Any Doctors here?

>>8966629
it doesnt

dingus

>>8966652
then why does popular science sees it as a fact?

>>8966629
Removing thinner skin entirely and sewing the remaining thicker skin to where it was only removes channels for viruses to get in. It's like removing some circuits from a circuitboard lowers total amperage or removing programs from your computer lowers total risk of software exploits being used against you.
I'm saying this as an anteater, by the way.

>>8966659
(((pop sci)))

>>8966660
its just a piece of skin, you have more skin on your ass then on your penis

>>8966629
The foreskin is the most vulnerable piece of the penis so removing it will decrease the risk of small wounds where diseases can enter the body.

>>8966629
More crevices for viruses to sneak into your body from. But it's probably a very small effect. If you get a STD you done fucked up anyway. Wear condoms.

>>8966677
diseases don't just enter the body all the time, you need to be in a certain environment or do something purposefully malicious to yourself in order for viruses to get in.
if people that chop vegetable all day don't get infected why would people get a severe infection in the penis? does the blood not clot in the penis?

File: 3-types-of-fgm1.jpg (13KB, 334x237px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 334x237px

>>8966629
It's a desperate attempt to justify cuttin on baby dick to make sex less enjoyable. In comparison, this is what is done to women for the same purpouse. Noone who does this cares about medicinal advantages.

And consider how many cases there are of babies getting herpies from old rabbis suckin their freshly cut noodle, versus the effectiveness of the prevention.
http://nypost.com/2017/03/08/new-case-of-neonatal-herpes-caused-by-jewish-circumcision/

>>8966693
STDs spread because of small wounds the genitals get by rubbing them against each other. Unlubed anal sex will cause much more and bigger wounds because there is much more friction. This is why STDs are much more prevalent in the homosexual community. Removing the foreskin removes the most vulnerable piece of the penis and will thus decrease the number of wounds drastically.

>>8966659
((()))

>>8966701
okay, that picture is just weird. I would have never thought of sewing a vagina.

>>8966704
My understanding was that the vulnerability went the other way -- not from HIV getting INTO the penis during gay sex, but the penis shooting into a butthole full of micro tears and stuff from having a dick stuck into it.

>>8966729
It is. But the guy that penetrates can of course still also catch a disease but he will be less likely to catch the passives partners diseases if he is circumsised because of less wounds/points of entrance.

>>8966704
ok but does it justify Circumcision? circumcision in itself puts you in danger of having a fatal life threatening injury, does shit tier STD's that can be avoided with condoms justifies that risk?

>>8966755
No it doesnt. That why in large majority of first world countries circumsision isn't practiced

>>8966761
in first world countries its a minimum of 20%. that's a shitton dude

File: Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_at_Country_Level[1].png (99KB, 1425x625px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1425x625px

>>8966769
Wrong

it's 0-20% and I bet my foreskin that it's closer to zero.
Lived all over west/east Europe, also spend few years in Scandinavia and I've never even heard about anyone being circumsised or getting it done for their kids. It's just weird, why would anyone ever do this is beyond me and most europeans. Doesn't apply to jews though, they do it for religious reasons.