To circumcise or not to circumcise?

[Losty]

Studies that are peer reviewed. And done outside of America.

Still, even from your own link to the AAP earlier they say there's not enough benefit to do this routinely.

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."  

I didn't dismiss it because I don't like what it says. It says 1 thing I don't agree with which is that the benefits outweigh the risk enough to allow people to do it if they want to. It still agrees with me because it says that there is not enough benefits to do this routinely.

I don't like American studies because they tend to be done in whatever way necessary to get the result they want. Often including not even using American people as their test subjects.

Not having my son circumcised was one of the hardest things I have done as a parent. I was harassed by doctors and nurses. I was made to feel like a bad mother. I was told my son would be at high risk for penile cancer. This being in 2009. The push used to be a lot harder. Generally we should trust the medical professionals. I do not. Call me a crazy theist if you like, but I don't trust American doctors on this subject. These same doctors that think foreskin should retract from shortly after birth. They hand out misinformation to new parents and it really irks me.

However, I did not do what you said. I did not dismiss that link for any other reason than that I had already read it. I actually linked to that the day before.