by snare&racket 148 Replies latest jw friends
I mean this sincerly Cofty, I enjoy your posts and wit, I rarely comment directly to you but I do enjoy reading what you write. I hope that everything works out well for you.
If I sometimes come across as an ascerbic, surly asshole with no patience when I post, well, that's right on the money. I don't suffer fools lightly.
Qcmbr, agreed.
Cofty, sorry to hear that. Everything of the best. I hope you beat it with the help of Medical Science. I heard a stat a while back that 1 in 4 is going to contract some form of cancer in his lifetime. So it is going to hit a great percentage of us out here. And make no mistake, I will avail myself of treatment if and when available.
EntirelyPossible, circumcision was supposed to happen on the 8th day after the baby was born. By then his antibody count is quite high. In Africa circumcision is encouraged by the authorities, because it lowers the incidence of STDs, especially AIDS. An open minded person benefits from a wide range of knowledge from all kinds of people. The scope of a narrow minded person is limited because he will reject the input from the people he despises or disagrees with.
Personally I believe there is a Creator and that he will eventually fix this mess. He sent his Son, who demonstrated that he could heal all diseases, no matter how severe. This belief is based on the eye witness reports of the Bible. One of the writers was Luke the physician. I believe him and his report.
A judge must listen to evidence, then decide whether the witness is believable or not. I have judged the witnesses to be credible, but that is my opinion. At one time, Jesus' disciples aksed him the following, after encountering a blind man: "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, so that he was born blind?" Jesus answered: "Neither this man sinned nor his parents, but it was in order for God might be made manifest in his case. We must work the works of him that sent me while it is day; for the night is coming when no man can work" (cf. John 9:1-4). He then healed the blind man. I believe we are now in the night phase, and that things will get better. This is my hope and I will share it with all that will listen.
EntirelyPossible, circumcision was supposed to happen on the 8th day after the baby was born. By then his antibody count is quite high.
A baby's immune system does not fully develop until about six months old. Until then, the only antibodies they get are from the mother through breastmilk. It all depends on the mother so there is no way you can legitimately say that a newborn's antibody count is "quite high" by 8 days old. No matter how you turn it, it's a horribly stupid thing to do.
Go be stupid somewhere else and come back when you are willing to learn something rather than attempt to drag us all down to your level of stupid.
In Africa circumcision is encouraged by the authorities, because it lowers the incidence of STDs, especially AIDS.
Absolutely untrue. Go be stupid somewhere else.
An open minded person benefits from a wide range of knowledge from all kinds of people. The scope of a narrow minded person is limited because he will reject the input from the people he despises or disagrees with.
Very true. Unfortunately, you aren't using knowledge, you are using bullshit. And I don't despise you at all. You're just stupid. You've have many chances to fix your ignorance, offers for help, and you reject them. That's the stupid part. Ignorance is fine as long as you are willing to learn. You aren't, therefore you are willfully stupid.
So please go be stupid somewhere else.
A judge must listen to evidence, then decide whether the witness is believable or not. I have judged the witnesses to be credible, but that is my opinion.
You don't actually know how courts work, do you?
Sorry for those that must suffer. This is all "stupid" and "absolutely untrue," according to Entirely Possible. As I say: Think, it might be a new experience for you.
2010-07-21 12:33
Vienna - More than 4 million new HIV infections could be prevented in eastern and southern Africa by 2025 if male circumcision rates were increased to 80%, researchers said on Tuesday.
Expanding circumcision services to 80% of adult and newborn males in the region would also save $20.2bn in HIV-related health costs between 2009 and 2025, they said.
"With global resources spread thin, we must focus on expanding proven and cost effective methods like male circumcision to prevent HIV transmission," Krishna Jafa, an HIV expert at health aid group Population Services International (PSI), said at an AIDS conference in Vienna.
Jafa's comments echoed former US President Bill Clinton and philanthropist Bill Gates, who both used speeches to the conference to call for rapid scale-up of male circumcision as a cost effective way to prevent the spread of HIV.
Sub-Saharan Africa carries the greatest burden of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) that causes AIDS, accounting for 67% of the 33.4 million people living with the virus worldwide. An estimated 1.9 million people were newly infected with HIV in the region in 2008.
6 500 circumcised in a year
Research cited by the World Health Organisation (WHO) has shown that male circumcision can reduce a man's risk of getting HIV by up to 60%.
PSI presented results of a study from Zimbabwe, where researchers designed and tried out an efficiency model called Move, aimed at increasing the numbers of male circumcisions by using better techniques, training, equipment and staff.
In a pilot of the new system, a team of two doctors and three nurses was able to carry out four circumcisions at the same time and increase their rate from three operations per hour to 10, the results showed. Over 12 months of the pilot, around 6 500 men were circumcised.
The findings also showed the quality of the procedure was not compromised and there were no increases in the percentage of men reporting bad side effects afterwards.
In March 2007, the WHO and United Nations UNAIDS group recommended male circumcision as an effective HIV prevention.
Surprising numbers
The PSI study found that in Zimbabwe alone, which has an adult HIV rate of 13.7% and a male circumcision rate of just over 10%, 750 000 new HIV infections could be prevented if 80% of men were to be circumcised. It also found there was high demand for the procedure.
Bill Gates, whose Gates Foundation spends much of its $34 billion fund on fighting HIV, told the AIDS conference on Monday he had been surprised by the number of men in Africa who wanted to be circumcised to reduce their risk of contracting HIV.
"I was doubtful that a large number of men would sign up for it. I'm glad to say I was wrong," he said. "Wherever there are clinics available, men are volunteering to be circumcised in huge numbers - far more than I expected."
