The majority of aids cases are in the sub-sahara desert africa.
This is well known.
What is not so well known, is that the countries immediately north of these black african countries, have almost no aids cases.
They have so few cases of hiv/aids, that they don't even have significant statistics. They have round the numbers ub to get even 0.1 percent of adults.
What is the most significant factor. These countries encourage marriage and practice 100% male circumcision due to religous custom (muslim, jew). It is almost impossible for a circumcised male to infect a female through any any normal sexual act.
Encouraging infant and even adult circumcision should be our primary preventive method, and then condoms.
Why is this simple treatment which would eventually eliminate hiv/aids, unknown to the general public.
If women knew they were at much greater risk of being infected with aids by uncircumcised males, I think you would see them giving them preference, and then the men would be encouaged to follow through.
Does anyone know why this is not general knowledge.
i dont understand how a circumcision is relavant or decreases the chances at all as the greatest risk of contracting the AIDS virus is when one comes in contact with infected vaginal secretions, semen and Blood...so...how does circucision help prevent aids in any way? It really makes no sense...elaborate...I believe its just coincidence personally...circumcised or uncircumcised..you're still going to ejaculate...and thus infect your partner
Male circumcision reduces the risk that men will contract HIV through intercourse with infected women by about 70 percent, according to a study reported in The Wall Street Journal.
After discovering the dramatic results, French and South African researchers halted the study about nine months in order to offer the uncircumcised men the opportunity to undergo the procedure, the newspaper reported.
The results of the study have not been published in a medical journal, although the French researcher who headed the team is expected to present them at an International AIDS Society conference in Brazil later this month.
The study was conducted on more than 3,000 HIV-negative South African men, ages 18 to 24. Half of the men were randomly selected to be circumcised while the other half remained uncircumcised.
After following the men for a year, the researchers found that for every 10 uncircumcised men in the study who became infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, only an estimated three circumcised men contracted the virus, the newspaper reported.
The study is considered significant because scientists have yet to discover an effective vaccine against the HIV virus or develop a reliable way to prevent infection other than through abstinence or safe-sex practices.
thats interesting..however it hasn't been accepted by the medical journal as of yet...soooooo...i dunno...i'm just really trying to understand HOW this is possible...how is it that foreskin causes a greater chance of infection? Foreskin or no foreskin you're still coming into contact with someone infected, and it isn't like you can contract the virus through the skin...there has to be a direct opening in the body...so i'm trying to understand how supposedly men without foreskin were more protected than men with, they both have the same orfice down there...I think some of it could have just been coincidental..the bottom statement does say that previous studies had linked circumcision to a higher HIV risk...i was looking more for an explanation explaining how/why this could be possible
I hear ya. Well, my personal opinion is that men with foreskin have a tendency to get abrasions, microscopic cuts and tears as a result of the tightness around the head of the penis...just my guess as I don't really know either..I'll have to study this some more. Thanks for the interesting questions...
OK, here is what I found:
Studies have found that there are five sensitive areas to a male penis. Ultimately, researchers aim to discover how circumcision affects what a man feels. Circumcision involves the removal of skin that covers the tip of the penis, also called the foreskin, and is the most commonly used medical procedure used in new born infants in the United States. In a finding detailed in the British Journal of Urology (BJU) International, an estimated 60 percent of male babies are subject to this surgery.
According to Live Science, Morris Sorrells of the National Organization of Circumcision Information Resources Center and fellow researchers mapped out a "penis sensitivity map" by measuring the sensitivity of 19 locations on the penises of 159 male volunteers. Out of the 159 participants, 91 of the people were circumcised as infants and surprisingly, the data showed that none had a history of penile or sexual dysfunction.
According to the researcher's findings, the most sensitive region of a male penis is the circumcision scar on the underside of the penis. For uncircumcised penises, the most sensitive areas were five regions that were normally removed during the circumcision procedure. All five of these regions were more sensitive than the most sensitive part of the circumcised penis.
The surgical process is practiced in several different countries including the United States. It is done for medical as well as cultural reasons throughout. Scientists studying sexual diseases agree that circumcision at a young age offers a degree of protection against contracting infections and sexual diseases. Recent studies have shed new light on this protective ability of circumcision, and researchers have stated that the procedure can lower the risks of HIV infection up to 60 percent in sex between males and females.
I found this at http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2