字體：小 中 大 |
|
|
|
| 2014/06/03 23:23:50瀏覽701｜回應0｜推薦0 | |
割包皮無法防止子宮頸癌、陰莖癌及愛滋病的發生，反增加傷亡風險 經常在基督教宣傳的文章中提到割包皮的好處 http://www.godsword7.net/G16CancerOfCervix.htm 但現代研究反發現割包皮根本無力防止子宮頸癌、陰莖癌及愛滋病的發生，反增加傷亡風險 1. 包皮環切能預防子宮頸癌？ Does Circumcision Prevent Cervical Cancer? 這是許多有關於割包皮被散佈的神話之一，它說沒行割禮的男性會傳播性病給女性伴侶，讓她們得子宮頸癌的機會較大。但這是真的，或醫學神話? 人類乳頭瘤病毒和子宮頸癌的新聞讓許多人關注，過去的研究聲稱不割包皮的男子讓婦女得子宮頸癌獲病率較高有關連，然而不同的研究則指出二者無關，這二邊的聲明誰是正確，我們來探究真相。 聲稱割包皮會減少婦女得子宮頸癌，是Ernst L. Wynder等人，1954年Wynder說這群曾嫁給作過割禮的猶太男人的猶太婦女，患子宮頸癌的比例較低，然而，在1958年的時候，瓊斯，麥克唐納和布瑞斯羅夫(Jones, Macdonald, and Breslow)研究子宮頸癌，他們發現包皮環切與子宮頸癌之間沒有任何關係 ，1962年斯特恩和尼利(Stern and Neely)的一項研究發現，割禮不是猶太婦女子宮頸癌產生的因素，而是多次婚姻所帶來的風險增加，另在1964年， 1965年， 1970年和1973年的研究都做過尋找嘗試並發現子宮頸癌和不割包皮的男性之間的聯繫，確定沒有關係。 到1980年代人類乳頭瘤病毒(HPV)和子宮頸癌致病的關係才被發現，後來相關的研究也經証實營養不良，吸煙，口服避孕藥服用，性行為，傳染性疾病，或性伴侶有陰莖癌或子宮頸癌的，或有生殖器疣的才有關聯。 2002年在新英格蘭醫學雜誌的一篇文章稱，包皮環切減少了導致發生子宮頸癌的風險。但這沒能成為媒體頭條新聞，許多人認為這論文標題並不正確，因在檢驗方法上犯錯並與其他已發表的研究衝突，這作者也招來參與研究的其他人抨擊，同時期的新英格蘭醫學雜誌的社論也認為這論文不可信。 這無效報告的最大缺點是作者讓受測男人採自我檢測而非採用身體檢查，以得出結論，Castellsaque 和其他作者僅選用性關系單一的女人， 在這文化中對某些類群的女性，那些有婚前性行為和婚外情的女性很少會被採樣，因為子宮頸癌的潛伏期很長，很可能一些得病婦女是被以前的性夥伴所感染乳頭瘤病毒HPV而沒能確認。 同時這在五個國家進行的研究，沒有考慮吸煙，性生活習慣，使用口服避孕藥的發病率變化，或任何現在已知有助於子宮頸癌的風險的其他因素。 儘管這研究存在缺陷且結論誇張，許多人仍會引用它作為包皮環切可以減少子宮頸癌率的“證據” ，在古哥Google可找到480,000頁的支持割包皮可減少子宮頸癌風險的這類文章 但大多數的醫學機構不會將不割包皮與子宮頸癌連結。 美國癌症協會的網站上也沒有割包皮能避免子宮頸癌風險的指導，英國癌症研究中心的網站指出：“研究人員相當確定，未受割禮的男性只要注意保持外陰部的清潔，就不會比割過包皮的人，讓他們的性伴侶獲致風險，美國小兒科學會指出，數據不足以推薦新生兒進行包皮環切; 加拿大兒科協會報告說，沒有醫學會指示男性新生兒須割包皮。 事實上，美國疾病控制中心的報告指出，雖然美國男性行包皮環切術的比率極高，但得性病的比率也極高，如果包皮環切術與性病有關聯是真實的，那美國得性病的患者應該很低才對，但實際上美國人得生殖器皰疹，淋病和披衣菌患者是非常多的。 有二個理由是重要的 1.研究顯示披衣菌會增加婦女得子宮頸癌的機會。 2.1997年Laumann作的研究顯示美國那些割包皮的男性，他們患披衣菌的比例是千分之25.4與得泡疹的有千分之14.9; 相較沒割包皮的男性，患披衣菌的比例是零，得泡疹的有千分之8.1都比割包皮的患病比率低。 依據世界衛生組織報告得子宮頸癌比率最高的國家是美國，意大利，澳大利亞，德國，荷蘭，加拿大和法國， 相較割包皮少，婦女得子宮頸癌低的國家為荷蘭，比利時，法國，德國，瑞士，奧地利，斯堪的納維亞半島，蘇聯，中國和日本。 顯然就全球觀查而言，割包皮並不能減少婦女患子宮癌 但這割包皮會減少婦女患子宮頸的謊言還是繼續在全球散播，也沒事實能証明這種結論，其他因素，如吸煙，不良的飲食習慣，服用 荷爾蒙節育，性傳播疾病是更應對美國婦女患子宮頸癌高比率負責， 有關子宮頸癌的消息，與致病的謊言，已被揭破。 ============= 2. 割包皮預防愛滋病患不成反增加 肯亞每日新聞2013年9月11日 THE KENYAN DAILY POST, Nairobi, September 11, 2013 Big Blow as circumcision of LUO MEN fails to reduce HIV/AIDS infections in Nyanza http://goo.gl/OXVpTW 摘要: 肯亞衛生部與非政府組織 NGO送獎金以獎勵男性割包皮，結果並沒能減少愛滋病，反而從先前的14.9% 患病率增到15.1%. -------------- 3.每年割包皮至死的人數比死於陰莖癌的人多 美國的醫學資料顯示陰莖癌只佔全部男性癌症個案百分之零點四，即每1400多名癌症男士中只有一人患上。而陰莖癌之年發生率，一向小於每十萬人1人，屬於罕見的癌症。 包皮環切術的風險 包皮環切術算是一項手術，發生併發症的風險在所難免。美國小兒科醫學會（AAP）、美國醫學會（AMA）和美國家庭科醫學會（AAFP）依據大規模的統計，公佈此項手術的併發症比率約在0.2%到0.6%。兒童保護署（CPS）認同以上數據，但引用另一篇統計指出2%到10%更接近實情。皇家亞澳醫師學會（Royal Australasian College of Physicians）的一份資料表示嬰兒割包皮的併發症比率從0.2%~0.6%到2%~10%，另一篇資料則為1%~5%。以上的資料顯示併發症比率高低取決於包皮手術的狀況和所謂"併發症"如何定義，故有不同的數據差異。 。嬰兒割包皮時若是傷口沒有癒合在一起，而粘到龜頭時，會形成黏連。