New HIV/AIDS Vaccine: An Old Jewish Ritual…

A South African AIDS expert Saturday advocated male circumcision as the best available “vaccine” against the virus in his country, where an estimated 6 million people are infected and more than 600 people die every day.

So began a hopeful but controversial Circumcision: The ultimate slice of faith for Jews that may also offer protection against contracting HIV/AIDS…

It is instructive to note that the findings of the Soweto Study (of this remarkably prophylactic “association between circumcision and reduced risk of HIV”) mirror the findings of a Kenya Study that was conducted by Canadian researchers in 1987. And, the AP reported that these findings hold such promise that the U.S. National Health Institute is currently conducting a Uganda Study with a sample of 5,000 men.

All very hopeful indeed; therefore, one might ask, what’s so controversial? In two words: religion and custom.

Because, whether to cut or not to cut has been the contentious question facing Western civilization for thousands of years. Circumcision is most associated with Jews who practice it as a “mark of their covenant with God”. But, even though most Christians reject this religious covenant, many have adopted circumcision as a standard medical practice – as an old wives’ panacea for everything from curing syphilis to foiling the sin of masturbation.

Even as a non-religious custom, however, circumcision is not without controversy. Because where Americans are routinely circumcised, their counterparts in Latin America, Europe, Asia and Africa rarely have this elective surgery. (And, this fact is especially ironic in the case of Africa where more women than men are circumcised – as a cultural rite of passage for African women of all religious faiths.)

Yet, 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.

But I still have reservations. Because I wonder about the controls for these Afro-centric studies: For example, even though HIV/AIDS is a predominantly heterosexual disease throughout Africa, how would the researchers have controlled for high risk behaviours that might exacerbate the risk of HIV infections?

I also wonder why researchers have not conducted a follow-up study with circumcised homosexuals in America as one controlled group and non-circumcised homosexuals in Europe as the other to see if the results of the 1987 Kenya Study would be replicated. After all, whatever their attachment to the foreskin, I suspect most uncircumcised men (regardless of sexual orientation) would rather have a bris (Jewish term for circumcision) if that would lower their risk of contracting HIV.

Note: I know that some people resent the constant gardening amongst Africans to find human guinea pigs for pharmaceutical research. And, I suppose I would too if HIV/AIDS were not killing Africans – as opposed to people on other continents – at a ratio of 25:1.

Yet, South African President Thabo Mbeki is roundly here for more information on this disease and to share your concerns with the recently founded Ogranisation of African First Ladies Against HIV/AIDS that can be instrumental in promoting male circumcision as a medical necessity throughout Africa.

News and Politics