—– Original Message —–
From: asego2002
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
my cut-o-map tells me that most of the world is un-cut. so what is all this thing about the cut when its actually not the norm ?
the only country in east africa in which most tribes do the cut is kenya. infact only the wagisu (bukusus of uganda) do the cut in uganda. the obsession with “cut or no cut” has been a lie peddled over the last   45 years to deny the un-cut a place at the seat of power. there are more un-cut-ted tools that got the population of the world to 6,602,224,175 than cut-ted ones…
– – – – – – – – – – –
— In kenyaonline@yahoogroups.com, “Wuod Lando” <wuodlando4@…> wrote:
 Mig. Ojanga:
 You are absolutely correct in your remarks below.
The claim that somehow male circumcision prevents contracting HIV/AIDS is not informed with science is complete nonsense. In Western Europe, little male circumcision is practiced. It is particularly done by immigrants from cultures that practiced male circumcision. The same is true in Eastern Europe including Russia. Please revisit what Mig. Putin said about circumcision.
 In Russia, it is considered a primitive practice left to folks in Chechnya and other minorities in Russia. In the former Soviet Union the practice was confined to Asian Russia and some primitive societies. And I can go on and on yet you do not find this madness that male circumcision prevent HIV/Aids in Europe and Russia. Omiyo I completely concur with your observation.
 Wuodi.
– – – – – – – – – – –
— On Mon, 8/18/08, mrbob_k wrote:
From: mrbob_k
Subject: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
To: kenyaonline@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, August 18, 2008, 2:56 PM
Wuod Lando
In the same vein let me add this observation. In Kenya people who are known to practise homosexuality happen to come from cut culture. Just keep this thought and mull over over it.
Bob-K
– – – – – – – – – – –
— On Mon, 8/18/08, odhiambo okecth wrote:
From: odhiambo okecth <komarockswatch@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [kca_main] Re: [KOL] GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
To: kenyaonline@yahoogroups.com
Cc: letters@guardian.co.ke
Date: Monday, August 18, 2008, 11:40 PM
This is one area that we must handle with care.
As a Luo people, we used to practice the removal of the lower teeth as a sign of initiation to adulthood. Others used to cut their ears, others used to cut the foreskin, while others used to do it differently.
As we catch up with the pace of the current world, I would not suggest that the Maasai culture is better than the Kikuyu culture. Nor would I suggest that the Pokomo culture is superior to the Luo culture.
As we celebrate the various cultures, we must not look down upon ones culture. In this vain, I would not go for the other culture which has been alien to mine since Jesus came to save mankind.
The Right Hon PM might have come up with this purely on medical grounds, with the belief that the cut organ will help with the spread of the HIV/AIDS. But this is one area science will keep misleading Africa.
Those who invented most of the scientific theories are white scientists. And in their cultures, most do not cut their organs. So why would we want an African to cut his organ as a mechanism of minimizing the spread of HIV/AIDS?
No. God created man in his own image, and if he so desired that we have a cut foreskin, he would have made it such all the way from creation. Let us not pretend that we can be more knowlegeable than God in matters of creation.
To this extent, the Luo realized that God was supreme in His creation, and as such, we stopped interfearing with God’s will. We stopped the removal of the 6 lower teeth and reverted to be whole human beings in the image and likeness of God as he intended us.
Odhiambo T Oketch
Komarock Nairobi
– – –
Date:Â Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
From:Â odhiambo okecth
Subject:Â Â Fw: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
– – – – – – – – – – –
 ——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Vs: Fw: Re: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
From: “Paul Nyandoto”
Date: Tue, August 19, 2008 7:55 am
Guys,
I had said ealier that our present politicians think through their pocket, mouth and stomach. In all these chain the BRAIN is completely left out. Male circumcision does not prevent HIV/AIDS. Take for example a country like Finland which has the lowest number of HIV/AIDS cases in the world and they do not cut male foreskin, so how did they manage to control the spread of this HIV/AIDS. The answer is they used scientific method and good knowledge on how this deadly virus hibernates, spreads and is contacted and used those knowledge to stop the spread of this virus on their population. When will we Africans start using our own brains to make something reasonable in Africa or Kenya?.This madness of circumcision is primitive and is not what people should do to control the virus from spreading, there are already medical guidelines on how to control this virus from spreading so why can`t our fellow Africans plus leaders tell the common man the truth. Why is Raila trying to be all at once a kikuyu?. How many years have luos lived without circumcision?. Where was this virus in the 1960 or 1970s?.As a prime minister I would have expected Raila to bring high medical services in Nyanza, disposible surgical tools, disposible, injection needles, scapels, glooves, high powered disinfection machines and atleast high efficient medical ambulances in Nyanza with good medical equipment, machines which can purify infected bloods which can be used incases of accidents or bleeding. Good polyclinics for infected mothers and pregnant women. I did not expect a prime minister to come out with this nonsence of circumcision in the year 2008 when people already know more about HIV/AIDS, virus and disease than in the early 1980s.
