Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Circumcision Death Rate Estimates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Circumcision Death Rate Estimates

    I just noticed two articles for Italy about tots dying from circumcision. They're from 2018 and 2019. Each says about 5000 circumcisions per year are done in Italy. That would give a crude estimate of deaths per patient in Italy of 1 in 5000.

    See: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46671457
    and https://kfor.com/news/infant-dies-af...officials-say/

    In Brazil where careful records are kept by their national health service, we get an estimate of 1 in 7700.

    See: https://www.circumstitions.com/death.html#brazil

    In the US, Bollinger estimated 117 deaths per year (about 1 in 10,000). Earp was more conservative but identified at least 1 in 50,000 cuts leading to death of a heathy normal baby.

    See: https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Infant_Deaths
    and https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...ngAbstract/224
    -Ron Low
    [email protected]
    847 414-1692 Chicago

  • #2
    In all honesty, I've found the "circumcision causes ~100 deaths per year" argument to be one of our weaker ones. I'm very skeptical of that number. If there were 100 deaths per year, that corresponds to approximately 200 parents per year whose story is, "We had our baby in June and had to bury him in July because of his circumcision." Well, the obvious question is where are these parents? Are literally all 200 of them in denial, too ashamed of what they did, or being effectively gaslit by the medical community? Why aren't any of them making public statements or at least chiming in on intactivist forums? I know this forum all too well and I'm going to get a lot of pushback for that skepticism. Just point me to a few personal accounts of parents losing their son in this way and it will be easier for me to believe that it is accurate.

    The Earp study linked above sets a more modest estimate of 20 boys per year (200 over ten years) who died following circumcision. From what I can gather, they do not assert a causal relation, just that the boy died during the same hospital visit. This needs to be compared with the mortality rate of the entire infant population to determine whether circumcision might be a contributing factor. (With the added wrinkle that boys who already have severe medical conditions are less likely to be brought to the hospital for circumcision, somewhat increasing the mortality rate of non-circumcised boys.)

    To be clear, one death is too many and even zero deaths is too many because the central issue should be the person's bodily autonomy. I just think we should get our statistics straight before parroting them across other forums, as I so frequently see.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by eeeee View Post
      approximately 200 parents per year whose story is, "We had our baby in June and had to bury him in July because of his circumcision." Well, the obvious question is where are these parents? Are literally all 200 of them in denial, too ashamed of what they did, or being effectively gaslit by the medical community? Why aren't any of them making public statements
      The answer is that when the hospital settles a lawsuit for negligence, the payment is often contingent on a non-disclosure no-talking-to-the-press agreement. I think these ought to be illegal. Lawyers will say they allow for larger amounts of cash be offered to grieving familes. But the cost to society is too great.

      But I agree that deaths is not our issue. If something was necessary and carried a tiny risk of death that would be one thing (e.g. driving in a car to get to a job). Something that can wait for the patient's informed consent is entirely a different issue.
      -Ron Low
      [email protected]
      847 414-1692 Chicago

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by eeeee View Post
        In all honesty, I've found the "circumcision causes ~100 deaths per year" argument to be one of our weaker ones. I'm very skeptical of that number. If there were 100 deaths per year, that corresponds to approximately 200 parents per year whose story is, "We had our baby in June and had to bury him in July because of his circumcision." Well, the obvious question is where are these parents? Are literally all 200 of them in denial, too ashamed of what they did, or being effectively gaslit by the medical community? Why aren't any of them making public statements or at least chiming in on intactivist forums? I know this forum all too well and I'm going to get a lot of pushback for that skepticism. Just point me to a few personal accounts of parents losing their son in this way and it will be easier for me to believe that it is accurate.

        The Earp study linked above sets a more modest estimate of 20 boys per year (200 over ten years) who died following circumcision. From what I can gather, they do not assert a causal relation, just that the boy died during the same hospital visit. This needs to be compared with the mortality rate of the entire infant population to determine whether circumcision might be a contributing factor. (With the added wrinkle that boys who already have severe medical conditions are less likely to be brought to the hospital for circumcision, somewhat increasing the mortality rate of non-circumcised boys.)

        To be clear, one death is too many and even zero deaths is too many because the central issue should be the person's bodily autonomy. I just think we should get our statistics straight before parroting them across other forums, as I so frequently see.
        On the contrary, I thought what you've written was well stated.

        Comment

        Working...
        X