What is it with some of these doctors?

[dpmtherrien]

For some time I've been getting some pain from my second toe, the one next to the big toe. I thought it might have been an ingrown nail, but I really couldn't see clearly if it was. I went to a foot doc who looked at it and told me it was a callus on the tip of that toe. I told him it was really bothersome so right away he said he could cut it out and take care of the problem. When he told me what was involved with the procedure, and the recoup time, I told him I'd think it over. I didn't want to get involved with the hassle of going through the recovery time, which would be several weeks. I've had a couple of procedures on my feet in the past for calcium in my big toe joints and was told I'd be fine in a few weeks. Well that was almost 20 years ago, and I still have pain in the area of the operations. Anyway getting back to the callus thing, I saw my primary care doc, had him look at it, and he told me to try just putting cream or lotion on it to soften the callus up before doing anything. If that didn't work go back to the foot doc. Long story short, I've been doing just that, using intensive care lotion for the past month or so, and the callus is almost gone, no pain and things are fine. Kind of makes you wonder about some of these doc's who just jump at the chance to operate. The foot guy probably saw the dollar signs when I came in, and thought he's make the easy bucks instead of suggesting the easy, and much better way of taking care of the problem.

Makes you wonder doesn't it? Seems that you're not a patient, you're a customer.

 

[beginish]

Sometimes it's like calling tech support about your computer not turning on, and they come by, mess around with a few things and pronounce it dead, only to find out that the plug had been kicked out of the wall.

 

[jd_1138]

I agree. Too many procedures. It's like routine male circumcision. It removes 20,000 sensitive nerves and it removes skin that keeps the penis sensitive, yet it's still a fairly common procedure in the USA. I think it's down to about 50% now. It used to be much higher. To the Dr, circumcision is a quick 10 minute procedure that nets a $1000 charge to the HMO/PPO, but to the infant it could mean a lifetime of less fulfilling sex and even impotence. The USA has way higher rates of Viagra being prescribed than Europe where circumcision is rare. A lot of grown men who've been circumcized as adults report losing half or more of their sexual pleasure after being cut.

And there's nothing wrong with a foreskin. It stays fused to the boy's penis until it gradually loosens in puberty where he can then pull it back to wash it. There was a CA law to ban circumcision, but the courts declared the law to be an unconstitutional deprivation of parental rights. So I guess if a parent wanted to chop off the kid's toe, they should be allowed to also?!?! And the ban against circumcision would've protected the parents from later guilt. A lot of dads are cut themselves so they have no idea how sex with a foreskin feels, so they want their sons to look like them, so they have their boys mutilated. And some of the uncut fathers don't realize how much is lost without a foreskin, so they may decide to let their sons get cut in order to save them 30 seconds of extra washing in the shower. And of course, the mother is probably pushing for circumcision because it's what she is familiar with. It's a shame.

 

[SEnSE]

Once the proverbial "they" learned that they can make more money on sick people than they can on healthy and well people the state of our healthcare and our lives was doomed. Most decisions today are being made not with the best interest of the patient in mind, but rather the bottom line.

 

[raisindot]

I agree. Too many procedures. It's like routine male circumcision. It removes 20,000 sensitive nerves and it removes skin that keeps the penis sensitive, yet it's still a fairly common procedure in the USA. I think it's down to about 50% now. It used to be much higher. To the Dr, circumcision is a quick 10 minute procedure that nets a $1000 charge to the HMO/PPO, but to the infant it could mean a lifetime of less fulfilling sex and even impotence. The USA has way higher rates of Viagra being prescribed than Europe where circumcision is rare. A lot of grown men who've been circumcized as adults report losing half or more of their sexual pleasure after being cut.

Oh, puhleeze. Try to convince 7 million Jewish men and a billion Muslim men circumcised at birth that it means a lifetime of less fulfilling sex and/or impotence and you'll get over a billion rebuttals, plus the evidence of much higher birthrates in Muslim countries and among Orthodox Jews than in the US and among European countries as a whole, where birthrates have been declining for decades. (Now, circumcising adults is a completely different story and mostly unnecessary for anyone other than those converting to Judaism or Islam; doing any kind of surgery to any fully developed appendage carries risk of dysfunction.) There are also plenty of studies that claim that circumcision protects against STDs and enhances sex and potency; frankly, I don't believe either side of the argument and can only use my own experience as the basis for my conclusions which, if you must know, completely contradict your claims.

There is also absolutely no plausible cause and effect connection between Viagra use and incidence of circumcision. We in the US simply have far easier access to it than Europeans do and the American attitude toward healthcare is "if a pill can fix it, get it."

 

[jtb]

Its the old, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!

 

[jd_1138]

frankly, I don't believe either side of the argument and can only use my own experience as the basis for my conclusions which, if you must know, completely contradict your claims.

Were you circumcised as an adult? That's the only way to be able to tell if it makes a difference in your sex life. Some men say: "I've been circumcised ever since I was a baby, and sex feels great to me." But they really lack a credible basis of comparison.

 

[raisindot]

Were you circumcised as an adult? That's the only way to be able to tell if it makes a difference in your sex life. Some men say: "I've been circumcised ever since I was a baby, and sex feels great to me." But they really lack a credible basis of comparison.

No I was circumcised at birth. 99% of circumcisions occur at birth. And you're right, we don't have anything to compare it to, and neither do those who weren't circumcised at birth. So any study making and claim about impotence and/or pleasure based on those circumcised at birth are completely invalid, since there's no way to compare data on this based on lifelong experience.

