Primary Care Physician
Dr. Orrange received her BA in Biology at the University of California, San Diego, and a Masters Degree in Health Sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health. She received her MD from the USC Keck School of…
Can Being Circumcised Lower Your Risk for Prostate Cancer?
Posted in Prostate Cancer by Dr. Sharon Orrange on Mar 19, 2012
Random notable study of the week is this: men who are circumcised before their first sexual intercourse have a significantly lower risk for prostate cancer than do uncircumcised men.

Four thousand men were studied and there was a 15% reduction in risk of sexually transmitted infections and inflammation, which may be what helps reduce the risk of prostate cancer.

These findings, published in the journal Cancer, are consistent with research showing that an infectious/inflammatory pathway may be involved in prostate cancer. So the logic would follow that circumcision reduces the risk of sexually transmitted infections that may alter the risk of prostate cancer.

After controlling for age, race, family history, among other things; risk of prostate cancer was lower in circumcised men. The reduction in prostate cancer risk with circumcision before first intercourse was observed in whites and blacks.

Circumcision has been shown in other studies to be linked to lower rates of sexually transmitted infections including HIV/AIDS, herpes, and syphilis. The authors of this study propose this: STD's cause small tears in the lining of the penis; this provides bacteria and viruses with a route to the bloodstream, which results in chronic inflammation, which contributes to prostate cancer.

This study provides evidence of a 15% reduction in prostate cancer in circumcised men. Though an interesting finding, this certainly does not indicate that every boy be circumcised.


- Dr. O.


       Send to a Friend     Share This

CONDITIONS AND COMMUNITIES: Circumcision  •  Prostate Cancer  •  Prostatitis  •  Sexually Transmitted Diseases - Male
TAGS: Symptoms  •  Therapies  •  Monday Health News

TOTAL COMMENTS: 10 - View All Comments »

Add a Comment
Displaying comments 10-1 of 10
Sounds like we are selling circumcision with some junk science. Maybe were should inject boys with Guardisil too. LOL
By ADRSeeker  Mar 22, 2012
A rather weak justifiation for mutilating males.
By Bamb00  Mar 20, 2012
I'm always a skeptical of studies like this that use statisical analysis based on data gathered for other reasons in order to make some kind of unrelated correlation. Cause and effect are not clearly identified, and other determining factors are not ruled out. The people studied here were not part of a controlled study on circumcision, they were simply statistics derived for other purposes - and therefore there is no "control group" or "test group" where one can truly isolate circumcision as beneficial in this case.

Circumcision was not begun for medical reasons. Sure, there may be some medical benefits, but there are also some medical risks. One should be cautious that the intent of some of these studies is to medically justify a practice that has gone on for millenia without any previous medical justification.
By azkevin  Mar 20, 2012
I just don't see where child mutilation is a benefit at all. Why in the hell would some one cut or even want to screw around with a little boy's penis, AND, what happens to the foreskin after it is cut off? Is it saved for a BBQ? This practice is barbarically Jewish and should be stopped!
By doghunter59  Mar 20, 2012
Another benefit of circumcision is afforded to the wives and lovers of circumcised men. Their risk for development of cervical cancer is much lower.
By painfree123  Mar 20, 2012
Another benefit of circumcision is afforded to the wives and lovers of circumcised men. Their risk for development of cervical cancer is much lower.
By painfree123  Mar 20, 2012
it is interesting that a lot of the studies which were done to assess circumcised vs not circumcised where performed in Africa and not Europe where most men are not circumcised and have good access to health care.
By Aronia  Mar 20, 2012
I had previously read that the only documented incidences of penile cancer were in uncircumcised patients. This is the first I have read or heard about circumcision affecting the incidence of prostate cancer. It makes sense I guess but doesn't sound like a direct correlation to prostate cancer.
By jeremyrides  Mar 20, 2012
European and Latin American men are not circumcised except the ones because of being jewish and muslim,and they have less prostate problems than American men.
The same goes for STD that is prevalent in African nations where men are circumcised.
As the boy reaches adulhood the foreskin can not retain any moisture.
More baby boys that are not jewish or muslim in the US do not have this procedure preform unless it is a medical need.
It is up to parents to teach higiene to children boys and girls, protected sex for STD.
By deraming  Mar 19, 2012
As I get older, the thought of circumcision seems more and more bizarre to me. I would think that this procedure traumatizes a little baby. What do studies have to say about that part of it? We were made to have that's natural. I want a refund.
By Blindsidedagain  Mar 19, 2012
Got a Question?
My Fans
(62 Discussion Topics)
Prostate Cancer
(173 Discussion Topics)
(54 Discussion Topics)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases - Male
(60 Discussion Topics)