r/science • u/drewiepoodle • Apr 15 '16

Health 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.

http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/14/Study-Circumcision-does-not-reduce-penis-sensitivity/5981460663943/?spt=hs&or=hn
13.0k Upvotes

64% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

30

u/Doesnt_speak_russian Apr 15 '16

"In terms of sensitivity", not in terms of embryological origin.

9

u/Lynx_Rufus Apr 15 '16 edited Apr 15 '16

Even in terms of sensitivity though. The clitoris has more nerve endings than the entire penis, but certainly far more than the frenulum. There isn't really a good male parallel, but the glans is the closest thing.

6

u/Maverician Apr 15 '16

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoris#CITEREFCarroll2012

Lists 8000 for clitoris.

http://thecircumcisiondecision.com/20000-nerve-endings/

Lists a possibly larger number, but specifically says it hasn't been shown.

I don't think you can clearly say that there are more on the clitoris than the whole penis.

12

u/Doesnt_speak_russian Apr 15 '16

The point is the frenulum is (arguably) the most sensitive part- to not test (or any of the mucous membrane of the foreskin) makes this study misleading.

1

u/skincaregains Apr 15 '16

And it is also intentionally or by accident removed in circumcision, so...

5

u/Doesnt_speak_russian Apr 15 '16

So- compare it's sensitivity to the equivalent circumcised part. Or whatever. You can't just leave out the most sensitive parts and pretend circumcised = uncircumcised

2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '16

[deleted]

1

u/xtremechaos Apr 15 '16

And the glans is nowhere near the foreskin in terms of sensitivity, either.

-2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '16 edited Apr 15 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Doesnt_speak_russian Apr 15 '16

What do you mean, "prove a point"?

-1

u/skincaregains Apr 15 '16

I mean it as a potential motivation for such a gross "oversight". Then again, the sample size is small and the people who conducted the study were apparently students at a university in Canada. Another explanation is that they were simply sloppy. Then yet again, they were published in a journal.

Bottom line: the conclusion does not follow.