Medical History Of Infant Circumcision: The 1900’s

which is why he recommends circumcision since it “lessens the sensitiveness of the organ”. [Circumcision. American Practitioner and News 1901 Feb 15;31(4):122-6]

[The surgical treatment of epilepsy. American Medicine 1902 Nov 22;4(21):807-9]

It weakens the memory, makes a boy careless, negligent and listless. It even makes many lose their minds; others, when grown, commit suicide…. Don’t think it does no harm to your boy because he does not suffer now, for the effects of this vice come on so slowly that the victim is often very near death before you realize that he has done himself harm. It is worthy of note that many eminent physicians now advocate the custom of circumcision…” (Mary R. Melendy, MD, The Ideal Woman – For Maidens, Wives and Mothers, 1903.)

[Circumcision. Transactions of the Luzerne County Medical Society 1905 Sep 20;13:200-9]

[Universal circumcision as a sanitary measure. Journal of the American Medical Association 1914 Jan 10;62(2):92-7]

[Circumcision in the Female: Its Necessity and How to Perform It. American Journal of Clinical Medicine, 1915 Jun;22(6):520-523]

 [Why not circumcise the girl as well as the boy?, Texas State Journal of Medicine, 1918 May;14:17-19]

[Is circumcision a prophylactic against penis cancer? Cancer 1926 Jul;3(4):301-10]

[Surgical treatment of epilepsy with report of case. The China Medical Journal 1930 Nov;4(11):1109-13]

[Bloodless circumcision of the newborn. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, July 1935;30(1):146-7]

[Circumcision. British Medical Journal 1935 Oct 19;2(3902):764]

He also spreads the false claim that a baby’s foreskin must be forcibly retracted and scrubbed daily. [Should the baby be circumcised? Parents Magazine 1941 Sept;16(9):26,76-8]

 [The relationship of circumcision to cancer of the prostate. Journal of Urology 1942 Sep;48(3):298-9]

[Circumcision and venereal disease. Archives of Dermatology and Syphilology 1949 Sep;60(3):341-6]

(Note: This paper helped encourage the National Health Service to drop coverage for infant circumcision which led to the practical elimination of non- religious circumcision in the United Kingdom.) [The fate of the foreskin. British Medical Journal 1949 2:1433-7]

[Prophylaxis of cancer of the prostate, penis, and cervix by circumcision. New York State Journal of Medicine 1951 Jun;51(12):1519-20]

[Immediate circumcision of the newborn male. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1953, Jan;6(1):1-11]

 [A study of environmental factors of carcinoma of the cervix. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1954 Oct;68(4):1016-52]

 [USPTO patent number RE24,377]

[Circumcision of the female. General Practitioner 1958 Sep;18(3):98-99]

[Female Circumcision: Indications and a New Technique. General Practitioner 1959 Sep;20(9):115-120]

(Note: Their work helps propagate the medical dogma that circumcision has no effect on sexuality go practically unquestioned for nearly the next four decades.) [Human Sexual Response, Boston, Ma: Little Brown & Co, 1966]

 [Sex hygiene. Modern Home Medical Adviser. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co: 1969 pp 90, 119]

[Viral carcinogenesis in venereally susceptible organs. Cancer 1971 Jun;27(6)1493-6]

[Committee on Fetus and Newborn Issues. Circumcision. Hospital Care of Newborn Infants 5th Edition. Evanston, Ill: American Academy of Pediatrics; 1971 p 110]

[Carcinoma of the penis and the anti-circumcision crusade. Journal of Urology 1973 Jul;110(1):79-80]

[Report on the ad hoc task force on circumcision. Pediatrics 1975;56:610-1]

Parents should insist on convincing reasons for circumcision — and there are no convincing reasons that I know of.” [Baby and Child Care, New York, E P Dutten, 1946-76]

[Decreased incidence of urinary tract infections in circumcised male infants. Pediatrics 1985 May;75(5):901-3]

[A possible explanation for heterosexual male infection with AIDS. New England Journal of Medicine 1986 Oct 30;31(18):1167]

[Is hygiene enough? Circumcision as a possible strategy to prevent group B streptococcal disease. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1988 Aug;159 (2):534-5]

[Report of the Task Force on Circumcision. Pediatrics 1989 Aug;84(2):388-91]

 [Is it time for Europe to reconsider newborn circumcision? Acta Paediatrica Scandanavian 1991 May;8(5)573-7]

[Circumcision and sand. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 1991 Nov;84(11):696]

 [The prepuce: Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. British Journal of Urology 1996 Feb;77:291-5]

[Benefits of newborn circumcision: Is Europe ignoring the medical evidence? Archives of Diseases of Childhood 1997 Sep;7(3):258-60]

(Note: Before this, almost all infant circumcisions were done without anesthetic due to the prevalent belief among circumcisers that babies are not capable of feeling significant pain and if they could it doesn’t matter since they won’t be able to remember it.) [Comparison of ring block, dorsal penile nerve block, and topical anesthesia for neonatal circumcision. Journal of the American Medical Association 1997 Dec;274(24):2157-2162]

[Patent #5,160,185, Infant support and restraint system 1992] [Circumcision Practice Patterns in the United States, Pediatrics, 1998 Jun;101(6):E5]

[The prepuce. British Journal of Urology 1999 Jan;83(1):34-44]

 This report is also the first time the AAP has acknowledged (after decades of doctors mindlessly repeating the belief that babies don’t feel significant pain) that circumcision without anesthesia is traumatic and if circumcision is to be done, anesthesia should be used. 

Here are some highlights from the report:

• Role of Hygiene: 

“there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimum penile hygiene.”

• STDs including HIV:

“behavioral factors appear to be far more important than circumcision status.”

• Penile Cancer: 

“in a developed country such as the United States, penile cancer is a rare disease and the risk of penile cancer developing in an uncircumcised man, although increased compared with a circumcised man, is low.”

• Urinary Tract Infections:

 “breastfeeding was shown to have a threefold protective effect on the incidence of UTI in a sample of uncircumcised infants. However, breastfeeding status has not been evaluated systematically in studies assessing UTI and circumcision status.” meaning that the earlier UTIs studies results were confounded. Even if their numbers were accurate, in order to prevent one UTI during the first year of life by circumcising a baby boy, approximately 195 babies who will not get a UTI would need to be circumcised. Also infant girls commonly develop UTIs(in some studies at even higher rates than infant boys) and the standard treatment for them is antibiotics which works just as well for infant boys with UTIs. The AAP concludes this section noting that “the absolute risk of developing a UTI in an uncircumcised male infant is low (at most, ~1%)”.

• Ethics:

 Here they say while even though cutting off part of your baby’s genitalia “is not essential to the child’s current well-being” they are perfectly fine with parents and doctors using cultural tradition as justification. (Note: The report does not mention whether they also think cultural tradition is an acceptable reason to anesthetize infant girls and then cut off their clitoral hoods(which are biologically analogous to foreskin)). [Task Force on Circumcision. Circumcision Policy Statement. Pediatrics 1999;103 (3):686-693]