But Gates said while more than 41 million men in sub-Saharan Africa could benefit from it, only 150 000 have been circumcised in the past few years.
- Reuters
Oh look, I can troll the internet for information, too.
Does male circumcision actually help prevent HIV/AIDS?
Studies linking male circumcision and AIDS are conflicting. Two studies completed in 2006 in Kenya and Uganda concluded that male circumcision had a 48% - 53% protective effect against HIV over a 14 month period, and an earlier published Auvert Study (criticized for having methodology flaws and overly optimistic conclusions) found that circumcision reduced HIV transmission in South African men by 63% over a period of 21 months. The multi-country Mishra study concluded that circumcision may actually increase transmission of the AIDS virus, however, which is what many earlier studies found. The Brewer Studypublished in March 2007, also concluded that circumcision in Kenya, Lesotho, and Tanzania increases the transmission of AIDS, and the Connolly study published in November 2008 found that circumcised men in South Africa are just as likely to be HIV-positive as uncircumcised men.
Here's the difference, if I am wrong, I will admit it. I will freely admit right NOW that I was wrong about your assertion being "absolutely untrue". Looks like the results indicate that there MIGHT be some benefit but that the benefit might also be outweighed by people thinking they are protected. Also, since HIV didn't exist, circumcision 4000 years ago was still an utterly dumb idea.
You, however, prefer to remain willfully ignorant, mis-represent science, facts, the work that people do and assert a myriad of bullshit falsehoods without understanding what you are talking about and refuse to even basic learning.
Having said that, please, go be stupid somewhere else.
Sorry again for all the “stupidity” that is totally untrue.
My mistake, it’s actually the levels of vit. K and prothrombin, and not the antibodies.
This is from a Jewish source: It is important to recognize that while some medical studies have shown health benefits to circumcision, Jews do not circumcise their sons for that reason, but because of the covenant that it represents with God. While the American Academy of Pediatrics has changed its position several times, the Jewish people have always been steadfast in their commitment to bris mila.
Nevertheless, despite rare media reports and rabid blogs to the contrary, ritual circumcision is a very safe procedure. Dr. Avraham Steinberg, author of the Encyclopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics[11] (and a pediatric neurologist himself) reports that:
". . . although ritual circumcision is usually performed by non-physicians, complications are extremely rare. A summary of several large studies comprising more than 24,000 newborn circumcisions found complications in only 0.06% to 0.25%. The medical literature between 1953 and 1980 contains only two instances of fatality as a result of circumcision. By contrast, in a report of 500,000 circumcisions in New York and 175,000 in the U.S. Armed Forces, not a single fatality occurred. These large studies are more reliable than reports of individual cases. The fact that isolated reports occur in the literature attests to the extreme rarity of death following circumcision."
It should be apparent that the timing of bris mila is meaningful and profound. Circumcision has been an integral part of Jewish tradition for thousands of years and we reaffirm our unique connection to God with each bris that we perform.
This is from a Christian source:
In Genesis 17:12, God specifically directed Abraham to circumcise newborn males on the eighth day. Why the eighth day? In 1935, professor H. Dam proposed the name “vitamin K” for the factor in foods that helped prevent hemorrhaging in baby chicks. We now know vitamin K is responsible for the production (by the liver) of the element known as prothrombin.
If vitamin K is deficient, there will be a prothrombin deficiency and hemorrhaging may occur. Oddly, it is only on the fifth through the seventh days of the newborn male’s life that vitamin K (produced by bacteria in the intestinal tract) is present in adequate quantities.
Vitamin K, coupled with prothrombin, causes blood coagulation, which is important in any surgical procedure. Holt and McIntosh, in their classic work, Holt Pediatrics, observed that a newborn infant has “peculiar susceptibility to bleeding between the second and fifth days of life.... Hemorrhages at this time, though often inconsequential, are sometimes extensive; they may produce serious damage to internal organs, especially to the brain, and cause death from shock and exsanguination” (1953, pp. 125-126).
Obviously, then, if vitamin K is not produced in sufficient quantities until days five through seven, it would be wise to postpone any surgery until some time after that. But why did God specify day eight?
On the eighth day, the amount of prothrombin present actually is elevated above one-hundred percent of normal—and is the only day in the male’s life in which this will be the case under normal conditions. If surgery is to be performed, day eight is the perfect day to do it. Vitamin K and prothrombin levels are at their peak
Sorry again for all the “stupidity” that is totally untrue.
No need to be sorry. Just don't be willfully ignorant and you'll do just fine.
As to your article, it still all bullshit, sorry. Genital mutilation is wrong when not done on an adult that can give consent. Regardless of levels of V. K and prothrombin, you are still attempting to suggest that Sky Daddy knew what he was doing when he commanded children to have the genitals cut open in an unsanitary environment with unsanitary tools becase he didn't like the foreskins he himself made. Apparently the only concern was one of bleeding out through their dicks, not getting infection, the danger of miscuts, scarring, none of that.
What a f'ing whacko you worship.
Oh, and whacko sky daddy also insisted all the adult men be circumcised too, without the elevated levels of prothrombin. Apparently he didn't REALLY give a shit about the 8th days except when he wanted those fresh, un-defiled baby soft newborn foreskins.
God - The orignal pedophile.
How many babies had to die on days 1-7 for them to figure out that less of them die on the 8th day and to magically make it their god's idea?
How did I know that if I started talking about penises that Poopsie would show up? ;)
Merry Xmas dear!
Hi EP! Merry Christmas to you too sweetie :)
