To circumcise or not to circumcise?

[robvalue]

You could make a (weak) case for the removal of a huge number of body parts, with the argument that the removed part can no longer go bad in any way.

Of course, you then have to balance the likely damage such a removal causes.

If the medical community as a whole considered every single modification you could make as a general rule, and decided that it's foreskins and nothing else, I'd be surprised and suspicious. It just happens to correlate with what people have been doing for a long time for other reasons, mainly religious, or for primitive hygiene.

But still, if the evidence was there and experts agreed it really is worth it, then I'd accept that. That doesn't seem to be the case though.