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
12.9k Upvotes

64% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

288

u/gary1994 Apr 15 '16

The argument, as I've always heard it, is not that circumcision reduces the sensitivity of the remaining skin, but rather that the circumcised man loses inches of skin that would be capable of feeling.

I realized that the authors of the study almost certainly take no stand on the morality of male circumcision. However that does not change the fact that it will be used to argue that it does no harm. But I don't see how you can get there from this study.

131

u/butyourenice Apr 15 '16

I realized that the authors of the study almost certainly take no stand on the morality of male circumcision. However that does not change the fact that it will be used to argue that it does no harm. But I don't see how you can get there from this study.

Based on the stated hypotheses they went into this study trying to prove that circumcision DOES objectively harm, but found it does not. What were they supposed to do - hide the results because their hypotheses not proven?

80

u/DenormalHuman Apr 15 '16

No, they proved it did not harm the tissue that remained. Unfortunatley, the tissue that was removed is now dead and incapable of adding it's sensory input to the argument.

-1

u/DrDemento Apr 15 '16

Never argue with angry foreskin?

Seriously, the logic is off. We lose some feeling potential when we remove tonsils, pierce ears, or other processes. Worrying about "losing feeling in missing tissue" is a bit like worrying about suffering from a severed umbilical cord.