Gesundheit! Two circumcision procedures!

On October 11, 1987, I called attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating phony babies-can't-feel-pain neurology...

On October 11, 2004 (today), I call attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating the notion that American medicine's most
frequent surgical behavior toward males - total foreskin amputation - is the
same as ancient Jewish ritual circumcision which left most of the foreskin
on the penis.

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD et al. write in PEDIATRICS, the journal of the
American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP:

"Historically, Jewish ritual circumcision consists of 3 parts: 1) the
excision of the OUTER PART of the prepuce (milah), 2) slitting [ripping? -
TG] of the foreskin's inner lining to facilitate the total uncovering of the
glans (peri'ah), and 3) the sucking of the blood from the wound."
--Gesundheit et al.^^^ PEDIATRICS Vol. 114 No. 2 August 2004, pp. e259-e263
[OUTER PART emphasis added]
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/114/2/e259

OPEN LETTER (archived for global access; see below)

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD and colleagues (Galia Grisaru-Soen, MD, David
Greenberg, MD, Osnat Levtzion-Korach, MD|, David Malkin, MD, Martin Petric,
PhD, Gideon Koren, MD, Moshe D. Tendler, PhD, Bruria Ben-Zeev, MD, Amir
Vardi, MD, Ron Dagan, MD and Dan Engelhard, MD)
via

Dr. Gesundheit et al.,

First you indicate that some foreskin is left on the penis, as in,

"Jewish ritual circumcision consists of...the excision of the OUTER PART of
the [foreskin] (milah)...[and]...slitting of the foreskin's inner lining to
facilitate the total uncovering of the glans (peri'ah)..." [emphasis added]

Then you indicate that NO foreskin is left on the penis...

"Pathologic phimosis and paraphimosis [are] precluded by the ABSENCE of a
foreskin..."

(Note: Fraudulent infant penis care now recommended by AAP can cause both
pathologic
phimosis and paraphimosis. See below.)

Obviously, there cannot be "absence" of a foreskin in the Jewish ritual if
only the "outer part" of the foreskin is amputated and foreskin still covers
the glans.

You write:

"Biblical sources dictate routine ritual circumcision at 8 days of age for
Jewish boys....60% to 90% of newborn boys of the Jewish population in the
United States undergo this procedure..."
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/114/2/e259

It appears that most Jewish (and non-Jewish) boys in the United States
undergo TOTAL foreskin amputaton - not the original procedure dictated by
Biblical sources...

The late Edward Wallerstein won an American Medical Writers Award for
gathering much of the historical evidence in "Circumcision: An American
Health Fallacy" [NY: Springer 1980]

Wallerstein wrote in a subsequent 1983 article:

"Originally, the surgery involved only cutting the tip of the foreskin.
This was changed in the Hellenic Period to prevent [Jews from]
elongat[ing] the foreskin stump in order to appear uncircumcised."
[Wallerstein E. Humanistic Judaism 1983;11(4):46]

Wallerstein's research is supported by The Jewish Encyclopedia which
indicates that a Jewish "rage for athletics" occurred around 175 BCE
when the Seleucid king Antiochus IV offered citizenship to those who
adopted the athletic Greek way of life.

ANCIENT NUDE WRESTLING AND CIRCUMCISION

According to The Jewish Encyclopedia...

Jason, high priest of Jerusalem, offered to increase his tribute to
Antiochus IV if he would build a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem. The
gymnasium was built.

As Jews began participating in the nude games, "devout Jews" (a minority
of Jews) found to their horror that a partially exposed glans (i.e., a
"mini"-circumcised penis) was considered vulgar. Compounding the horror
(of this minority of "devout Jews") was the fact that many Jews -
including perhaps Jewish priests - were stretching their "mini"
circumcisized foreskins so as not to appear circumcised.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia:

"[D]evout Jews began to look upon the exercises with horror, especially
because most of them were practised "in puris naturilibus" and the
Covenant of Abraham had become an object of derision. Nevertheless, for
a time at least, the rage for Athletics spread even to the priests...
[See Athletics in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish
Encyclopedia. New York: Ktav 1901.]

"...[T]he consequence was [the] attempt to appear like the Greeks by
epispasm ('making themselves foreskins')... [See Circumcision in Singer
I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

Forty years later (134 BCE), the high priest of Jerusalem, John
Hyrcanus, forcibly circumcised the Idumeans, "leading them to think they
were Jews." [Gribetz J, Greenstein EL, Stein RS. The Timetables of
Jewish History. New York: Simon and Schuster 1993. Judah Gribetz is
president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York.]

