I doubt circumcision can do much to lower the transmission rates of other STDs but the science proves that the reduction for AIDS is very significant, which makes it a valuable tool in reducing the rate of infection throughout Africa where condom usage and education on safe sex practises has traditionally been very low.
It's 60% according to the newest studies. However, we have to take into consideration that the people who underwent the circumcision might be living a safer lifestyle then the ones who aren't undergoing the procedure . And again, the African case features grown men, who are making their own decision about it. Another thing that I'm concerned about (which arguably contradicts my earlier point about safe lifestyles) is that some people will start thinking this:
Experts are also concerned men who get circumcised will mistakenly think they are immune to HIV. That was the case for Samson Agalo, a bicycle taxi operator from Kisumu, Kenya, who recently had a circumcision â€” and has been having sex with multiple partners ever since. "After going for the cut, you don't need condoms," he said.Full article here.
And let's not forget that this has nothing to do with female transfer rates. Sure, fewer infected men = lesser risk to women but an infected, circumcised male is probably just as infectious as an uncircumcised one. The study only took into consideration whether or not the uninfected, circumcised men became infected, after their procedure.
I'm still against infant circumcision. If studies showed that loosing your pinky finger would reduce chances of cancer, should we start chopping them off all our infants? Sure, we could be without it, but shouldn't the choice be ours to make?
Holy crap! This thread just won't die. Why is everyone obsessed with penises?
Do I have to quote myself again? lol!