Paul Nyandoto.
– – – – – – – – – – –
From: samokello@ . . .
Subject: RE: Vs: Fw: Re: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBODate: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:14:57 -0700
Daktari,
Â
To the extent that a cut can be one of the series of measures used to slow down the spread of this killer disease, let’s go for it. Those incredible medical measures and scientific approaches to curbing the spread of AIDS sound good, but when was the last time a kid in Keumbu or Kakdhimu heard about them and their effectiveness. I imagine that when Mr. Odinga talked he had more than just people like you and I who happen to be privy to the science of AIDS. He had a deep Kenyan village in mind.
Â
Incidentally, I’ve heard a lot of people dismiss the veracity of the cut as a tool in the fight against AIDS. Are there any conclusive studies done to date to point us in the direction of truth?
Â
Sam
– – – – – – – – – – –
Could male circumcision reduce HIV incidence in the UK?
Rice B, Delpech V, Evans B.
Department of HIV and STIs, Health Protection Agency Centre for Infections, Colindale, London, UK.
We consider the public health relevance of three recent African clinical trials showing male circumcision (MC) to reduce female-to-male transmission of HIV for the UK. Although heterosexually acquired HIV infections now account for the majority of new diagnoses in the UK each year, it is important to note that when considering the public health relevance of MC for the UK a large majority of these infections are acquired abroad. Men who have sex with men (MSM) remain those most at risk of acquiring their HIV infection in the UK. The efficacy and effectiveness of MC among MSM and in particular its protective role in unprotected anal intercourse between men remains unknown. Any future consideration of the role of MC in reducing HIV incidence in the UK should not be at the expense of weakening existing effective interventions.
Â
Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men.
Siegfried N, Muller M, Volmink J, Deeks J, Egger M, Low N, Weiss H, Walker S, Williamson P.
South African Cochrane Centre, Medical Research Council, PO Box 19070, Tygerberg, South Africa.
BACKGROUND: The findings from observational studies, reviews and meta-analyses, supported by biological theories, that circumcised men appear less likely to acquire human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has contributed to the recent ground swell of support for considering male circumcision as a strategy for preventing sexually acquired infection. We sought to elucidate and appraise the global evidence from published and unpublished studies that circumcision can be used as an intervention to prevent HIV infection. OBJECTIVES: 1) To assess the evidence of an interventional effect of male circumcision for preventing acquisition of HIV-1 and HIV-2 by men through heterosexual intercourse 2) To examine the feasibility and value of performing individual person data (IPD) meta-analysis SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched online for published and unpublished studies in The Cochrane Library (issue 2, 2002), MEDLINE (April 2002), EMBASE (February 2002) and AIDSLINE (August 2001). We also searched databases listing conference abstracts, scanned reference lists of articles and contacted authors of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of male circumcision or, in their absence, observational studies that compare acquisition rates of HIV-1 and HIV-2 infection in circumcised and uncircumcised heterosexual men. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Independent reviewers selected studies, assessed study quality and extracted data. We stratified studies based on study design and on whether they included participants from the general population or high-risk groups (such as patients treated for sexually transmitted infections). We expressed findings as crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and conducted a sensitivity analysis to explore the effect of adjustment on study results. We investigated whether the method of circumcision ascertainment influenced study outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no completed randomized controlled trials. Three randomized controlled trials are currently underway or commencing shortly. We found 34 observational studies: 16 conducted in the general population and 18 in high-risk populations. It seems unlikely that potential confounding factors were completely accounted for in any of the included studies. In particular, important risk factors, such as religion and sexual practices, were not adequately accounted for in many of the included studies.General population study results:The single cohort study (N = 5516) showed a significant difference in HIV transmission rates between circumcised and uncircumcised men [OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.96]. Results for the 14 cross-sectional studies were inconsistent, with point estimates for unadjusted odds ratios varying between 0.28 and 1.73. Six studies had statistically significant results, four in the direction of benefit and two in the direction of harm. The test for heterogeneity between the cross-sectional studies was highly significant (chi-square = 77.59; df = 13; P-value < 0.00001). Nine studies reported adjusted odds ratios with eight in the direction of benefit, ranging from 0.26 to 0.80. Use of adjusted results tended to show stronger evidence of an association although they remained heterogenous (chi-square = 75.2; df = 13; P-value < 0.00001). Only one case-control study was found (N = 51) which had a non-significant result [OR = 1.90; 95% CI: 0.50 to 7.20]. High-risk group study results:The four cohort studies identified found a protective effect from circumcision with point estimates for unadjusted odds ratios varying from 0.10 to 0.39. Two of these studies had statistically significant results. Two studies reported adjusted odds ratios, both protective with one being significant. The chi-square test for between-study