Try the powerful ZimEye search:
Selected ZimEye searches:
Abductions Lorcadia Tembo Morgan Tsvangirai Injuries Chiwenga ZANU PF army killingsPublished: August 4, 2012
Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, has taken a swipe at the current UN backed male circumcision for HIV prevention program massively promoted across Africa, and has cautioned people against considering male circumcision as the remedy and automatic control of HIV/AIDS infection.
President Museveni said that the messages promoting the practice were misguiding and may put the lives of many people in danger since it had not been proven to be scientifically true.
“I have witnessed Muslims and other people from tribes that cherish circumcision like the Bagisu, die of Aids. Therefore, who told [health workers and leaders] that circumcision [prevents] HIV [infection]? ” he said.
Museveni advised leaders and health workers to sensitize the youth about the dangers of peer pressure, saying many young people have been influenced by their friends into engaging in early sex and pre-marital sex and early marriages, not in getting circumcised to avoid being infected with HIV.
“[Leaders and health workers] are busy spreading confusion of circumcision, instead of concentrating on behaviour change,” he said.
His comments come as Zimbabwe’s government health advisor to the president Timothy Stamps also rubbished the method hinting that there was no comparative scientific basis for it.
COMMENTARY
Male circumcision has not only this week been subject of debate but has been for a couple of years. Barely two weeks ago the former Minister for Health Timothy Stamps rubbished a UN backed circumcision program that concluded that male circumcision reduces HIV transmission. Stamps argued that ‘it did not make any difference to the adult prevalence rate stating further that studies undertaken on circumcision had shown that countries such as the US with a higher number of circumcised men had a high HIV prevalence rate.’ Additionally that money should be ‘channelled into saving pregnant mothers who die in huge numbers in the country.’

A banner advertises circumcision program in Harare
To a greater extent many would have to agree with Stamps, that rather than channelling money into a project that does not have any guarantees or that would only promote reckless sexual behaviour, the money to jump start this program could be best used in many other areas-one of them being the promotion of sexual awareness and sexual health programs that are much needed, especially in countries where there are high percentages of people contracting HIV/Aids. Male circumcision, the oldest surgical invention that is being pushed as the ‘intervention bullet’ for HIV is not the answer to the ever growing problem of HIV/Aids.
Although there are studies that have suggested that circumcised men are half as likely to contract the virus from unprotected sex as their uncircumcised counterparts, the reality is that circumcision only offers partial protection and there is still a significant risk of contracting HIV and other STI’s if men engage in unprotected sex with an infected partner(s). Further circumcision does not offer the man’s partner any protection from contracting HIV whether he is or is not circumcised.
In addition, this UN backed program will only promote reckless sexual behaviour by irresponsible people who think that circumcision is the new form of protection. However, the actual reality is that condoms are about the most effective way of ensuring that both sexually active males and females are less likely to contract the virus.
Past and present surveys as suggested by (Bourne 2008) have revealed that most men would be willing to undergo the knife. However, the argument is that it would be fairly short-sighted not to consider that while circumcision may offer a 60% chance of not contracting HIV that not coupling circumcision services with education on HIV prevention and safe-sex-provider initiated counselling and testing, as well as referrals would be unwise.
The effect of circumcision on male-to-female HIV transmission has not been extensively researched. Boyle and Hill (2011) highlighted some concerns about the methodology of the three randomised controlled trials (RCT) carried out in Kenya, Uganda and South Africa. They stressed issues to do with researcher expectation bias, participant bias, inadequate double blinding, selection and sampling bias. Wawer et al(2009) in their study on the trials argued that male circumcision was a possible cause of HIV transmission as it was associated with over 60% increased transmission of HIV to female sex partners of circumcised HIV-infected men (Wawer et al., 2009).
The trial involving 922 HIV infected men in Uganda found circumcision did not reduce HIV transmission to uninfected female partners. The findings suggested that the risk of HIV transmission could even have been increased in the six weeks after circumcision due to unhealed wounds from the procedure. However, another study found that male circumcision was not significantly associated with women’s HIV risk.
Furthermore, HIV and the epidemic reality is that women account for the majority of people who live with HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa. Bourne (2008) suggests that a woman is 8 times more likely than a man to contract HIV during intercourse with an HIV positive partner regardless of circumcision.Therefore it is clear that circumcision is an imperfect way to HIV prevention.
Although the main beneficiaries of male circumcision are men let those who are pro-circumcision not lose sight of the fact that women are stakeholders in these programs. Before such a program can be even considered the main focus should be on areas where funding is really necessary, specifically equipping men and women with sexual advice, including men and women’s health groups and those living with HIV, should be involved in the analysis of how circumcision will affect them.
