I'm no Doctor, but simple science has always dictated that dark, moist places are a breeding ground for bacteria and infection. That said, I'm not surprised at this and have heard this years ago actually in regards to HIV infection.
I'm all for reducing HIV infections, yet, this study seems a bit skewed. 70% is a huge contrast and what's up with a vaccine targeted for only a 30% reduction risk? Being in the Social Science field I'm pretty well versed in research methods and know that statitistics are very grey and are almost always skewed towards the agenda of a given issue being measured. Looks like in this case we have science battling religion.
As for circumcision, I consider that genital mutilation and don't think it should be mandatory for anyone. However, nowhere in Cutguys post indicates that as an option so I'll leave it at that.
|