WASHINGTON -- Circumcision is an, ahem, uncomfortable topic. The traditional Jewish bris calls this medical procedure a sign of blessing on the newcomer. Ten out of 10 male infants seem to disagree.
During World War II, American soldiers were often circumcised to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. From the 1950s to the mid-1970s, the circumcision of American newborn boys became increasingly common. Then a minor backlash set in, and circumcision rates declined for a time. Today, the American Academy of Pediatrics has a hands-off policy, leaving the decision up to parents.
But suddenly, Uncle Irving seems pretty wise. Studies in Uganda, Kenya and South Africa indicate that circumcision halves the risk of adult males contracting HIV through heterosexual intercourse. An author of one of those studies, Robert Bailey of the University of Illinois, Chicago, told me, "There is nothing else currently out there in public health or HIV prevention with protection results this compelling." Studies are ongoing to determine if male circumcision protects women from transmission; researchers suspect it might. The benefit for men, however, is increasingly undeniable.
Why does circumcision help prevent AIDS? Well, since we're all adults here (and children reading the editorial pages are likely to be freakishly mature), I'll be frank. The foreskin of the penis - the part removed in a circumcision - has a high concentration of cells that bring HIV into the body. A circumcised male is exposed to less of the HIV during sexual relations, and has less chance of being infected.
This helps to explain one of the great mysteries of AIDS in Africa: why infection rates vary so widely across the continent. The most mind-numbing levels of infection - sometimes upward of 30 percent - are concentrated in those regions of southern Africa where most men are uncircumcised. Massive infection rates seem to be associated with uncircumcised males, ulcerative STDs and many concurrent sexual partners. Researchers hope that broader circumcision will remove a contributor to this deadly cycle.
As you'd expect, there are cultural obstacles to broader circumcision in Africa. Circumcision, or the lack of it, can be a matter of cultural identity, distinguishing Christians from Muslims (who, like Jews, are traditionally circumcised), and even dividing ethnic groups within a country. But surveys in Africa indicate an openness to the procedure among uncircumcised Christians. One researcher, Dr. Maria Wawer of the Johns Hopkins University, says, "A response we got was, `Well, what's the big deal? Jesus was circumcised.'"