heterogeneity was not significant (chi-square = 5.21; df = 3; P-value = 0.16). All eleven cross-sectional studies reporting unadjusted results found benefit from circumcision, eight of which had statistically significant results. Estimates of effnal studies reporting unadjusted results found benefit from circumcision, eight of which had statistically significant results. Estimates of effect varied from an unadjusted odds ratio of 0.10 to 0.66. Between-study heterogeneity was significant with the chi-square = 29.77; df = 10; P-value = 0.0009. Four of these studies reported adjusted odds ratios ranging from 0.20 to 0.59 and all were significant. One additional cross-sectional study only reported an adjusted odds ratio in the direction of benefit which was statistically significant. All three case-control studies found a protective effect of circumcision on HIV status, two being statistically significant. Point estimates varied from unadjusted odds ratios of 0.37 to 0.88. One reported an adjusted odds ratio showing a significant protective effect.Adverse effects:No studies reported on the adverse effects of circumcision. In most studies, circumcision had taken place during childhood or adolescence before the studies commenced. REVIEWER’S CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence to support an interventional effect of male circumcision on HIV acquisition in heterosexual men. The results from existing observational studies show a strong epidemiological association between male circumcision and prevention of HIV, especially among high-risk groups. However, observational studies are inherently limited by confounding which is unlikely to be fully adjusted for. In the light of forthcoming results from RCTs, the value of IPD analysis of the included studies is doubtful. The results of these trials will need to be carefully considered before circumcision is implemented as a public health intervention for prevention of sexually transmitted HIV.
PMID: 12917962 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
1: HIV Med. 2008 Jul;9(6):332-5.
Male circumcision for the prevention of heterosexually acquired HIV infection: a meta-analysis of randomized trials involving 11 050 men.
Mills E, Cooper C, Anema A, Guyatt G.
St Paul’s Hospital, British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Objectives Observational studies and a small collection of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that male circumcision may significantly reduce HIV transmission between sero-discordant contacts. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and World Health Organization have recently announced recommendations to scale up male circumcision in countries with generalized epidemics and low levels of male circumcision. However, no meta-analysis has been conducted to determine the effectiveness of this intervention. Methods We conducted a systematic review of medical literature, and included any RCTs assessing male circumcision to prevent heterosexually acquired HIV infection among males. We used the DerSimonian-Laird random effects method to pool study outcomes. We calculated the relative risk (RR), risk difference, number needed to treat (NNT) and I(2), all with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results We identified three RCTs that met our inclusion criteria, involving a total of 11 050 men. The pooled RR was 0.44 (95% CI 0.33-0.60, P<0.0001, I(2)=0%, 95% CI 0-35%). The risk difference was 0.014 (95% CI 0.07-0.21), yielding a NNT of 72 (95% CI 50-143). Conclusions Male circumcision is an effective strategy for reducing new male HIV infections. Its impact on a population level will require consistently safe sexual practices to maintain the protective benefit.
PMID: 18705758 [PubMed – in process]
Circumcision and HIV transmission.
Quinn TC.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. tquinn@jhmi.edu
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the recent literature on male circumcision and its effect on HIV acquisition. RECENT FINDINGS: The report from the randomized clinical trial of male circumcision in South Africa demonstrating a 60% protective effect in preventing HIV acquisition provided the first clinical trial evidence of efficacy of male circumcision in protecting men against HIV infection. This protective effect was consistent with both ecological and epidemiologic studies which also show a protective effect of 50-70% in men at high risk for HIV infection. Biological studies also demonstrate an increased number of HIV receptor cells in the mucosa of foreskin providing additional evidence of HIV susceptibility in the uncircumcised male. Male circumcision may also have a beneficial effect in preventing HIV acquisition in women and lowering selected sexually transmitted infections in both sexes. SUMMARY: The results of two ongoing randomized clinical trials of male circumcision in Kenya and Uganda are awaited with interest, however male circumcision should be carefully considered as a potential public health tool in preventing HIV acquisition. If other trials confirm the results of the South African trial, implementation of this surgical procedure will need to be carefully scaled up and integrated into other prevention programs with emphasis on surgical training, aseptic techniques, acceptability, availability and cultural considerations.
PMID: 17197879 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
– – – – – – – – – – –
In recent years we have seen African leaders make conclusive statements over scientific matters that require review of data by those in the field. Here is where United states beats the world. Hearings after hearings are important for men of integrity to put their names on the line for such matters of public importance. Relying on vodoo science, Jacob zuma during a court procession in which he was accused of raping an HIV positive activist said in court ” I left my bedroom after having sex with the woman and taken a shower because this would minimise the risk of contracting the disease [HIV]”.
