In Favour of Circumcision [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

Brian Morris' book "In Favour of Circumcision" consists of much outdated and/or invalid evidence which has not been taken seriously by the medical community for some time. Therefore, when one has waded through all the mumbo-jumbo, one is left with the rantings and ravings of a very disturbed man with an apparent mutilation fetish and a sick desire to promote the genital cutting of children.

Although I admit to laughing heartily several times while reading this book, I found my laughter interrupted by the sobering consideration that many foolish parents will take in this nonsense. I'm afraid I can't recommend this book to anyone.

"In those with a normal bladder and kidneys the argument for circumcision may be akin to suggesting prophylactic removal of the tonsils or the appendix; the latter are obviously as silly as taking seriously any study supposedly concluding that either version of the penis 'looks better'. Also, is the author really serious in suggesting that routine circumcision is needed to prevent zipper injury? ...Unfortunately, once again, a presentation on the subject of circumcision has not advanced the development of a scientific approach."

My professional opinion is that this book will be very useful to men seeking to validate their circumcised condition, and to parents who fear non-conformity and are searching for a "scientific" excuse that will justify an emotional need to subject their child to this senseless surgery.

This book appears to be nothing but a collection of critically unevaluated information and a lot of unscientifically, and frankly silly anecdotes and facile assumptions.

As a scientist, the author should know these simple scientific maxims:

1A. Any study, conclusion, or opinion predicated on flawed or invalid data is inherently flawed and invalid.

1B. Any conclusion or opinion predicated on any number of flawed studies with invalid data is inherently flawed and invalid..

2. Any data, study, conclusion , or opinion contradicted by reality is inherently flawed and invalid.

I frankly do not see any evidence to support that he is aware of/or follows these maxims.

Every study given by the author fails the test of both of these principals. Every study cited has admitted flaws and is contradicted when one looks at the rartes of the disease circumcision is purported to cure or prevent--the rate of EVERYONE of these diseases in non-circumcising Europe is the same as, or lower than in the circumcising USA.

Since the implicit prediction in all of the studies purporting a reduction and/or cure is that a circumcising country MUST have lower rates of these, these studies do no meet the criterion of satisfying their prediction.

And as far the facile assertion about getting the foreskin caught in zippers, does the author seriously want us to think that a circumcised man does or cannot get his penis caught in a zipper--and that it would not be worse as the more sensitive inner tissue would be entrapped instead of the less sensitive OUTER foreskin of the intact penis?

As for the "Seinfield".. please give me break--how is this silly made-up sequence from a sitcom relative to the subject..

Myths, superstitions and many bogus studies--I hardly see how this book could in any way provide any valid information to anyone other than those who know nothing about the subject and who do want VALID and PROVEN information--- and who do not wish to critically analyze it.