So all that leaves findings about men who have had adult circumcisions. Since this is a very small number of people and is rarely done for anything other than religious reasons (I know men who gone through it for this purpose; it's absolutely not pleasant at all and something a man is unlikely to forget. So they say), there already may be psychological resistance on the part of the man undergoing this procedure that could lead to future impotence and/or lack of pleasure. Similar claims have been made about men who have undergone vasectomies and prostate operations. I'd think that any operation done to a man "in that area" could carry a whole weight of psychological (pardon the pun) baggage that, coupled with potential loss of testosterone (from vasectomies and prostate operations) could lead to these detrimental sexual effects. But I hardly believe that the snipping off of foreskin itself if the cause itself.

 

[jd_1138]

"Yes I was."

You were circumcised as an adult? But yet you say you have nothing to compare it to? If you were circumcised as an adult, then you can make a comparison of sex before and after circumcision. But then again that would only be one person's perspective. There are studies showing that there is a statistically significant correlation between being circumcised and a loss of sensation. Plus I've read a ton of anecdotal information from guys who've been cut as adults who wish they hadn't gone through the procedure. You can actually restore the foreskin. Takes about a year to do so. You know how those people in Africa stretch their lips and ears to accomodate those huge discs? The same concept applies to the foreskin or what's left of it. You can use medical tape and gradually regrow your foreskin. A lot of guys who were circ'd as adults (or as babies) who were unhappy with the loss of sensation have regrown their foreskins and report that it's almost as good as the original.

But bottom line: it's flippant and not prudent to just say "well you don't have any proof that sex would be better if you had a foreskin, so quit whining about it." That's like telling a person whose arm was chopped off as a kid: "how do you know you needed that arm? You never had that arm!" It should be a man's personal choice whether or not to be circumcised. Even his parents shouldn't be allowed to make that decision for him. He should be allowed to grow up and decide on his own.

 

[jazzman]

Its the old, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!

According to the non-surgeon doctors I know, this is what it's all about, more so than a dishonest desire for financial gain. Surgeons tend to view a problem as something that can be solved by surgery. Other docs see the same problem as something that can be solved by medicine.

 

[jazzman]

...It should be a man's personal choice whether or not to be circumcised. Even his parents shouldn't be allowed to make that decision for him. He should be allowed to grow up and decide on his own.

Freedom of religion? A parental right to consider current studies regarding STDs? Who gets to choose--the government?

 

[Neognosis]

I am surprised that they did not try to put you on anti-depressants for your toe issue making you sad.

 

[jd_1138]

Freedom of religion? A parental right to consider current studies regarding STDs? Who gets to choose--the government?

Banning male genital circumcising doesn't mean the government is choosing. It means that the child will grow up and choose HIMSELF if he wants to get circumcised.

Freedom of religion?!?! What if the kid grows up and decides he doesn't want to be Jewish or Muslim and thus wishes his genitals hadn't been cut? To me, true freedom of religion is letting the kid grow up and decide what body parts he wants to have cut off in observance of religion. There's a ton of ignorance about circumcision. Most men were cut at birth in the USA, so they don't know what they are missing, and this practice gets continued generation after generation. And the STD risk is only if the man is dirty and doesn't keep it clean, but those numbers of lower STD rates among cut men are open to debate anyway.

 

[jd_1138]

According to the non-surgeon doctors I know, this is what it's all about, more so than a dishonest desire for financial gain. Surgeons tend to view a problem as something that can be solved by surgery. Other docs see the same problem as something that can be solved by medicine.

Our family doctor is an Osteopath (D.O.). He seems to take a more holistic approach to medicine and has done back adjustments on my wife for some pain she's had instead of instantly just writing a bunch of prescriptions for medicines.

Our previous doctor was an MD, and he had my wife on a bunch of different meds, and she felt bad all the time. So we switched to the local Dr. (the osteopath), and he cut her down to half the number of meds and changed some of them and adjusted the dosage. She feels better now. I am not saying DO's are better than MD's. All Dr's are different.

 

[Neognosis]

You can not, and should not, legislate circumcision out of existence. For one, it IS a religious issue.

The way to end circumcision is through a change in social attitude. Which is the only way to change anything. The law is an afterthought. Already, less and less boys are being circumcised in American hospitals without any unnecessary law.

 

[jd_1138]

For one, it IS a religious issue.

I think the boy himself should be able to decide if he wants religion to dictate whether he gets errogenous tissue cut off his penis or not after he's an adult. It shouldn't be the parent's choice to force religion and genital cutting onto the kid. If you think a parent should be able to mutilate a kid's body over the parents' religion and take away his choice, you are just plain wrong. Sorry. And don't bother to sit here and argue further. It will just turn into an uncivil mess.

 

[Obsessed]

Careful, guys, we don't want this thread to get cut off, resulting in less stimulating discussion.

 

[Haggises]

Indeed.
Let's be more circumspect and get back to calluses before this gets nipped in the bud.

 

[ouch]

Careful, guys, we don't want this thread to get cut off, resulting in less stimulating discussion.

I see what you did there.

 

[Neognosis]

I think the boy himself should be able to decide if he wants religion to dictate whether he gets errogenous tissue cut off his penis or not

That's good for you, but part of religion is not caring WHAT you or anyone else thinks.

It shouldn't be the parent's choice to force religion and genital cutting onto the kid. If you think a parent should be able to mutilate a kid's body over the parents' religion and take away his choice, you are just plain wrong.

I don't think that parent's should do this, maybe I was not clear. But I do not think that there should be a law against an established western religious practice. PERIOD.

The culture is shifting away from circumcision, and as long as people like you don't try to legislate the issue, it should be mostly eradicated in the near future.

CULTURE changes people's behavior, not laws.