Morris BJ, Krieger JN, Klausner JD. Critical evaluation of unscientific arguments disparaging affirmative infant male circumcision policy. World J Clin Pediatr 2016; 5(3): 251-261 [PMID: 27610340 DOI: 10.5409/wjcp.v5.i3.251]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Brian J Morris, DSc, PhD, Professor Emeritus, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Building F13, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia. brian.morris@sydney.edu.au
Research Domain of This Article
Pediatrics
Article-Type of This Article
Frontier
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Pediatr. Aug 8, 2016; 5(3): 251-261 Published online Aug 8, 2016. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v5.i3.251
Critical evaluation of unscientific arguments disparaging affirmative infant male circumcision policy
Brian J Morris, John N Krieger, Jeffrey D Klausner
Brian J Morris, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
John N Krieger, Section of Urology, VA Puget Sound Health Care System and School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States
Jeffrey D Klausner, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States
Author contributions: All authors contributed to this manuscript.
Conflict-of-interest statement: No conflict-of-interest.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: Brian J Morris, DSc, PhD, Professor Emeritus, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Building F13, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia. brian.morris@sydney.edu.au
Telephone: +61-2-93513688 Fax: +61-2-93512227
Received: January 20, 2016 Peer-review started: January 20, 2016 First decision: March 1, 2016 Revised: March 11, 2016 Accepted: April 21, 2016 Article in press: April 22, 2016 Published online: August 8, 2016 Processing time: 201 Days and 10.9 Hours
Core Tip
Core tip: This article critically assesses an extensive compendium of detailed arguments criticizing the American Academy of Pediatrics policy in support of infant male circumcision. The article we assess is by an historian, Robert Darby, who is opposed to infant circumcision. It should be recognized that the American Academy of Pediatrics policy on infant male circumcision was developed on the basis of the latest scientific evidence. The policy reported that benefits exceed risks and recommended unbiased education of parents and providers, as well as facilitation of access and improvement in affordability by increased third party insurance coverage. We present the scientific evidence undermining Darby’s arguments. Our evaluation leads us to conclude that the criticisms by Darby should be dismissed as unreliable.