嚴重的話甚至傷害到陰莖，皇家亞澳醫師學會統計包皮環切術造成陰莖重殘者約為百萬分之一 5歲娃割包皮意外死亡https://www.top1health.com/Article/2638 割包皮 4歲童枉死http://goo.gl/w06d25 國外割包皮死亡報導 http://www.circumstitions.com/death.html ====================================== Does Circumcision Prevent Cervical Cancer? file:///C:/Users/louis/AppData/Roaming/Moonchild%20Productions/Pale%20Moon/Profiles/r4jzvxxd.default/ScrapBook/data/20140530090727/index.html FlagPost a comment It is one of the many myths floating around about circumcision, that males who are not circumcised have a greater risk of spreading sexually transmitted diseases and that their partners have a grater chance of having cervical cancer. But is it true, or just another medical myth? With HPV and cervical cancer making news lately many people are looking at the causes of both. Studies have be shown that claim to link circumcision with higher rates of penile and cervical cancer, yet on the opposite spectrum there are also studies out that report no correlation. With claims on either side it is helpful to look at the facts. The claim linking circumcision and a reduced risk of cervical cancer first appeared in 1954 by Ernst L. Wynder et al. Wynder claimed that Jewish women with circumcised husbands had lower rates of cervical cancer as a group. However in 1958 when Jones, Macdonald, and Breslow studied cervical cancer they found no relationship between circumcision and cervical cancer. A study in 1962 by Stern and Neely found that circumcision was not a factor for cervical cancer among Jewish women, however multiple marriages did increase the risk. Studies done in 1964, 1965, 1970, and 1973 all tried to find a link between cervical cancer and intact males with no conclusive relationship found. It was in the 1980's that the link between HPV and cervical cancer was discovered. Later research confirmed the link between HPV and cervical cancer. Studies showed an increase in risk for malnutrition, smoking, use of oral contraceptives, sexual behavior, infection with sexually transmitted diseases, or sexual partners with penile or cervical cancer, or genital warts. In 2002 an article in the New England Journal of Medicine claimed that circumcision reduced the risk of causing cervical cancer. What did not make many headlines, however, was that this article was an inaccurate press release. Methodological flaws, conflict with other published research, and other research by the same authors drew criticism; and editorial problems at the New England Journal of Medicine at the time of the article's release made the reported conclusions less than credible. One of the largest flaws that invalidated the study was that the authors used self-reported status not status determined by physical examination to draw their conclusions. The men in the study reported their circumcision status without being examined. Castellsaque and the other authors also only used women who reported having had only one sexual partner, though women in some of the groups studied lived in cultures where premarital sex and extra-marital affairs would rarely be admitted to. Because of cervical cancer's long incubation period it is quite possible that some of the women were infected with HPV by previous