AIDS prevention: To briss, or not to briss: that is the question….

Last September, I published this article extolling the findings of scientific studies that established a positive link between male circumcision (briss) and substantial reduction in the incidence of HIV infections. I lamented, however, that two words: custom and religion, explained why this simple preventative measure was not being practiced to help stem the epidemic of AIDS in Africa.

I maintained, however, that:

…whatever the religious or cultural taboo, if circumcision is as effective in fighting HIV as these African studies suggest, then not practicing it as a standard medical procedure – especially in areas with high incidence of HIV/AIDS – is irresponsible, if not inhumane.

Yet I received a flood of emails – primarily from Europeans – ridiculing me as a cultural bigot naively citing spurious research (perhaps, ironically, because the studies were conducted by an African scientist) as a panacea for this global health crisis. But in my broadcast response, I merely challenged them to present scientific data to refute the findings or suggest any measure that might have a more prophylactic effect on the spread of the AIDS virus. That effectively damned the vituperative emails.

Nevertheless, I was buoyed in my support for this admittedly controversial AIDS-prevention strategy last week when World Heath Organisation (WHO) researchers confirmed the findings of the African scientist:

They analyzed data from trials that showed men who had been circumcised had a significantly lower risk of infection with the AIDS virus, and calculated that if all men were circumcised over the next 10 years, some two million new infections and around 300,000 deaths could be avoided.

But particularly relevant to my African friends, WHO researchers found that:

In West Africa, male circumcision is common and the prevalence of HIV is low, while in southern Africa the reverse is true….This analysis shows that male circumcision could avert nearly six million new infections and save three million lives in sub-Saharan Africa over the next twenty years.

Therefore, I hope preputial Europeans who seem to care for the foreskin of African penises more than they do for African lives will find this follow-up study more credible. Perhaps then they will support efforts to prevail upon our African brothers (especially in South Africa) to suspend cultural myths and consider seriously the health benefits of circumcision.

NOTE: Since some critics might find these new findings more persuasive if they were reported by a respectable European news organization (as opposed to the Washington Post), I invite them to click here to read about them as reported by Agence French Presse (AFP).

circumcision HIV AIDS