Todd Gastaldo wrote:

AAP/CMA CIRCUMCISION ANTI-SCIENCE

See below.

First this...

THE TWO "KINDS" OF PENISES

"Jake Waskett" wrote:

snip
It is categorically *not* fraudulent to state that circumcision enhances
the
hygiene of the penis.

Jake,

You and I are talking about two very different "kinds" of penises - there
is "the penis" (intact; the one male babies are born with) and there is
the mutilated penis.

My own mutilated penis seems quite normal to me - seems to work fine (!) -
but it *was* mutilated.

Ok, Todd. I accept that you feel it was mutilated.


Some readers might ask what I mean by mutilated penis...

Like most American males my age a LARGE PART of my penis was literally
ripped then sliced off my penis.

You mean that the synechiae connecting your foreskin to the glans were
separated, and then the foreskin excised?


Mutilated penises seem quite normal - indeed they ARE quite normal to
those
who sport them. But men with mutilated penises reportedly have on average
about 12 sq. in. less of sexually sensitive skin than men with intact
penises. By slicing off this sexually sensitive skin, MDs reportedly deny
immune function. See the postscript.

Be careful to be accurate, Todd. As the skin is double-layered, one half of
it will be ordinary shaft-skin. The other half, some claim, is especially
sensitive.


Finally regarding my use of the term mutilation, encyclopedias use the
term
mutilation to describe circumcision. See
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2398

I'm sure, Todd.


...

Bottomline Jake,

Mutilation (circumcision) cannot possibly enhance hygiene of "the penis"
because following circumcision one does not HAVE "the penis." One has
something less...

Ok, Todd, you feel free to split hairs.


At best, mutilation (circumcision) enhances hygiene of THE MUTILATED
penis.

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


[repeat of earlier posts snipped]