Circumcised or not

Answer 1

"A review of the scientific literature, however, reveals that the actual effect of circumcision is the destruction of the clinically-demonstated hygienic and immunological properties of the prepuce and intact penis....The higher rate of STDs in circumcised males might well be the result of the loss of preputial immunoprotective structures. The loss of the protective, self-lubricating, mobile, double-layered prepuce exposes the glans penis and meatus to direct friction, abrasion, and trauma. Eyes without eyelids would not be cleaner. Neither is a glans without its prepuce. The surgically externalized and unprotected glans and meatus of the circumcised penis are constantly exposed to abrasion and dirt, making the circumcised penis less hygienic. The circumcised penis is more prone to infection in the first years of life than the intact penis....These factors may explain why circumcised males are more likely than their genitally intact peers to engage in high risk sexual behaviours (such an anal intercourse and active and passive homosexual oral sex) that lead to HIV and other STD infections."

Immunological functions of the human prepuce, P M Fleiss, F M Hodges, R S Van Howe, STI (London), Volume 74, Number 5, Pages 364-367, October 1998

Circumcision as a Risk Factor for Urethritis in Racial Groups

GREGORY L. SMITH, MD, MPH, ROBERT GREENUP, AND ERNEST TAKAFUJI, MD, MPH

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, Volume 77 Number 4: Pages 452-454.

April 1987.

.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/smith/