If there is a possible future for this program, it should be closely monitored and evaluated in collaboration with these health groups. Funding should especially be allocated as well to initiating new research into what biomedical, structural, and behavioural interventions can best help women protect themselves from HIV infection such as microbicides (Bourne, 2008).
Perhaps the most important thing that also needs to be done before this program is considered is to communicate clearly about what male circumcision will, and won’t, do for a man and his female partner(s). Furthermore undertake education campaigns to ensure that women and men have a clear understanding that this program is not an excuse to promote promiscuity.
Circumcision does not completely protect men from HIV and circumcised men should continue using condoms to protect themselves and their partner(s) from infection. It should also be made clear that it is no excuse for females to have unprotected sex with circumcised men as there are no guarantees. Male circumcision is not a vaccine, and it is not a cure-all. It is simply one of the best ways to prevent HIV infections in men.
Charity organization HIV/AIDS Zimbabwe (HAZ) have argued in their review that there are multiple factors that need to be examined when evaluating between male circumcision and HIV prevalence especially in relation to risky sexual behavior, time of male circumcision, education, among other factors. HAZ in their counter argument in relation to Stamps, suggest that policy makers need to implement male circumcision as a public health measure to stop growing heterosexual transmission of HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa and globally, as various findings have otherwise suggested that it is in fact effective in conjunction with contraceptive methods (hivaidszimbabwe.org, 2012). However, the question still remains, is this program crucial enough to divert funds from the real pertinent issues in order to test a theory that might not really be effective?
References
Bourne, K (2008) “How Effective Is Male Circumcision at Preventing Sexually Transmitted Infections?” [online] available at http://www.alternet.org/story/92046/how_effective_is_male_circumcision_at_preventing_sexually_transmitted_infections (accessed 25/07/12)
Boyle, G. J., & Hill, G. (2011). Sub-Saharan Africa randomised clinical trials into male circumcision and HIV transmission: Methodological, ethical and legal concerns. Thomson Reuters, 19(316).
HAZ(2012) “To circumcise or not to circumcise: That is the Question? [online] available at http://www.hivaidszimbabwe.org/2012/07/20/to-circumcise-or-not-to-circumcise/ (accessed 24/7/12)
Turner, A.N. (2007) [online] ‘Men’s circumcision status and women’s risk of HIV acquisition in Zimbabwe and Uganda’, AIDS 2007, 21:1779-178937 (accessed 26/07/12)
Wawer, M.J. et al (2009) [online] ‘Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmission to female partners in Rakai, Uganda: a randomised controlled trial’, The Lancet 2009; 374: 229-37 (accessed 26/07/12)
Related articles:
21 Comments on "Uganda’s president dismisses circumcision, HIV research"
mwanawechishobo on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 8:46 am
if you want to sleep with mukadota’s whoring sister just wear a condom to be safe.
Eran Sadeh on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 8:59 am
Uganda’s President, Yoweri Museveni is a very wise man. In Israel people also die of Aids and the circumcision rate here is nearly 100%.
Circumcision does not prevent AIDS.
Circumcision kills, because it leads men to think that once they are circumcised they have an invisible condom. And once you are circumcised your sensory capacity is diminished so naturally you are reluctant to use condoms.
Very Good News!
Guvnor on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 10:05 am
Then all this effort is being wasted on an unkind cut in the name of doing something to curb of the disease. ABC method is better.
CHANDO KUPISA on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 11:50 am
In Zimbabwe the ministry of healthy headed by MDC, acted as if they had made a major breakthrough in combating the spreading of Aids.Posters about circumcision were pasted everywhere including in trees,dramas were beamed ZTV, yet its now being proven that its not the best solution after all.
Comrade Naked on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 2:44 pm
Even those who sleep with Chinese women thinking that their HIV is a fong kong like their goods watch out Chando,condomise n don’t use rhino horn muti to boost your sex appetite n to satisfy your fong kong wife sexual
Cde Red Orange on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 2:49 pm
Wena Naked you are so stupid. All you think about is se’x? Listen young man life is far much more than that. Some of you dissidents who deserted the people’s party, ZANU PF are so deranged you can’t even see beyond the mote before your very eyes. Get some sense mfana wami, nxa!
pedro on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 5:16 pm
Munhu aka checheudzwa nharo too much.
Bomba??? on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 5:46 pm
Comrade Naked muri vahombe! Sando dzenyu!
