The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently issued a preliminary federal statement that said their research leads them to see benefits in circumcision of  infants and even suggested intact older male children and adults undergo the procedure. Such nonsense.  They should be calling for an end to forced circumcision.  The public is invited to respond no later than Jan. 16 to that preliminary document.   So far the denunciation of the recommendation is rightfully fierce.  A writer  is limited to 5,000 characters in such feedback, and I pressed it to the limits.  Go to this site to make your comments:!docketDetail;D=CDC-2014-0012

So this is what I  wrote to the CDC;

I am astonished and aghast to learn that, in 2014, an institution like yours would actually resort to recommending the back-country, primitive practice of circumcision for infants and adults. Hopefully, this first round is just time for you to come to your senses.  Medical ethics don’t embrace circumcision. It is incompatible with modern medical practices, just as female genital mutilation remains outside your tool kit for treatment for what may come to women.

At the center of this issue is NOT health and disease. It is the vulnerable, indefensible male child subjected to permanent genital alteration and cutting for specious reasons, i.e., continuation of a flagging, faltering medical practice that makes billions of dollars because parents are duped and uninformed.   We well know that physicians commonly don’t have their own sons cut because they know it is undesirable.

We find it laughable that you try to suggest that so much bacteria and disease lurk under the foreskin, yet the intricate, moist folds of the female genitalia offer a wonderful environment for any of that.  How is that humans are able to wash and keep clean other parts of their anatomy, yet you try to suggest they can’t/won’t clean under their foreskins?
The hypocrisy and double standard that make female genital totally off limits for American medical cutting while male circumcision is legal is cruel and absurd.  It only survives because the medical field sees profit and won’t acknowledge that the foreskin has a multitude of purposes, not the least of which are sensitivity, protection of the glans, the fullness of the mechanics of sex, maintenance of lubrication and natural bacteria-battling antigens. It also survives because too many parents are woefully uninformed about physiology and the foreskin’s value.

Please salvage your reputation, especially on the landscape of world medicine.  The CDC is a laughing stock in the developed world for caving in to the special interests in circumcision and making this tentative recommendation. You are foolish to try to extrapolate from discredited African studies on HIV/AID and circumcision that you have research to justify wide practice of circumcision in America.  How is that circumcision has never caught on in, say, Europe, Asia and South America, and males there are surviving well without all the diseases warned against?  How is that there is no race of intact men to doctors’ offices to have their foreskins amputated to avoid some phantom disease?  Males who have escaped the Gomco clamp can feel relief.  Oddly many circumcised men don’t even know they’ve been cut — all to the benefit of the circumcision industry where ignorance well serves their continuation.

Nearly 40 years ago, my wife and I followed our instincts and our research and rejected circumcision when our son was born, even though I had my body rights violated  in 1946.  Since then our grandsons have been left intact without any problems or issues for anyone.  Their bodies, their rights.  How difficult is that to fathom? How triumphant we felt as Midwesterners rejecting something so insidious in the folkways of our culture.

How do you explain the rates of HIV/AIDS in the U.S. what with a long tradition of blanket circumcision? Contrast that to a Finland or Denmark or Italy where the practice of circumcision is far more rare and HIV/AIDS rates are lower.
We certainly hope you are not simply picking up on the American Academy of Pediatrics’ 2012 statement that saw value in circumcision. Their research and findings were flawed, not to mention that more than a few members of their committee have backgrounds, vested interests and histories that made them less than free of bias.

The tragedy in all of this is that the APP and CDC wield influence — and that leads to unhealthy and wrong decisions by Americans unwilling or unable to do their own research. Sadly, too often they are expectant parents where just a little  knowledge is dangerous.

Should you tragically move forward to make a pro-circumcision recommendation, you are sentencing more generations of innocent young males to lives of incompleteness, altered genitalia, with questions of “what if?  What if I had been allowed to remain whole the way God and nature made me? Like that friend who was never cut?  And what about the lover, wife, spouse or playmate who knows the difference between an intact and cut penis as far as pleasure and sensitivity? Why should she be denied?

Why do you suppose there are dozens of books on the market touting the value of the foreskin and critical of circumcision?  Why are there so many violated men who deeply resent having been circumcised?  Botched circumcisions have left them with skin bridges, loss of sensitivity, pain to the body and psyche.

Males resent circumcision.  Being whole is paramount.

Please issue a statement for the 21st century that boys and men have a universal right to their foreskins.