It was during this period that Jewish priests apparently decided that
stretching the foreskin was wrong and threatened the extermination of
those Jews who stretched their foreskins:

"The Book of Jubilee (xv. 26-27), written in the time of John Hyrcanus,
has the following: '...God's anger will be kindled against the children
of the covenant if they make the members of their body appear like those
of the Gentiles, and they will be expelled and exterminated from the
earth.'" [Charles, The Book of Jubilees iv.-ix. iii. 190-192, under
Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish Encyclopedia.
New York: Ktav 1901.]

But Jews of this period apparently construed the "no stretching" decree
to mean that it was all right not to circumcise; for when the son of
John Hyrcanus took power in 104 BCE (by imprisoning his mother and
killing his brother), he forced circumcision on the residents of Galilee
- "many of them Jews." [Gribetz 1993]

THE SHIFT TO TOTAL FORESKIN AMPUTATION

The shift to total foreskin amputation is believed to have occurred one
hundred years later, after the unsuccessful Bar Kokba uprising against
the Roman Emperor Hadrian (who had completely outlawed circumcision):

"In order to prevent the obliteration of the "seal of the
covenant"...the Rabbis, probably after the war of Bar Kokba (see Yeb.
l.c.; Gen. R. xivi.), instituted the 'peri'ah' (the laying bare of the
glans), without which circumcision was declared to be of no value (Shab.
xxx. 6)." [See Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

"Thenceforward [total foreskin amputation - the laying bare of the
glans] was the mark of Jewish loyalty." [See Circumcision in Singer I
(and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

God originally/allegedly told Jews to leave most of the foreskin on the
penis - and rabbis are
ignoring Him...

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo

"Todd Gastaldo" wrote in message ink.net...
On October 11, 1987, I called attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating phony babies-can't-feel-pain neurology...

On October 11, 2004 (today), I call attention to the American Academy of
Pediatrics/AAP perpetuating the notion that American medicine's most
frequent surgical behavior toward males - total foreskin amputation - is the
same as ancient Jewish ritual circumcision which left most of the foreskin
on the penis.

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD et al. write in PEDIATRICS, the journal of the
American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP:

"Historically, Jewish ritual circumcision consists of 3 parts: 1) the
excision of the OUTER PART of the prepuce (milah), 2) slitting [ripping? -
TG] of the foreskin's inner lining to facilitate the total uncovering of the
glans (peri'ah), and 3) the sucking of the blood from the wound."
--Gesundheit et al.^^^ PEDIATRICS Vol. 114 No. 2 August 2004, pp. e259-e263
[OUTER PART emphasis added]
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/114/2/e259

OPEN LETTER (archived for global access; see below)

BENJAMIN GESUNDHEIT, MD and colleagues (Galia Grisaru-Soen, MD, David
Greenberg, MD, Osnat Levtzion-Korach, MD|, David Malkin, MD, Martin Petric,
PhD, Gideon Koren, MD, Moshe D. Tendler, PhD, Bruria Ben-Zeev, MD, Amir
Vardi, MD, Ron Dagan, MD and Dan Engelhard, MD)
via

Dr. Gesundheit et al.,

First you indicate that some foreskin is left on the penis, as in,

"Jewish ritual circumcision consists of...the excision of the OUTER PART of
the [foreskin] (milah)...[and]...slitting of the foreskin's inner lining to
facilitate the total uncovering of the glans (peri'ah)..." [emphasis added]

Then you indicate that NO foreskin is left on the penis...

"Pathologic phimosis and paraphimosis [are] precluded by the ABSENCE of a
foreskin..."

(Note: Fraudulent infant penis care now recommended by AAP can cause both
pathologic
phimosis and paraphimosis. See below.)

Obviously, there cannot be "absence" of a foreskin in the Jewish ritual if
only the "outer part" of the foreskin is amputated and foreskin still covers
the glans.

You write:

"Biblical sources dictate routine ritual circumcision at 8 days of age for
Jewish boys....60% to 90% of newborn boys of the Jewish population in the
United States undergo this procedure..."
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/114/2/e259

It appears that most Jewish (and non-Jewish) boys in the United States
undergo TOTAL foreskin amputaton - not the original procedure dictated by
Biblical sources...

