Male Circumcision Reduces Risk of HIV Transmission From Women to Men
Main Category: Men's healthArticle Date: 20 Jan 2005 - 6:00 PDT
'Male Circumcision Reduces Risk of HIV Transmission From Women to Men'
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
|
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
5 (3 votes) |
| Article opinions: | 4 posts |
The first study to examine the probability of HIV infection per act of heterosexual sex among a population with multiple sexual partners has found that uncircumcised men have more than twice the risk of acquiring HIV than do circumcised men.
In the study, published in the Feb. 15 issue of The Journal of Infectious Diseases, now available online, Jared Baeten and colleagues from the United States and Kenya collected detailed sexual data from a group of male Kenyan truckers and, using statistical models, developed infectivity measures that estimate the per-sexual-act probability of HIV transmission. The study is the first to calculate the probability of infection for men who have multiple, concurrent heterosexual partners, which was found to be significantly higher than infectivity rates calculated in the past from studies of monogamous couples. Their results may help explain the rapid spread of HIV in settings where circumcision is not common and multiple sexual partnerships are.
Between 1993 and 1997, 745 male employees of trucking companies based in Mombasa, Kenya were followed for the study. Initially they were evaluated for circumcision status and HIV-negativity. Over the length of the study the men were asked to give information concerning the number of sexual encounters with three different partner types--wives, casual partners, and prostitutes--and were screened for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. At the end of the study the probability of infection was calculated using a statistical model that incorporated published data to estimate the rates of HIV infection among the three types of sexual partners.
For the men in the study, the overall probably of becoming HIV-infected following a single act of intercourse was calculated to be .0063, or one in 160. Uncircumcised men had a more than two-fold increased risk of infection per sexual act compared with circumcised men--one in 80 versus one in 200. Past studies have also found greater HIV infection risk for uncircumcised men. Unlike those studies, however, the present study was also able to take into account cultural characteristics that might be responsible for differences in sexual behavior. These differences could, in turn, account for differences in the risk of infection. But the researchers found that cultural differences in sexual behavior did not matter: when groups of men were excluded from the analysis based on ethnic or religious characteristics, the difference in probability of infection related to circumcision status did not change.
In addition to the results on circumcision, another significant result of the study was the high overall rate of per-contact infection. In past studies that attempted to calculate the probability of female-to-male infection through heterosexual sex, the cohorts consisted only of monogamous couples in which the female partners were HIV-positive. However, in some areas of Africa where HIV infection rates are highest, multiple, concurrent partnerships are more common than monogamous couplings. Past studies of monogamous couples found that the probability of HIV transmission per-act of sexual intercourse was on the order of one in 1000 or less, much lower than the probability of one in 160 found in this study. Taken with the authors' evidence that female-to-male infection rates may be more than two-fold greater for uncircumcised men, this new information may help us understand why the virus is spreading rapidly in parts of Africa, and help define better HIV strategies for prevention in these settings.
Founded in 1904, The Journal of Infectious Diseases is the premier publication in the Western Hemisphere for original research on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of infectious diseases; on the microbes that cause them; and on disorders of host immune mechanisms. Articles in JID include research results from microbiology, immunology, epidemiology, and related disciplines. JID is published under the auspices of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). Based in Alexandria, Va., IDSA is a professional society representing more than 8,000 physicians and scientists who specialize in infectious diseases. Nested within the IDSA, the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) is the professional home for more than 2,700 physicians, scientists and other health care professionals dedicated to the field of HIV/AIDS. HIVMA promotes quality in HIV care and advocates policies that ensure a comprehensive and humane response to the AIDS pandemic informed by science and social justice. For more information, visit the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Steve Baragona
sbaragona@idsociety.org
Infectious Diseases Society of America
Visit our men's health section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
26 May. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/19058.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/19058.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
Visitor Opinions (latest shown first)
Foreskin is vital to sensation
posted by Andrew Sachs on 20 Nov 2005 at 2:05 amThe foreskin is extremely important for the sensation during sex. The tip of the penis is, without foreskin, desensitized and ultimately causes the man to experience much less pleasure than an uncircumsized man. This should be well understood.
Don't ignore medical ethics
posted by Dan P on 9 Mar 2005 at 1:14 amFifteen square inches of an adult's genital flesh is not so tiny, as if severity even matters. Adult men certainly have feelings of violation, say from childhood molestations which leave all the parts attached. That is not immaturity, it is a natural response to abuse. The foreskin-deprived man is no better off.
Restoration of the foreskin is a vastly better alternative to the unnatural circumcised condition. It's time to face facts. Not even veterinarians are recommending circumcision for their patients -- it's exactly because it doesn't work to improve health and so clearly sexually maims humans males that some folks are so keen on it. Learn what you can, life is short.
OH PLEASE!
posted by lbaker on 7 Mar 2005 at 3:56 amYour precious genitals were not sacrificed, had they been you would be a eunuch. It was just a tiny piece of foreskin or in your case your brain!! Grow up!!
Typical for so-called doctors
posted by Dan P on 20 Jan 2005 at 10:43 pmThis is typical mutilation for money. Sacrificing our genitals is not medicine. I was subjected to involuntary circumcision, and know it is driven by the purest form of hatred. On the off chance your son will have sex with multiple prostitutes, then great -- they say just mutilate to deter him from AIDS. But respect for the human body is not built on this obvious medical fraud. Not even animals are circumcised, and this vile disrespect for the human male is certainly not welcome.
Add Your Opinion On This Article
'Male Circumcision Reduces Risk of HIV Transmission From Women to Men'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.