partners not admitted to. Also the study combined studies done in five countries without considering the varying incidence of cigarette smoking, sexual habits, use of oral contraceptives, or any of the other factors that are now known to contribute to the risk of cervical cancer. Despite the study being flawed and the conclusions exaggerated, many still cite it as "proof" that circumcision can reduce cervical cancer rates. A quick search on Google can pull up over 480,000 pages referencing the supposed reduced risk of cervical cancer by circumcision. And yet most medical institutions do not link non-circumcision to cervical cancer. On the American Cancer Society's website no where is circumcision listed in their tips for avoiding risk factors for cervical cancer. The Cancer Research UK website states that "researchers are fairly sure that as long as uncircumcised men are careful about keeping their genitals clean, the risk of cervical cancer in their partners should not be any greater than that for circumcised men." The American Academy of Pediatrics states that data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. And the Canadian Paediatric Society reports that no medical indication for male neonatal circumcision. In fact, though the U.S. has an extremely high circumcision rate for males the Centers for Disease Control reported there is a very high rates of sexually transmitted diseases for the U.S. Diseases that should low if the circumcision/STD link were true such as genital herpes, gonorrhea and chlamydia are actually very high. This is important for two reasons: 1 research has shown that having chlamydia increases a woman's chances of cervical cancer, and 2 a study done in 1997 on circumcision in the U.S. by Laumann shown that circumcised men reported riskier sexual behavior and found a rate of rate of 25.4/1000 for chlamydia in circumcised males and a rate of 14.9/1000 for in circumcised males, while intact males had a rate of zero for chlamydia and 8.1/1000 for herpes. According to the World Health Organization countries with the highest cervical cancer rates are the U.S., Italy, Australia, Germany, The Netherlands, Canada and France. Countries with the lowest rates of circumcision, however, include Holland, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Scandinavia, the U.S.S.R., China, and Japan. It is obvious that circumcision rates do not affect the cervical cancer rates across the globe. Though the myth that circumcision reduces the risk of cervical cancer is still wide spread, the facts simply do not support that conclusion. Other factors such as smoking, a poor diet, taking hormonal birth control, and having certain sexually transmitted diseases are far more responsible for the cervical cancer rates in the U.S. As more information about cervical cancer and its causes comes out the myths around this malady are being debunked. |
|
| ( 不分類｜不分類 ) |
