Quote:
Originally posted by fastpat
There is no known rationale behind the notion that circumcision reduces viral transmission. HIV is transmitted via bodily fluids, not transdermally.
The fact of circumcision and confounding variable of muslim influence would have had to have been controlled for in the study, and if it was not then the study is indeed flawed to the point of being worthless.
|
HIV transmission in a nutshell:
Man puts penis into woman. Penis is uncircumcized and therefore the glans is a bit less toughened. This makes micro tears in the skin of the glans easier. Add to this that there IS IN FACT FLUID secreted from the vagina during sex (Pat, I know you are in your 60s...but yes, this did USED to happen), and this fluid will then become trapped between the glans and foreskin after withdrawal. Also, the study suggests that the epithelium of the inner foreskin is more susceptible to viral infection, thereby increasing the risk of transmission.
Pat, you really should stick to talking about things that you have a clue about...like bunkers and southern history.
