To circumcise or not to circumcise?
June 12, 2016 at 9:17 am
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2016 at 9:21 am by LadyForCamus.)
(June 12, 2016 at 9:00 am)Irrational Wrote:(June 12, 2016 at 8:27 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: To be fair, studies done outside of America and on non-Americans are not considered to be generalizable to this population. I had not seen this AAP link before, and I don't think it's right to dismiss it just because we don't like what it says. If we, as skeptics, are not going to consider scientific research from a reputable, national medical organization, then we are no better than the crazy Christians who deny evolution research because the source has an "agenda."
Being normally a reputable national organization does not automatically mean that every study or review they conduct will not suffer major flaws.
As a skeptic, you shouldn't trust blindly what any one organization or scientist tells you. The best thing you can trust is the scientific method itself when done properly and replicated multiple times to the point that you can't but be confident of the findings.
Evolution is a theory, and a really good one at that. It's been tested so many times, and despite everything, still is the theory that we can trust to explain the variation of life on this planet.
I agree. In fact, meta analyses are prone to flaws by their very design, and while they can be useful, it's important for differences in methods of statistical analysis, and differences in individual study design be taken into account when results are interpreted. It also needs to be taken into account that researchers are free to cherry pick which studies they'd like to include.
I was not making a positive statement about the AAP's supporting evidence; i haven't even read any of it yet. I was merely responding to Losty's opinion that we should dismiss said evidence based on a perceived philosophical stance taken by the organization.
In fact, the AAP does NOT recommend universal newborn circumcision. Their position is that there MAY be health benefits, including prevention of STD's and penile cancer, but that the scientific evidence for these things is NOT overwhelming, and ultimately it is a clinical judgement call to be made between the parents and their pediatrician. This is exactly the kind of 'play it safe until the evidence is stronger' recommendation I would expect from any scientifically reputable medical organization.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.