The late Edward Wallerstein won an American Medical Writers Award for
gathering much of the historical evidence in "Circumcision: An American
Health Fallacy" [NY: Springer 1980]

Wallerstein wrote in a subsequent 1983 article:

"Originally, the surgery involved only cutting the tip of the foreskin.
This was changed in the Hellenic Period to prevent [Jews from]
elongat[ing] the foreskin stump in order to appear uncircumcised."
[Wallerstein E. Humanistic Judaism 1983;11(4):46]

Wallerstein's research is supported by The Jewish Encyclopedia which
indicates that a Jewish "rage for athletics" occurred around 175 BCE
when the Seleucid king Antiochus IV offered citizenship to those who
adopted the athletic Greek way of life.

ANCIENT NUDE WRESTLING AND CIRCUMCISION

According to The Jewish Encyclopedia...

Jason, high priest of Jerusalem, offered to increase his tribute to
Antiochus IV if he would build a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem. The
gymnasium was built.

As Jews began participating in the nude games, "devout Jews" (a minority
of Jews) found to their horror that a partially exposed glans (i.e., a
"mini"-circumcised penis) was considered vulgar. Compounding the horror
(of this minority of "devout Jews") was the fact that many Jews -
including perhaps Jewish priests - were stretching their "mini"
circumcisized foreskins so as not to appear circumcised.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia:

"[D]evout Jews began to look upon the exercises with horror, especially
because most of them were practised "in puris naturilibus" and the
Covenant of Abraham had become an object of derision. Nevertheless, for
a time at least, the rage for Athletics spread even to the priests...
[See Athletics in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish
Encyclopedia. New York: Ktav 1901.]

"...[T]he consequence was [the] attempt to appear like the Greeks by
epispasm ('making themselves foreskins')... [See Circumcision in Singer
I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

Forty years later (134 BCE), the high priest of Jerusalem, John
Hyrcanus, forcibly circumcised the Idumeans, "leading them to think they
were Jews." [Gribetz J, Greenstein EL, Stein RS. The Timetables of
Jewish History. New York: Simon and Schuster 1993. Judah Gribetz is
president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York.]

It was during this period that Jewish priests apparently decided that
stretching the foreskin was wrong and threatened the extermination of
those Jews who stretched their foreskins:

"The Book of Jubilee (xv. 26-27), written in the time of John Hyrcanus,
has the following: '...God's anger will be kindled against the children
of the covenant if they make the members of their body appear like those
of the Gentiles, and they will be expelled and exterminated from the
earth.'" [Charles, The Book of Jubilees iv.-ix. iii. 190-192, under
Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.) The Jewish Encyclopedia.
New York: Ktav 1901.]

But Jews of this period apparently construed the "no stretching" decree
to mean that it was all right not to circumcise; for when the son of
John Hyrcanus took power in 104 BCE (by imprisoning his mother and
killing his brother), he forced circumcision on the residents of Galilee
- "many of them Jews." [Gribetz 1993]

THE SHIFT TO TOTAL FORESKIN AMPUTATION

The shift to total foreskin amputation is believed to have occurred one
hundred years later, after the unsuccessful Bar Kokba uprising against
the Roman Emperor Hadrian (who had completely outlawed circumcision):

"In order to prevent the obliteration of the "seal of the
covenant"...the Rabbis, probably after the war of Bar Kokba (see Yeb.
l.c.; Gen. R. xivi.), instituted the 'peri'ah' (the laying bare of the
glans), without which circumcision was declared to be of no value (Shab.
xxx. 6)." [See Circumcision in Singer I (and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

"Thenceforward [total foreskin amputation - the laying bare of the
glans] was the mark of Jewish loyalty." [See Circumcision in Singer I
(and 400 others, eds.), 1901]

God originally/allegedly told Jews to leave most of the foreskin on the
penis - and rabbis are
ignoring Him...

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


Fascinating information, Todd. Thanks for posting. :-)

I *USE* to feel the *ONLY* reason for circumcision was in cases of
extreme emergency when a minor male's life was on the line and all
other resources have been throughly exhausted... AND for religious
reasons (Jewish, Muslim). That was when I was still in my mid-teens
and just starting to realize that RIC (Routine Infant Circumcision)
shouldn't be forced on an naive baby/child.

While I still agree to the first part (and always will), I no longer
accept it's a necessary for the second part. It's easy to be brought
up as a certain type of religious believer and then as you grow up,
decide it's not for me and look at other religions. We're free to do
that in a democratic society. But the act of violating a person's body
for religious reasons when they're not old enough to understand and
consent to it, just seems ungodly to me.

Chris Mitten
atheist
29 GWM
happily intact 29 years
Canada



---
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/religious.htm