tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7271393088423483426.post8141278031846109952..comments2024-01-11T12:25:32.458+02:00Comments on bruce's rwanderings: Cross your legs, gentlemen.......Bruce's Rwanda bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01101703935690851618noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7271393088423483426.post-88995140870348823552009-12-06T22:15:44.730+02:002009-12-06T22:15:44.730+02:00After reading this, I thought "Wow, could tha...After reading this, I thought "Wow, could that be worth it?" Well, some quick googling reveals the following:<br /><br />Circumcised men have a 40-73% lower risk of contracting HIV during sex. <br /><br />(http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm)<br /><br />Wow! Sounds good, right? Well, no.<br /><br />Giving relative risk percentages like that doesn't say much and is a slightly dishonest and unscientific way of presenting results. Given that the risk of a man contracting HIV from vaginal sex from an infected partner is about 5 in 10,000, basically, 2-4 people in 10,000 will be spared an HIV infection by circumsizing all 10,0000.<br />(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11773877) <br /><br />I know this is approximate, but I just want to do a 'back of the envelope' calculation here. <br /><br />Ok, so circumcising 10,000 might be worth it because 2-4 of them might be spared an HIV infection. Sounds good, right? Well, no. <br /><br />Because the risk of complication from HIV is 2-10%, even at the low end -- let's say 1% -- 100 people are going to be suffering complications including permanent damage, sterility, infections, death. Also: http://sexuality.about.com/od/malesexualhealth/a/sexcircumcised2.htm<br /><br />Of course, it sounds like these people doing the circumcisions aren't a crack team of experts, so the complication rate is probably going to be much higher. <br /><br />Sounds like this whole campaign is a bad idea. What do you think?Trevorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16185286042217605145noreply@blogger.com