Conflicting studies on HIV protection for gay men
ATLANTA — College years are filled with memories, none more exciting for Louis Rahim than the first time he laid eyes on an uncircumcised penis while attending one of the schools that make up the Atlanta University Center.
He remembers every detail of the encounter, from the screen name of the guy he hooked up with, to the animal Rahim thought of when he first saw what was in his pants.
“The skin covered the head, and it reminded me of an elephant trunk,” Rahim said.
More skin is almost a deal-breaker for D.J. Levi, 26, who has a “strong preference” for circumcised men.
“If it’s big enough, I can overlook it,” joked Levi, who added that “my reasons are dumb” for being biased against uncut penises.
“I think circumcised looks better, and it’s more hygienic,” Levi said. “Guys have to be taught the proper way to clean uncircumcised foreskin, and everyone isn’t taught that.
“I’ve actually known guys to have to get circumcision done because they got an infection from improper cleaning,” Levi said.
Despite their differing tastes when it comes to their partners’ phallus, Rahim and Levi share the perception that uncircumcised men are more prone to hygiene-related infections and STDs.
“I’ve read about uncut men being more susceptible to STDs, but that’s if they aren’t being clean,” said Rahim, who added that despite his preference for uncut men, he is glad to be circumcised.
Whether or not circumcision status plays a role in the spread or prevention of STDs is an ongoing topic debated by scientists, with several recent studies coming to dramatically conflicting conclusions. Two separate studies conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention appear to show that circumcision profoundly reduces the risk for heterosexual men in Africa to contract HIV, while having “absolutely no effect” on whether gay and bisexual men in the U.S. contract the disease.
While trying to figure out why black and Latino gay and bisexual men have higher rates of HIV even though they engage in less risky behavior than their white counterparts, CDC researchers looked at data from more than 2,000 black and Latino gay men to see if being uncircumcised increased their probability of being HIV-positive. About 74 percent of black men in the study — which was unveiled at the CDC’s National HIV Prevention conference last month — were circumcised, compared to 33 percent of Latinos.
“We found no overall association between circumcision status and HIV-infection status among black or Latino [gay and bisexual men],” said CDC epidemiologist Greg Millet (pictured above), the study’s author. “We also found no protective benefit of circumcision among those men reporting recent unprotected sex with a male partner in which they were exclusively the insertive male partner.”
Read the rest.
[Greg Millet was in Chicago this past October. Check out his presentation "HIV Infection Among Black and Latino Men" here. This presentation, and so many other great things, can be found on LifeLube.org - papa to this lil blog.]
No comments:
Post a Comment