He also said that he was prepared to marry the woman who accused him. Now ladies and gentlemen, this is the guy who is likely to be the future president of South Africa.
More worse than this is president Mbeki believing in the Deusberg theory that aids does not exist even after the particles of the virus has been isolated. These types of public utterances are either because our leaders get drunk with power and start believing that they are experts in everything. One cannot be a jerk of all trades. Scientific conclusions must be left to scientists of valor not just cook and crook scientists. They must be reviewed by great scientists and published in journals with high ratings.
Â
No one is denying the benefit of circumcision or the non benefits thereof. But for prime minister to publicly state that the cut is good for prevention of HIV, the evidence must be solid. Raila at this point, especially after the election violence should rate himself very high and should realize that his words are gospel to some people. Or to go to the extreme, the words of a prime minister in public should most of the time be policy. The implication of Raila stating that the cut can deter infection in essence strongly suggests that from now on the luos should adopt a new culture of circumcising their sons for the shake of limiting Aids spread. Of course if this was the pandemic diseases targeting such groups then a change of culture is important because culture in itself is always fashioned by calamities or fortunes. But if this is just political retoric then it is in bad taste for the luos who have been vilified for this practice.
Raila himself was almost denied the nomination for the ODM because Kalonzo and the rest believed that he was not a man because they were convinced that he is not circumcised. The point is that this circumcision thing is not just cutting off the foreskin, it is changing an identity. And in the light of the now where the luos are already silently complaining that Raila has left them in the cold and is shifting alliance to the kikuyus, this comment is a spit in the face.
Â
If circumcision was a valid preventive measure for HIV, it could have been adopted by United States and other parts of the world as a matter of policy or a matter of public safety measure. These are the very reasons why such things as vaccinations were instituted. I hate to be on the side of criticising fellow scientists but below I have attached some of the abstracts about circumcision and aids. As a scientist, the studies are wanting and substandard. They are simply reviews on puported evidence and generalized epideomological studies with no hard evidence of an actual occurance. They are not strong hard science that someone of Raila’s calibre can stand on.
Â
A valid test for this theory would be as follows. Take 300 male chimpanzees. Circumcise 150 and allow them to have sex with HIV positive female chimpanzees. If 80-90% of the uncircumcised males and only 10-20% circumcised ones become HIV positive then Mr. prime minister a change of culture will be worth it.
Dr. Barack Abonyo
– – –
Date:Â Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:36:55 +0000
From:Â barack abonyo
Subject:Â Â “GO FOR THE CUT” AGWAMBO NEEDS VALID SCIENTIFIC DATA
– – – – – – – – – – –
Odhiambo.
I can no more agree with you than to give you all my thumps up for this. I dod not think that to be cut is the way to go, Infact the other day the Jury in Boise Idaho awarded a young man 3 Million dollars when it ruled that his father had no right of having him being Mutilated (Cut) without his consent when he was minor, it rulled that the cut on a young guy without his concent was a real servere and profound violation of his rights. Further the medical field is really devided on this issue with others maintaing the thiught thatt the cut organ is safer to use with HIV/AIDS and at the same time and breath others say it makes no difference. http://www.norm-uk.org/circumcision_unhappy.html and this http://www.norm-uk.org/circumcision_lost.html
By the way the idea that to cut helps with AIDs is only directed to Africa, Not Jamaica and Not Haiti and not to the West, Even Studies in india was taken in South Africa, read these,
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN0345545120071204 , And it all gained momentum as of January 2007, long after Thierry Mertens talked about it, you could find more details here, http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/vincenzi/ . Anf if you look there was no such result found as postive in the US, But look at Kenya. It was reseacher conclusion but without any conclusive data, I am suprised that the PM bought this. Infact more tribe in Uganda have less than 10 percent cut men yet there has been tramendouse reduction of HIV and yet they never adopted the Cut. From that document you will see no Data for Uganda. the whole issue is hygien.
Take Australian doctors point of research, here http://aidsaction.org.au/content/hiv_sti_health/circumcision.php, they say in that country the Cut cant help. it is all an African concept and deception. If it is not relevant in Australia, US, UK and Asia, why is it relevant in Africa.
We need to educate guys that one day their sons will start fleecing them hard of money for violating their choice.
“JOIN the GROUP to HELP STOP CIRCUMCISION”
Prof
– – –
Date:Â Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:34:28 -0600
From:Â “Brown P. Onyango Dr.”
Subject:Â Â Re: Fw: Re: Re: GO FOR THE CUT: SAYS AGWAMBO
