CDC Drafting Recommendation Of Routine Circumcision For Male Infants To Prevent Spread Of HIV
Main Category: HIV / AIDSAlso Included In: Pediatrics / Children's Health; Men's health
Article Date: 26 Aug 2009 - 2:00 PDT
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
2.5 (4 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
2.8 (5 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 2 posts |
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is drafting a formal recommendation that all male infants born in the U.S. be circumcised as a way to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, the New York Times reports. Recent studies have shown that in African countries circumcision reduces a man's risk of infection by 50%; however, those studies focused on heterosexual men who are at a high risk of contracting HIV from female partners. The procedure does not seem to protect men who have sex with men -- the population at greatest risk of infection in the U.S. It is unclear whether male circumcision reduces the risk for women, experts say. "There's mixed data on that," according to Peter Kilmarx, chief of epidemiology for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at CDC. He added, "If we have a partially successful intervention for men, it will ultimately lower the prevalence of HIV in the population, and ultimately lower the risk to women."
The recommendation is expected to be released by the end of the year, but the issue already has generated controversy. Critics contend that the procedure subjects male infants to medically unnecessary surgery without their consent, while proponents argue that any measure that can reduce HIV infection rates should be taken under consideration. About 79% of adult men in the U.S. are circumcised. The Times reports that rates have fallen in recent years in part because the American Academy of Pediatrics does not endorse routine circumcision. AAP's policy states that circumcision is "not essential to the child's current well-being." As a result, many state Medicaid programs do not cover the operation, the Times reports. However, AAP is revising its guidelines and is expected to replace the neutral tone with a policy stating that circumcision has health benefits even beyond HIV prevention, such as reducing urinary tract infections in infants, according to Michael Brady, an AAP consultant.
Kilmarx said, "We have a significant HIV epidemic in this country, and we really need to look carefully at any potential intervention that could be another tool in the toolbox we use to address the epidemic." He added, "What we've heard from our consultants is that there would be a benefit for infants from infant circumcision, and that the benefits outweigh the risks." Still, according to Kilmarx and other public health officials, the benefits of such preventive measures would be muted in the U.S. compared with Africa because HIV is less prevalent here, spreads through different routes and because circumcision already is highly common (Rabin, New York Times, 8/24).
Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.
© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.
Visit our hiv / aids section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
13 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/161868.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/161868.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (2)
Ethical Justification
posted by Petro K on 26 Aug 2009 at 6:25 amThere have been many good advances in HIV prevention. But I was surprised to see that, based on a few African studies which have internal flaws and are countered by some other studies suggesting the opposite, the US government may, very prematurely, promote circumcision of newborns.
Sure, the procedure may be offered to adults. But how could anyone ever ethically justify remove a healthy, functioning structure from an infant? Assuming that he will engage in unsafe sex later, and wishing to *possibly* provide a *partial* reduction of risk of a disease, a disease preventable by other means, years and years down the road?
The HIV/AIDS fight has many promising battles ahead, but implementing permanent alteration of the bodies of infants is not a victory.
routine infant circumcision is wrong
posted by Jono on 6 Sep 2010 at 12:40 amthat's all that needs to be said.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




