Male circumcision and the enhancement debate: harm reduction, not prohibition
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
↵i Thanks to Bennett Foddy for this point.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The child's interests and the case for the permissibility of male infant circumcision
- Infant circumcision: the last stand for the dead dogma of parental (sovereignal) rights
- Rationalising circumcision: from tradition to fashion, from public health to individual freedom—critical notes on cultural persistence of the practice of genital mutilation
- Out of step: fatal flaws in the latest AAP policy report on neonatal circumcision
- Forced circumcision of men (abridged)
- Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine: a critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision
- Male or female genital cutting: why ‘health benefits’ are morally irrelevant
- Traditional male circumcision and the risk for HIV transmission among men: a systematic review
- A covenant with the status quo? Male circumcision and the new BMA guidance to doctors
- Male partner circumcision associated with lower Trichomonas vaginalis incidence among pregnant and postpartum Kenyan women: a prospective cohort study