Circumcision: Frankly Speaking

Rating:
Summary: Speaking on behalf of professional butchers
Review: ...Disinformation about circumcision has been put out on the American public for at least a century.The author only contributes more of the same by using outdated studies.....Harter also fails to acknowledge that such a traumatising procedure(performed without anesthesia)may have long-term psychological consequences.All in all a terrible waste of a book.

Rating:
Summary: Flogging Dead Horses
Review: Author Gerald Weiss' continues, with howling insistence, to assert that the American Academy of Pediatrics endorses infant circumcision as a prophylactic measure. Whether for religious, cultural or economic reasons, his pro-circumcision bias led him to misrepresent the AAP's position in his book and he is now obliged to continue flogging that dead horse in order to bolster sales. His approach is to divert attention away from his false assertion by launching ad hominem attacks on those who point out his deception and to inflate meager evidence supporting his favorite amputation.

Not only does the AAP NOT recommend infant circumcision as a prophylactic measure, but the American Medical Association has just published a policy report that also does not recommend routine infant circumcision:

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2036-2511.html

Summarizing the conclusions of this report, the AMA says:

"Recent policy statements issued by professional societies representing Australian, Canadian, and American pediatricians do not recommend routine circumcision of male newborns... Virtually all current policy statements from specialty societies and medical organizations do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision, and support the provision of accurate and unbiased information to parents to inform their choice."

Author Weiss' statements that circumcision may protect against UTIs and penile cancer are true, but he selectively fails to mention that, according to the cited studies and world medical opinion, this protection is so negligible in comparison with the potential risks and harm, that not one major medical association in the world recommends circumcision for these or any other reasons:

"The low incidence of urinary tract infections and penile cancer mitigates the potential medical benefits compared with the risks of circumcision."

Circumcisers such as Gerald Weiss are fighting a rearguard action pathologizing normal male anatomy in order to continue a lucrative practice that most of the world either abandoned long ago or never adopted. By touting the trifling benefits of amputating this most sexually sensitive and protective part of the penis, his position isolates him from his peer medical organizations worldwide, and places him in splendid solidarity with Victorian notions of sex and hygiene.

I have read his book. I do not recommend it.

Madison Park, PhD

Rating:
Summary: Dr. Weiss' Great Deceptions and Wishful Thinkings
Review: Can I give it no stars or a black one?

I have read at least four books on circumcision since I am a counselor in this area. I am appalled by Weiss' lies, red herrings and other scare tactics in what I believe will be a futile attempt to keep non-Jews in the United States circumcising for specious and improbable " health benefits of circumcision."

For a psychosexual point of view Dr. Weiss' book fits in at the bottom in a series of such books written over the past ten years by such authors with agenda as, Arron Fink, Morris of Australia and articles appearing elsewhere authored by Edgar Scheon.

Their denigation of those who would critically question their factoids, red herrings, speculations and plain scare tactics is comic and manifest. Weiss characterizes these people as the " antis".

Even Weiss' review of his own book is consumed by error and rant.

What more can be said, book buyer beware of the author with unspoken agendas and unvoiced motivations.

Dr. David Gollaher's historical accounting of circumcision, available at Amazon, gives the novice a background in which they may view these pro-circumcision authors.

Rating:
Summary: This would be funny if it wasn't so sick.
Review: Dr. Weiss states:

"The anti-circumcision craze has developed because groups of conservative, sensitive, medically misinformed individuals, some with fanatical emotionalism, have not seen the consequences of a society where males are not circumcised."

Erm... I come from a country (England) where males are not circumcised, and in my view, that country has far fewer societal problems than does the U.S. where circumcision was, until recently, fairly ubiquitous. Not that I really think that circumcision has much bearing on that.

Personally, my father was circumcised, I was not. I grew up with a condition commonly known as tight foreskin which was somewhat uncomfortable at times, but at no time did I get the urge to ask my doctor to shear off the offending body part. Fortunately, I was brought up in a society where this inhuman practice was long-since relegated to the annals of history. As we're on the verge of moving forward into the 21st century, I think it's about time that Dr. Weiss and America was dragged kicking and screaming (much like the victims of circumcision) at least into the latter part of the 20th.