B Maurene White on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 10:05 pm
ABC the only HIV/AIDS prevention, please visit website for support of this, and see i4SkinHealth an iPhone/Pod/Pad application at iTunes Store, about foreskin restoration. Approximately 200,000 men are now restoring. Tell PEPFAR and all other mutilatiors a GREAT, BIG, NO!!!! TO CIR CIRCUMCISION
Brian on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 10:23 pm
Finally, people are seeing the truth about the dangerous circumcision campaigns. Stop circumcision campaigns and put the money where it needs to be- condoms education and MEDICATION – treatment is prevention.
Mahika Min on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 11:46 pm
This is wonderful news now to stop what has been started, don’t cut apart the genitalia of children, this should be illegal, Educate and supply the adult and teenage population with condoms and discussions of abstinence.
Roland Day on Sat, 4th Aug 2012 11:48 pm
The very long paper by Boyle and Hill which debunks the three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that claim circumcision prevents HIV infection may be viewed at:
http://www.salem-news.com/fms/pdf/2011-12_JLM-Boyle-Hill.pdf
It was published in the December 2011 issue of the Journal of Law and Medicine.
Ken on Sun, 5th Aug 2012 1:12 am
“It is simply one of the best ways to prevent HIV infections in men.”
If circumcision is 60% effective at preventing HIV transmission to men during ******l intercourse while condoms are 99% effective at preventing HIV transmission to all partners in any kind of sexual act, why spend limited funds on both solutions? Clearly using circumcision in combination with condoms is redundant. Don’t forget that these countries have numerous other needs, namely food, water, education, employment and infrastructure that these circumcision campaign budgets could go towards meeting instead.
Anonymous on Sun, 5th Aug 2012 6:05 am
I have a friend who was circumcised but he died of AIDS.Cutting the fore skin can’t be the answer,instead its a problem
Wing on Sun, 5th Aug 2012 9:14 am
Within the Boyle/Hill Paper which you quoted, it was pointed out that the 60% prevention statistic is also a sham. the 60% they were referring to was the relative protection (that, according to their error-filled study, the cut group had 60% less HIV contractions than the control) as opposed to absolute protection (which, in reality is only 1,8%, which is not statistically significant.
In addition to that, I would like to point out that WHO’s action plan for HIV/AIDS for Europe is conspicuously missing circumcision as a supposed action for methods of prevention: you can read it here:
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/153875/e95953.pdf
So, what’s good for the goose is not always good for the gander?
Essentially, special interest groups are pushing their ideas on Africans, again… because they know they can get away with it there whereas in the rest of the world, we’re already wise to their games. Tell your friends, tell your family, tell everyone you know that CONDOMS, not circumcision is the way to go if you are going to be having casual sex. Even better, stick with one partner. Is your life worth risking for one moment of pleasure?
Patrick Smyth on Sun, 5th Aug 2012 3:11 pm
It is good to see that so many people are now realising that the US circumcision brigade are on a mission to convince the world that they can save us all by circumcising as many men as possible. These people are physically and psychologically damaged by the circumcision that they themselves had inflicted upon them for no good reason.
Lynn on Sun, 5th Aug 2012 8:54 pm
Circumcision to prevent HIV is ridiculous. All these pro-circumcision campaigns clearly say “You still have to wear a condom.” That means that even the people who are promoting circumcision trust condoms more.
richie moyo on Mon, 6th Aug 2012 11:00 am
thats a true statesman. haungatambiri zvese-zvese. circumsion does not prevent hiv in africa because tiri ana sinyoro, anazuma.
its like you are urging run-in and run-out during sex as a prevention of pregnancy. try it, kana yabata usazoiramba kuti sandi yangu ndaibuditsa kana zvakuuya
Marc on Mon, 6th Aug 2012 10:39 pm
Thank you, president Yoweri Museveni. The circumcision campaign is being pushed by those who have a financial stake in the whole thing, and they’re purposefully not telling the men about the research in Korea, Scandanavia, China and the U.S. finding circumcision removes the most sensitive part of the penis and often adversely affects sexual please, especially as men get older. The foreskin is there fore a reason. It is not a mistake. It has a sexual function. It protects the glans and acts as a lubricant and buffer during sex. Stop lying to African men. Promote condoms and safe sex, not genital mutilation. And stop wasting taxpayer money on this idiocy when that money can used for things like condoms, fresh water, medicine, food, jobs, etc.
Gringo on Tue, 7th Aug 2012 12:36 pm
Museven achiripo? Enda mhani wagarisa kunge Gushungo.
Pure on Tue, 7th Aug 2012 4:00 pm
Musuveni. when you are right why not stop this nonsense circumfetish jewish-american agenda. Put prohibition on any circumcision in the country. Anybody mutilating genitalia of men for whatever reason except cancer on the foreskin should be jailed and should also be possibly given capital punishment.