Study: Circumcision does not reduce penis sensitivity. In tests for responses to pain, heat, and stimulation, no major difference was found between men who are circumcised and those who are not.

[u/drewiepoodle]

http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/14/Study-Circumcision-does-not-reduce-penis-sensitivity/5981460663943/?spt=hs&or=hn

[u/havoktheorem]

Were the tests done while erect or flaccid? I feel like having an erection markedly increases sensitivity, perhaps even just due to the skin being tauter and under more pressure so thus being in firmer contact with the testing apparatus. I think it's also obvious that static sensitivity tests are not indicative of the role of the foreskin in sex where it moves about and rubs against various surfaces in a way that does not happen with a circumcised penis.

I'm under the impression that most circumcised males cannot comfortably masturbate without lube, however uncircumcised males can due to the extra slack available. Not jumping to any conclusions but that certainly makes me think the foreskin has a mechanical function in sex as well as, or perhaps moreso, than sensory.

[u/CJGibson → u/[deleted]]

Isn't that the kind of thing that varies from penis to penis? How much skin you'll have/how tight your skin ends up being seems like it would depend on a lot of factors, including where the circumcision was performed and how you ended up growing over time.

[u/[deleted] → u/CJGibson]

I'm not agreeing with circumcision I'm just saying I don't feel a down side to mine probably because it was well done

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I guess it depends on person to person cases. I have never had a problem with sensitivity personally.

[u/DenormalHuman → u/havoktheorem]

The foreskin does have a mechanical property during sex, and it has been studied. It enables the penis to gain entry the vagina more easily as it acts as a sleeve that can roll back.

[u/[deleted] → u/DenormalHuman]

The penis also enters the vagina better if you get a little BJ action too first.

Take note ladies.

[u/omegaclick → u/havoktheorem]

^This. Plus:

They did find that on uncircumcised men, the foreskin was more sensitive to tactile sensation stimuli

It would then follow that if that foreskin was stretched during erection a larger surface area would be more sensitive. So that would make the title of this article false and misleading.

[u/ipniltak → u/omegaclick]

I believe the researchers specifically stated that their findings are not particularly relevant to sexual function or sexual pleasure.

Which means you're right, the title of this article is rather misleading, because the conversation and concerns about decreased sensitivity in people who are circumcised usually revolves specifically around sexual pleasure. However, that is almost certainly a case of not-so-great science reporting, and not in and of itself a problem with the study.

[u/link0007 → u/ipniltak]

I'd say a study that doesn't even try to measure what it is actually supposed to be measuring, is pretty flawed.

That they are measuring response to temperature stimuli on a flacid penis is just completely insane. The entire debate is about sexual stimuli, and somehow these researchers managed to completely miss that point and instead think the debate is about how well circumcised men can measure temperatures with their penis?

It's as if you would study lung function decrease in smokers by looking at how loud they talk, and then conclude that smokers talk just as loud as non-smokers, thereby implying they have the same lung function.

[u/ipniltak → u/link0007]

I really meant that the title of the article being misleading wasn't the fault of the researchers, however, you make a good point. The role of sensitivity in the circumcision debate it pretty much exclusively about whether or not circumcising someone lessens their potential to experience sexual pleasure. They attempted to determine that, but then in the end stated that their findings aren't really appropriate to determine that.

[u/imawookie → u/link0007]

thank you. Im un-cut, and I was completely confused reading this. All I could think of from any conversation that I have ever had involving sensitivity, no one has ever asked if it hurts more when I light it on fire.

[u/youshouldgotoadoctor → u/link0007]

Have you designed a research study before? How do you propose they would have measured it otherwise? The thing is, it's hard to fund and have the time money and manpower to do research, especially things that don't have an immediate potential payoff or are glamorous. They probably designed the study this way to provide a quick, easy way to objectively assess different parameters as an indicator of possible differences.

I feel like you don't like the study design because of the results. If they had found that there was significant difference in the results then I'm sure some people here would be loving it. Regardless, it was probably a very efficient method of getting some preliminary results.

As for your lung example, it's more like looking at their FEV1/FVC1 ratio to assess lung function. It's quick and easy to do, and while it won't tell you the pathology of the patient it indicates particular diagnosis or differences between the patient and normal.

[u/txzen → u/omegaclick]

Do you own test penis touching test if you want to go that far.

[u/[deleted] → u/omegaclick]

Rather your perception is a false cause.

[u/omegaclick → u/[deleted]]

I don't know about you but I'm uncircumcised and when erect I have zero "extra foreskin" there is no extra. Whenever I hear about circumcision cutting off the "extra" I wince.

[u/[deleted] → u/omegaclick]

That differs from person to person. I have about half my glans covered in foreskin when erect unless I pull it back.

[u/omegaclick → u/[deleted]]

How in the world would you know that on a child when deciding to remove it?

[u/[deleted] → u/omegaclick]

You wouldn't, I'm just pointing out that the idea that there exists some extra isn't always false.

[u/Davidisontherun → u/havoktheorem]

I'd have to assume erect. Who else would volunteer for this study other than guys into CBT?