ASU2003

I'll paraphrase what I remember saying before. You take 3200 men, divide them into two groups of 1600, STD test them all, circumcised half of them that want it, wait X number of weeks and STD test them all again (without knowing how much sex each group had with infected females or if the circumcised guys even were able to have sex), STD test them all again a second time (this time seeing that the circumcised group was catching up to the uncircumcised group), then stop the study early because 12 uncircumcised guys out of 1600 got sick versus 5 circumcised. Then run with the headline 60% reduction! 60% reduction! I bet if they would go back and check up it would be close to 50-50 because there are too many unchecked variables in that study.

The CDC is at least looking for valid scientific reasons, but why aren't STD rates a lot higher in the socialized healthcare countries where most people are uncircumcised? Are they having safer sex with condoms? Which group of men use condoms more often? Condoms and monogamy are the answers to STDs, not circumcision.

It isn't easy to come up with a study unless the researchers know too much going in. I think if they studied couples where the woman had an STD, but the man did not, they could see how many times each type of man would have to have sex before he was infected.