Circ prevented six or seven out of a possible 10 infections

The truth had to finally come out. The foreskin is a dog.

=========================================
Circumcision appears to reduce HIV spread
By ED SUSMAN

RIO DE JANEIRO, July 27 (UPI) -- In the first study of its kind,
researchers said they were able to reduce the risk of contracting the
virus that causes AIDS by medically performing circumcision on healthy
young men.

Numerous observational studies had suggested AIDS might be less
prevalent in men who had been circumcised, but doctors and researchers
in France and South Africa put the question to the ultimate test: a
randomized controlled study in which 1,550 men ages 18 to 24 agreed to
be circumcised, while another 1,538 men acted as uncircumcised controls.

The result:

"We demonstrated that we could reduce HIV infection by 65 percent
through male circumcision in this group of individuals," Dr. Bertran
Auvert, professor of public health at the University of Versailles,
France, told United Press International. "This is the first randomized,
controlled trial demonstrating a strong protective effect of safe male
circumcision on HIV acquisition by males."

The study was performed in the Johannesburg, South Africa, suburb of
Orange Farm, a poverty-stricken community that has no farms, nor any
orange trees, but has a 32 percent prevalence of infection with the
human immunodeficiency virus, the agent that causes AIDS.

All the men agreed to circumcision before they were assigned either to
surgery -- under local anesthesia by physicians -- or waiting through
the course of the trial for 21 months before having the penile foreskin
removed.

The men were seen by researchers three months after surgery or inclusion
into the trial and then again at 12 months and 21 months. The study
began in 2002 and ended prematurely in 2005 because the Data Monitoring
Safety Board detected far more HIV infections in the uncircumcised men.

The study results, presented at the 3rd International AIDS Society
Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, were greeted with caution.

Finding the results "exciting," Dr. Helene Gayle, president of the
International AIDS Society, also advised caution before advocating
voluntary circumcision on the part of young men.

"This could be a major advance in prevention," Gayle said at a news
briefing on the study, "however, we need to see the results of other
trials to confirm these findings. Adult male circumcision should not be
implemented as a preventive strategy until other trials are done."

Auvert acknowledged that his study is not a green light for
circumcision, noting the area where it was performed is somewhat unique
in its population and HIV infection prevalence. For example, the men
were engaging in heterosexual activities and the study was performed
only for 21 months, so how long the protective effect continues is unknown.

He also said the treatment may be effective only in preventing
female-to-male transmission of HIV and may not prevent male-to-male
transmission or male-to-female transmission

"The treatment was not 100 percent successful, so safe sex is still
important in preventing transmission of HIV," Auvert said.

About 20 percent of men in the area undergo voluntary circumcision, he
said, so the proposal was not a foreign idea. During the scheduled
visits to the doctors during the trial the sexually active men were
counseled regarding safe sex activities.

Nevertheless, 69 infections occurred during the trial among the men, all
of whom were HIV-negative at its start. Of those infections, 58 occurred
in the uncircumcised men and 18 in those who had undergone the
operation. That translates into a 65 percent reduction, Auvert said.

The major adverse side effect mentioned by those undergoing the surgery
was pain. No one died in the study from the surgery, and no permanent
injuries occurred among men undergoing the surgery.

"Another way of putting it," he said, "is that we prevented six or seven
out of a possible 10 infections" by circumcising the men.

Edward Susman covers medical research and health matters for UPI Science
News. E-mail:

Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/inde...rcumcision.xml

LOL http://www.whale.to/a/hivfraud.html

"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
The truth had to finally come out. The foreskin is a dog.

=========================================
Circumcision appears to reduce HIV spread
By ED SUSMAN

RIO DE JANEIRO, July 27 (UPI) -- In the first study of its kind,
researchers said they were able to reduce the risk of contracting the
virus that causes AIDS by medically performing circumcision on healthy
young men.

Numerous observational studies had suggested AIDS might be less
prevalent in men who had been circumcised, but doctors and researchers
in France and South Africa put the question to the ultimate test: a
randomized controlled study in which 1,550 men ages 18 to 24 agreed to
be circumcised, while another 1,538 men acted as uncircumcised controls.

The result:

"We demonstrated that we could reduce HIV infection by 65 percent
through male circumcision in this group of individuals," Dr. Bertran
Auvert, professor of public health at the University of Versailles,
France, told United Press International. "This is the first randomized,
controlled trial demonstrating a strong protective effect of safe male
circumcision on HIV acquisition by males."

The study was performed in the Johannesburg, South Africa, suburb of
Orange Farm, a poverty-stricken community that has no farms, nor any
orange trees, but has a 32 percent prevalence of infection with the
human immunodeficiency virus, the agent that causes AIDS.

All the men agreed to circumcision before they were assigned either to
surgery -- under local anesthesia by physicians -- or waiting through
the course of the trial for 21 months before having the penile foreskin
removed.

The men were seen by researchers three months after surgery or inclusion
into the trial and then again at 12 months and 21 months. The study
began in 2002 and ended prematurely in 2005 because the Data Monitoring
Safety Board detected far more HIV infections in the uncircumcised men.

The study results, presented at the 3rd International AIDS Society
Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, were greeted with caution.

Finding the results "exciting," Dr. Helene Gayle, president of the
International AIDS Society, also advised caution before advocating
voluntary circumcision on the part of young men.

"This could be a major advance in prevention," Gayle said at a news
briefing on the study, "however, we need to see the results of other
trials to confirm these findings. Adult male circumcision should not be
implemented as a preventive strategy until other trials are done."

