, it will get clean during the boy's shower or bath. Once a boy discovers this cool, new feature of his penis, he will often retract the foreskin himself during his bath or shower, and you can encourage him to rinse it off. But he should not use soap as this upsets the natural balance and is very irritating. There is nothing special that the parents
need to do. Most little boys have absolutely no problem playing with their penises in the shower or anywhere else! << That is where the idea of the penis is "dirty" came from, not from any actual physical dirt, it is a hold over from the Victorian era idea that sex itself is some how "dirty".
How Male Circumcision Impacts Your Love Life
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/how-male-circumcision-impacts-your-love.html
&
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/how-male-circumcision-impacts-women.html
"10 Ways Male Circumcision Hurts Women"
from the site, Sex As Nature Intended
1. Coronal Ridge Hook Scrapes the Vaginal Walls, causing Soreness
2. Circumcised Coronal Hook Pulls Out Vaginal Lubrication
3. Circumcised Penis's Elongated Thrusting Stroke Dries Out Vaginal Lubrication
4. Circumcised Penis's Non-Moveable Shaft Skin Creates Friction Irritation
5. Circumcised Penis "Feels Like You're Being Poked with a Broomstick"
6. Circumcised Penis Thrusts Hard, Rough and Tough, with Pounding, Bang-away Thrusting
7. Circumcised Penis's Elongated Strokes Create Infrequent Clitoris Contact that Hinders Her from Achieving Orgasm
8. Circumcised Penis's Out-of-Sync Thrusting Frustrates Her from Achieving Orgasm
9. Circumcised Sex Lessens Feelings of Love for One's Partner
10. Circumcised Sex Can Deteriorate the Relationship
Do you want to stop rape?
Then stop circumcision.
A man without his foreskin can rape any woman he chooses, where as one with his foreskin can not commit rape upon anyone as her dry vigina rips his foreskin, it must be consensual.
Someone is making money off of your son's foreskin. Did you or your son get the money for the organ donation? Did you agree to allow his organ to be sold? Did you even know?
Interesting thought that those most willing to have their sons circumcised are the same folks who are most likely to be against stem cell research; yet ironically you freely give them the tissues to do with. I guess if you consent to having what God put in place lopped off, better to be of service than toss into the trash heap.
Looking up what is used in research, it says in PNAS
(Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America)
Searching journal content for infant foreskins & hair in full text.
Displaying results 1-10 of 5251
http://www.pnas.org/search?fulltext=infant+foreskins+hair&submit=yes&x=0&y=0
Searching journal content for infant foreskins in full text.
Displaying results 1-10 of 2751
http://www.pnas.org/search?fulltext=infant+foreskins+&submit=yes&x=0&y=0
Please do not attack the journal writers, they are not doing the research.
Nor did the journal writers or the scientist insist on having your son cut, you did that. They just paid big money to acquire what you discarded.
Novel approach to hair growth employs infant foreskins
Researchers tried a new way to foster hair growth via the dermal papilla cells, which give rise to hair follicles.
In the past, these papilla would not thrive in 2D cultures in a lab dish.
So taking inspiration from experiments on lab rats, whose papillae can be readily transplanted, they cloned human papillae in a 3-D tissue culture.
The tissue came from discarded infant foreskins obtained through circumcision procedures at Columbia University Medical Center.
Infant foreskin was chosen "because it would challenge the human dermal papillae not just to contribute to hair follicles within the skin, but rather, to fully reprogram the recipient epidermis to a follicular fate," said the study.
When scientists grafted the newly grown human skin tissue complete with donated human papillae, they saw hair growth in five of seven lab animals.
The hair matched the human donor DNA and lasted at least six weeks.
The “rite” of circumcision in the US started with the Jews during WWII. Hitler who was also Jewish as was his million man army, to sorted out who was Jewish from who was not by whether or not the males were circumcised (which makes this a civil war)..
* To prevent this from happening in the future, instead of telling the Jews to stop this cruel barbaric act, it was
decided that everyone should be circumcised whether you were Jewish or not and this was done by convincing folks that by having your foreskin you were in some way “dirty”. Heaven forbid you should touch yourself to keep yourself clean.
During the metzitzah b'peh (MBP) rite / circumcision rite, the circumciser puts his mouth on the baby’s genitals to suction the blood from the circumcision wound.
Recently a number of babies have contracted herpes from this act and some ended up with brain damage because of it.
This is a serious infection and there is NO safe way for an individual to perform oral suction on an open wound. Herpes is not the only disease that can be spread like this, so too can AIDS, HIV and hepatitis.
