Couldn't find what you looking for?


Users comments and reviews on article Phymosis Related Complications by SirGan


Wow, I had never heard of this and it sounds like a really scary thing for someone to have. Fortunately, since it happens to kids, it is fortunate that they will be able to have the problem cleared up before they are really too old to notice. It's still very scary so I'm glad you put together something on this for me to read about. I will now know what to tell someone if they're ever in this unfortunate situation with a child.


i feel that although informative this article is incomplete with out mention of preputioplasty where by a tight foreskin can be gently opened up and enlarged by a minor surgical option giving that there is no loss of tissue or nerves and the surgery involved has little trauma to the patient and healing time is short and relitivly painless this should always be recommened as an easy option.
the minor trauma and discomfort experienced from
preputioplasty when compared to the surgical cutting off of the entire foreskin during a
circumcision cannot be compared.


Sadly, this article repeats many mistakes and spreads misinformation.

Firstly, the claim that foreskins are normally retractile by aged 4-6. It is commonly understood that only a minority of boys have retractile foreskins by that age - it is perfectly normal, and not at all problematic, for the foreskin to remain tight until even late puberty.

You also give dangerous advice that the foreskin requires retraction - it does NOT. It is fused by tissue to the glans, the same way the nails are fused to the fingers/toes. The only person who should ever retract a boy's foreskin is the boy himself, when he is ready. Anyone else touching that boy's foreskin is putting him at grave risk.

Then there's the claim that paraphimosis "usually" requires circumcision. This is NOT the case. Paraphimosis can usually be resolved by compressing the glans, allowing the foreskin to slip back over harmlessly.

UTIs are not very common in boys at all, girls are four times as likely to get UTIs. We don't suggest amputation to prevent UTIs in girls - we give them antibiotics, which painlessly and effectively clear up the infection. There has NEVER been any study showing a benefit to circumcised boys past the age of about 1year, and none of the studies showing a benefit to circumcised boys controlled for the fact that uncircumcised boys often suffer from premature forced retraction.

Furthermore, there has been evidence that circumcised men in later life are at increased risk of more serious UTIs, because they don't have preputial irritation to warn them of UTIs, and consequently are diagnosed late, by which time the infection may have reached the kidneys.

STIs are a none-issue. Safe sex is still the best preventable measure, and the studies in Africa showing some (minute!) benefit to surgically altered men are deeply flawed.

More men suffer with breast cancer than with penile cancer. The Cancer Society of America specifically distances itself from the claim that circumcision is a preventative measure, they point out that more boys DIE each year from circumcision complications than will ever contract penile cancer. This is another poor excuse for surgery on infants' genitals.

Looking at a racially related group (like, or example, Jews, doesn't allow conclusions to be drawn about circumcision simply because they practise circumcision. Unless genetics can be ruled out, no comment on circumcision can be made.

This article has some flaws, and some misconceptions, but it does the truly wondrous thing of recognising the important eroto-sexual functions of the foreskin. Perhaps tidying up the mistakes, and pointing out the flaws in the pro-circumcision excuses would improve this article.