Rating:
Summary: Weiss Belongs in the Dark Ages
Review: Gerald N. Weis is pathological in his writings concerning circumcision. He ( Weis ) demonstrates a compulsion to mutilate in the name of medicine. The man is dangerous to society and needs to be put behind bars.

Our society would be better served by telling the world the truth about this horrible, horrible medical malpractice.

Amazon should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a known butcher to sell his trade through their channels.

Rating:
Summary: What a price to pay for rant and agenda
Review: I have read Weiss's little pro-circumcision book and found it laugable. Is he going senile, is he carrying a secret cultural agend, does he actually think anyone of right mind would pay 50 dollars for this work of ego and bias.
I'm sure he and his dear, albeit diminishing pro-circ supporters find it difficult to think this ritual mutilation in non Moslem/Jewish society is decreasing. Anyone who has actually seen a circumcision and has had their eyes open, can not think of this as anything other the child abuse most dire.
If the " good " doctor has done many of these sexual mutilations premptively one could only hope he can sell enough of this none sense to pay his lawyer, when his victims decide to sue him.

Rating:
Summary: Gerald Weiss Needs to Read His Own Book!
Review: I read with amazement author Gerald Weiss' loud denunciation of "anti-circ activists" who claim his book states that the American Academy of Pediatrics currently recommends circumcision of infants to prevent health problems, etc. Author Weiss needs to read his own book instead of denouncing those who have. On page 10 of Frankly Speaking he says: "The Academy currently recommends circumcision of infants to prevent health problems, especially protection against repeated infant urinary tract infections and foreskin diseases." Those of us who have actually read what the AAP's position on neonatal circumcision is are fully aware that the Academy has never said any such thing. In fact, on the contrary, the Academy has found that circumcision is unnecessary to a child's health or well-being and does not recommend this surgery. No national medical association in the world recommends routine neonatal circumcision for any reason whatsoever. Male circumcision, like female circumcision, is simply genital mutilation that cannot be justified on medical grounds. It is a holdover from Victorian notions of sex and hygiene and should be eliminated from our society just as it has been eliminated from Europe, most of Asia and Latin America. Parents interested in promoting the health and well-being of their children would do far better to respect the normal, natural design of their children's sexual organs rather than amputating the most sensitive and protective part of them. They may also find the information presented in Say No to Circumcision: 40 Compelling Reasons, or Circumcision : A History of the World's Most Controversial Surgery both available from amazon.com to be much more helpful than Gerald Weiss' book.

Rating:
Summary: What Gives?!
Review: Just this month the American Medical Association released its policy statement saying that they do not recommend circumcising infants, yet these doctors do. Why are they so persistent in suggesting a traumatic experience for a non-indicated surgery? No national or international medical society recommends the routine circumcision of infants. The circumcision rates for Britain, Sweden and Finland are less than 1% yet in the US we circumcise 62% of our baby boys. And on top of all this the routine circumcision of female infants is a Federal crime.

Rating:
Summary: One would expect much more from a distinguished physician.
Review: This book is a laugh, if for no other reason than the large number of grammatical and lexical errors that the author never bothered to fix. If he were really serious about this subject, he would have included some documented data backed by footnotes, and would have applied some basic statistical methods to defend the position that he is attempting to stake out. As an example, in the section on cowboy circumcisions, (inspired by what he humorously calls "western literature") he suggests that requests for circumcisions from adult patients suffering foreskin-related problems was a widespread phenomenon in the days before infant circumcision became routine. Unfortunately, data concerning the incidence of foreskin-related problems (in a period he erroneously calls the "18th century") are not presented. The author says that circumcision as a preventative measure can be justified on economic grounds alone, claiming that, for an adult patient suffering foreskin problems requiring costly treatment, neonatal circumcision would have been for him a far less expensive treatment. Unfortunately, this economic argument carries absolutely no weight without quantifying the incidence of foreskin-related problems for uncircumcised adults in the 21st century. Without this latter datum, a comparison of costs simply cannot be made.