Auvert acknowledged that his study is not a green light for
circumcision, noting the area where it was performed is somewhat unique
in its population and HIV infection prevalence. For example, the men
were engaging in heterosexual activities and the study was performed
only for 21 months, so how long the protective effect continues is
unknown.

He also said the treatment may be effective only in preventing
female-to-male transmission of HIV and may not prevent male-to-male
transmission or male-to-female transmission

"The treatment was not 100 percent successful, so safe sex is still
important in preventing transmission of HIV," Auvert said.

About 20 percent of men in the area undergo voluntary circumcision, he
said, so the proposal was not a foreign idea. During the scheduled
visits to the doctors during the trial the sexually active men were
counseled regarding safe sex activities.

Nevertheless, 69 infections occurred during the trial among the men, all
of whom were HIV-negative at its start. Of those infections, 58 occurred
in the uncircumcised men and 18 in those who had undergone the
operation. That translates into a 65 percent reduction, Auvert said.

The major adverse side effect mentioned by those undergoing the surgery
was pain. No one died in the study from the surgery, and no permanent
injuries occurred among men undergoing the surgery.

"Another way of putting it," he said, "is that we prevented six or seven
out of a possible 10 infections" by circumcising the men.

Edward Susman covers medical research and health matters for UPI Science
News. E-mail:

Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/inde...rcumcision.xml

john wrote:

LOL http://www.whale.to/a/hivfraud.html



The joke is on you if you believe that HIV is a hoax.

But on can expect the more lunatic of the skin freaks to adopt this line
as a desperate last ditch defense of the foreskin.

I dunno, if if is such a public health risk I guess it must go ... its
not like its worth a bucket of warm spit anyways.



"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...

The truth had to finally come out. The foreskin is a dog.

=========================================
Circumcision appears to reduce HIV spread
By ED SUSMAN

RIO DE JANEIRO, July 27 (UPI) -- In the first study of its kind,
researchers said they were able to reduce the risk of contracting the
virus that causes AIDS by medically performing circumcision on healthy
young men.

Numerous observational studies had suggested AIDS might be less
prevalent in men who had been circumcised, but doctors and researchers
in France and South Africa put the question to the ultimate test: a
randomized controlled study in which 1,550 men ages 18 to 24 agreed to
be circumcised, while another 1,538 men acted as uncircumcised controls.

The result:

"We demonstrated that we could reduce HIV infection by 65 percent
through male circumcision in this group of individuals," Dr. Bertran
Auvert, professor of public health at the University of Versailles,
France, told United Press International. "This is the first randomized,
controlled trial demonstrating a strong protective effect of safe male
circumcision on HIV acquisition by males."

The study was performed in the Johannesburg, South Africa, suburb of
Orange Farm, a poverty-stricken community that has no farms, nor any
orange trees, but has a 32 percent prevalence of infection with the
human immunodeficiency virus, the agent that causes AIDS.

All the men agreed to circumcision before they were assigned either to
surgery -- under local anesthesia by physicians -- or waiting through
the course of the trial for 21 months before having the penile foreskin
removed.

The men were seen by researchers three months after surgery or inclusion
into the trial and then again at 12 months and 21 months. The study
began in 2002 and ended prematurely in 2005 because the Data Monitoring
Safety Board detected far more HIV infections in the uncircumcised men.

The study results, presented at the 3rd International AIDS Society
Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, were greeted with caution.

Finding the results "exciting," Dr. Helene Gayle, president of the
International AIDS Society, also advised caution before advocating
voluntary circumcision on the part of young men.

"This could be a major advance in prevention," Gayle said at a news
briefing on the study, "however, we need to see the results of other
trials to confirm these findings. Adult male circumcision should not be
implemented as a preventive strategy until other trials are done."

Auvert acknowledged that his study is not a green light for
circumcision, noting the area where it was performed is somewhat unique
in its population and HIV infection prevalence. For example, the men
were engaging in heterosexual activities and the study was performed
only for 21 months, so how long the protective effect continues is

unknown.

He also said the treatment may be effective only in preventing
female-to-male transmission of HIV and may not prevent male-to-male
transmission or male-to-female transmission

"The treatment was not 100 percent successful, so safe sex is still
important in preventing transmission of HIV," Auvert said.

About 20 percent of men in the area undergo voluntary circumcision, he
said, so the proposal was not a foreign idea. During the scheduled
visits to the doctors during the trial the sexually active men were
counseled regarding safe sex activities.

Nevertheless, 69 infections occurred during the trial among the men, all
of whom were HIV-negative at its start. Of those infections, 58 occurred
in the uncircumcised men and 18 in those who had undergone the
operation. That translates into a 65 percent reduction, Auvert said.

The major adverse side effect mentioned by those undergoing the surgery
was pain. No one died in the study from the surgery, and no permanent
injuries occurred among men undergoing the surgery.

"Another way of putting it," he said, "is that we prevented six or seven
out of a possible 10 infections" by circumcising the men.

Edward Susman covers medical research and health matters for UPI Science
News. E-mail:

Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.



http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/inde...rcumcision.xml

"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
The joke is on you if you believe that HIV is a hoax.

But on can expect the more lunatic of the skin freaks to adopt this line
as a desperate last ditch defense of the foreskin.

I dunno, if if is such a public health risk I guess it must go ... its
not like its worth a bucket of warm spit anyways.

Looks like they took your brain along with your foreskin

john wrote:

"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...

The joke is on you if you believe that HIV is a hoax.

But on can expect the more lunatic of the skin freaks to adopt this line
as a desperate last ditch defense of the foreskin.

I dunno, if if is such a public health risk I guess it must go ... its
not like its worth a bucket of warm spit anyways.


Looks like they took your brain along with your foreskin




Tell me, do you really believe that virus myth crap?