It got so bad that the New York City Board of Health to require parents to sign a written regulation consent that warns parents of the risks of this practice, however it is being ignored and despite the recent cases, the city has never sanctioned or warned a mohel for failing to comply with the consent form. And whether the metzitzah b'peh (MBP) rite is preformed or not there is ALWAYS the risk of bleeding to death.
Who says baby boys don't remember or they don't feel it? The following is excerpts from one Jewish man's story. To read the full story of "My Story of Ritual Abuse"
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/my-story-of-ritual-abuse.html
"My Story of Ritual Abuse"
By Leland Traiman
Questioning barbaric acts on one's self and on innocent babies is valid. They never asked my permission to do this; what right did they have? There are lessons we should have learned from the Holocaust. And one lesson is that using the excuse "I was just following orders" is no excuse. It does not matter if the orders come from a president, a pope, a prime minister, a Muslim cleric or a Rabbi.
Everyone must question what I heard one rabbi say at a forum on male infant circumcision, "We do it because we have been commanded to do it." How can we, as Jews, condemn the harm that others wish to do to us in the name of their God and not condemn the harm that we do to our own children in the name of our own God?
My earliest memories are of terror, pain and helplessness ... between 4 & 5 I had nightmares and daytime fantasies related to these feelings ... between 6-8 I had a recurring nightmare of a long bearded goat coming to take bites out of my flesh. ... After a party I dreamed I was standing in the middle of the party terrified - in pain - and screaming, but nobody seemed to notice me. Everyone went on as if I was not there and that recurring nightmare haunted me for 12 years. ... During Passover the young children in our family were given grape juice instead of wine to drink. My grandmother would try to sneak some wine into the children’s grape juice when I was 9, and I would cough and spit out the wine and sometimes loudly complain how disgusting alcohol was.
At 21 my grandmother died, after her funeral her sister said, "I remember your bris." And she went on to tell the story, the effect was immediate. I recognized the actual event responsible for the night mares that had haunted me my whole life.
The bearded goat who wanted to bite off my flesh was the mohel, who cut off a part of my body.
My revulsion of alcohol was related to the wine forced on me as an unsuccessful sedative ...
Long before I began nursery school, I kept trying to pull the skin on the shaft of my penis over the glans at the end. I never knew why I had done this. .... I also came to realize why at my Bar Mitzvah, again the center of attention at Jewish ceremony, I was upset, angry and fearful which was totally out of character with the verbose joker I had become.
I began to ask myself, "Why did they do this to me? They never asked my permission to do this; what right did they have?"
Many Jews & Muslims are rethinking circumcision.
Two of the most well-researched and eloquent books on the harmful nature of circumcision have been written by Jewish men. For more information, I urge you to read;
"Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma" by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D., (Vanguard, 1997),
"Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy" by Edward Wallerstein (Springer Publishing, 1980)
and watch "CUT: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision".
From the Jewish perspective
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/06/circumcision-jewish-fathers-making.html.
"Ritual abuse" http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/my-story-of-ritual-abuse.html
Form the Christian perspective
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/06/information-on-circumcision-for.html
From the Islamic perspective; 1, 2, 3.
http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html
Improve Marital Sex: Keep the Foreskins
By Dr. Dean Edell
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/improve-marital-sex-keep-foreskins.html
Do The Research!
What Is the Greatest Danger for an Uncircumcised Boy?
Aside from circumcision? ... a well-baby visit.
WHAT HAPPENS TO BOYS WHO HAVE BEEN FORCIBLY RETRACTED?
The trauma of tearing the glans and foreskin apart before they separate naturally will cause intense pain, bleeding, swelling, and expose what was formerly a sterile, internal site to infection. The trauma and subsequent infection may create scarring all the way around the foreskin that will make it inelastic and thus difficult to retract in later life, when adult hygiene will actually be needed. This condition is called phimosis. In older children and adolescents, true phimosis is almost invariably due to forced retraction in childhood with its resultant infection and scarring.
Pediatrics, a reference text for doctors by Rudolph and Hoffman, warns: "The prepuce, foreskin, is normally not retractile at birth. The ventral surface of the foreskin is naturally fused to the glans of the penis. At age 6 years, 80 percent of boys still do not have a fully retractile foreskin. By age 17 years, however, 97 to 99 percent of uncircumcised males have a fully retractile foreskin... in particular, there is no indication ever for forceful retraction of the foreskin from the glans. Especially in the newborn and infant, this produces small lacerations in addition to a severe abrasion of the glans. The result is scarring and a resultant secondary phimosis. Thus it is incorrect to teach mothers to retract the foreskin."
No medical association in the world
recommends
routine infant circumcision.
None.