Should we American males be glad that we were circumcised in infancy? or should we consider ourselves victims of a tribal ritual of genital alteration? For those who are looking for an erudite, well-argued treatment of this subject matter, the recent book by David Gollaher is a good place to start. At present, scholarly works on this topic have come almost entirely from the anti-circumcision camp. As for the present text, some undergraduate-level coursework in the fields of statistics and English composition would put the author in a much stronger position to argue his case. As it stands, this text is not to be believed.

Rating:
Summary: Weiss Belongs in the Dark Ages
Review: This book is TERRIBLE and it stands out amongst the other books offered here by Amazon.com.
Why? Because it is advocating circumcision, something which no major medical association in the world recommends be performed routinely anymore. Also, as many others pointed out, 80-85% of the world's men are NOT circumcised, thus anyone advocating circumcision in today's day and age is on dangerous ground ethically and legally. Many men are beginning to sue hospitals and doctors such as Dr. Weiss who peform circumcision on them without their consent. Not only is curcumcision medically unnecessary but it has disadvanatges too.
New research by doctors and sexologists indicates that the foreskin is necessary not only to protect the penis from being damaged but to provide vital sexual functions for the man and his female partner. Weiss's statement around pages 24-25 that circumcision does nothing to alter the functioning of the penis is LUDICROUS! You don't have to be an M.D. to be aware that this statement is a LIE! Is he aware how many M.D.'s and sex researchers would take that statement apart? Removal of the foreskin has been shown to damage sexual sensitivity and sometimes provide sexual discomfort for the man and the woman. Why does Weiss not report the sexual damage that is done by circumcision? The book goes down hill from here using outdated and disproven medical studies and statistics. Circumcision has no medical benefits and may even have medical disadvantages. Some research being done now shows that circumcised men may be MORE at risk of AIDS than uncircumcised men.
Dr. Weiss is living in the past. He has performed so many circumcisions that he has the arrogance to still advocate it because he cannot admit that he was part of a generation of doctors who didn't understand the functions of the foreskin as we do today. Read statements by Dr. George Denniston who opposes circumcision in which he says that doctors who realize that circumcision is dying off and should be dead are part of the future and those who still do it are living in the past. Dr. Weiss does not tell his readers that some boys who are circumcised become angry and resentful towards doctors and towards their parents and soemtimes need counselling and hate their parents for it. Some men are now choosing to restore thier foreskins and want them back. Boys circumcised today may want to restore their foreskins and may be angry with those who took it from them. The point Weiss seems unware of is that countries and governments are considering regulating and possibly criminializing male circumcision. It will eventually be illegal to pefrom this on someone without his consent. I have realized that if I become a parent in a few years that I will leave my boy's bodies untouched and allow them to have control over what is done to their own genitals. Weiss convicts himself when he accuses others of being "anti-circumcision". As many of us have said, the MAJORITY (85%) of men in the world are not circumcised. It is those who are circumcised who are in the minority, and that includes Weiss. People who are not circumcised are not some small insignificant group, they are MOST of the world. Europe and Scandinavia do not circumcise and think that we are way behind the times here in North America.
It is time for Dr. Weiss to retire and fade away, which he will have to do soon anyway. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK! Imagaine the arrogance of Dr. Weiss writing a 5 star review of his own book! Read the great books available here at Amazon.com by Dr. Ronald Goldman (a Jew who opposes circumcision) such as "Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma" and "Sex As Nature Intended It" by Kristen O'Hara which explains how circumcision damages the functioning of the penis as designed by nature (contrary to what Weiss says in his book) and how this can damage a man and a woman's sex life. These books are several hundred pages long and explain the thousands of reasons not to circumcise. Why is Weiss's book less than 100 pages? Because he couldn't find enough information to recommend circumcision to fill that many pages because it doesn't exist. His book is also published in the fall of 1998, prior to the AAP recommending against routine infant circumcision in March 1999 and is outdated in this regard too. This book will be viewed by historians of an example of what we were doing wrong in the 20th Century whereas the books by Goldman and O'Hara will be viewed as books providing a light into the future.