The American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Statement on Circumcision says:
"Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision." (AAP 1999)
The British Medical Association says:
"[P]arental preference alone is not sufficient justification for performing a surgical procedure on a child." (BMA 2006)
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians says:
"After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand." (RACP 2010)
The Canadian Paediatric Society says:
"Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed." (CPS 1996)
The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG - Netherlands) policy statement is wonderfully clear:
"There is no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene... circumcision entails the risk of medical and psychological complications... Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity." (KNMG 2010)
Just a Snip – against genital mutilation aka circumcision
Why Continue to Harm Boys from Ignorance of Male Anatomy?
by Darcia Narvaez, Ph.D.
Myths about Circumcision You Likely Believe
More Circumcision Myths You May Believe: Hygiene and STDs
Circumcision: Social, Sexual, Psychological Realities
Circumcision Ethics and Economics
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/circumcision-ethics-and-economics
Parents' aesthetic preferences are not valid reasons for circumcision.
Even if you are fine with being circumcised, your son may not be.
Parents have a duty to educate themselves on circumcision rather than do it just because it was done to them.
Just because it has been a "tradition" does not make it right.
It's time to face our discomfort and admit that circumcision was a mistake.
* Routine infant circumcision is a 90-year aberration in the more than 150,000 years that Homo sapiens has existed on this planet coming from a time when we thought it was bad to enjoy your sexuality.
Circumcision wastes money
&
It violates the Hippocratic Oath to "First, do no harm."
American Academy Of Pediatrics Admits Case For Routine Circumcision Is Empty, Bankrupt
AAP waves white flag as Vikings storm fortress circumcision
The case for circumcision has been dealt a final, fatal blow. Danish research showing that the vast majority of normal (uncircumcised) boys never experience any “foreskin problems”, and that only a tiny minority of boys with a problem require circumcision to fix it, has forced the American Academy of Pediatrics to admit that the case for routine (prophylactic) circumcision is empty and bankrupt. The key facts from the paper by Ida Sneppen and Jorgen Thorup, are as follows:
-
5% of boys (aged 0-18) experienced a foreskin-related problem (mainly phimosis, BXO and frenulum breve).
-
1.7% of boys required surgery to correct the problem.
-
0.4% of boys required circumcision to correct the problem.
95 per cent of uncircumcised boys will never experience a foreskin problem
What this really means is that:
-
95% of boys will never experience a foreskin problem.
-
More than 98% of boys will not need foreskin-related surgery (mainly because most foreskin problems, especially phimosis, can be addressed by non-surgical means, such as topical medication).
-
Only a tiny minority of boys (less than half a per cent) will need to be circumcised because their particular foreskin problems are not amenable, or did not respond, to medical treatment.
The paper also noted that meatal stenosis (narrowing of the urethral opening) is 3 times more common in circumcised boys.
This website pointed out some years ago that 93% of Aussie boys would never experience a foreskin problem, and thus that routine circumcision makes no medical sense at all. This latest, comprehensive Danish study confirms this assessment, and further shows that only a small minority of the unlucky few who do experience problems will require surgery. The case for precautionary circumcision in advance is now well and truly dead and buried.
Source: Ida Sneppen and Jorgen Thorup, Foreskin morbidity in uncircumcised males, Pediatrics 137 (5), May 2016. Advance access 6 April 2016
Waving the white flag:
Astonishing admissions from American Academy of Pediatrics
In response to this devastating avalanche of scientific evidence, the AAP has more or less conceded that its 2012 circumcision policy was not really concerned with the medical case for circumcision at all, but with cultural and religious issues. In an editorial accompanying the Sneppen/Thorup paper, Andrew Freedman, a member of the circumcision policy taskforce, makes the following amazing admissions:
-
Circumcision is basically and usually a religious or cultural preference on the part of the parents, not a medical decision.
-
Parents and medical advisers use medical evidence selectively to bolster their prior ideological positions on circumcision.
-
We did not recommend circumcision.
-
Circumcision is not necessary for optimum health.
-
Underlying aim of 2012 circumcision policy was to counter proposals to prohibit non-therapeutic circumcision of minors.
-
“Given the role of the phallus in our culture”, it is legitimate to consider non-medical factors in the circumcision decision.
-
Not all penises have to look the same.
-
The risk/benefit equation we devised (“benefits outweigh risks”) is applicable and relevant only to those who have non-medical (cultural, religious, social) reasons for circumcision.
Source: Andrew Freedman, The circumcision debate: Beyond benefits and risks. Pediatrics 137 (5), May 2016. Advance access 6 April 2016.
The obvious questions arising from Dr Freedman’s admissions is: If circumcision is not a medical procedure, is not recommended and is not necessary for health, and if it is primarily a religious, cultural or social ritual, how can the AAP justify its recommendation that it is legitimate for health insurance providers to fund it?
The truth is now out of the bag.
