"Since the recommendation had been made that circumcision should be used as a preventative measure against cancer of the cervix, we sought further confirmation of this hypothesis. An almost ideal population was that of the well women attending a cancer detection facility, where the population was split almost equally between women whose husbands were circumcised and those whose husbands were not. The discovery rate for cancer of the cervix among non-Jewish women whose marital partners were circumcised was no different from the rate among non-Jewish women with noncircumcised husbands. Further, the use of a sheath contraceptive by the marital partner, which has an effect equivalent to circumcision in that the cervix is protected from contact with the smegma, was found not to be associated with rate differences for cancer of the cervix."

[This study, more than the others, exposed the myth that the presence of a foreskin or smegma had any association with the incidence of cancer of the cervix.]

2. British Journal of Cancer, Vol. XIX, Jun, 1965, No. 2, "Circumcision and Cancer of the Cervix" University of Aberdeen, Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

"These results do not support the theory that women whose husbands are circumcised will be less likely to develop cervical cancer than those whose husbands are uncircumcised. In this the study agrees with the findings of Jones et al (1958), Dunn and Buell (1959), and Boyd and Doll (1964)."

3. Journal of the American Medical Association, June 2, 1975, p. 961, Ernst L. Wynder, M.D., American Health Foundation.

"Additional variables observed to be more frequent and of more import among patients with cervical cancer are early age of first intercourse, multiple sexual parners, and low socioeconomic class.

Unless there exist surgical reasons (such as phimosis) indicating circumcision in the husband, the procedure would seem unwarranted."

4. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., Dec. 15, 1973, "Relation of cirumcision to cancer of the cervix" Terris, Wilson, Nelson.

"No differences were found in circumcision status of husbands of cervical dysplasia patients and controls. The findings of this study are consistant with those reported by Aitken-Swan and Baird. They fail to provide evidence that circumcision status is related to invasive carcinoma or the cervix, carcinoma in situ, or cervical dysplasia."

5. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., July, 1958, Jones, et al.

"The specific items of importance which have been under scrutiny are: dietary deficiency, estrogen excretion levels, menstrual patterns, hygienic practices, contraceptives, circumcision of marital and other partners, and frequency and duration of coitus; for none of these items was there any significant difference between the cases and their matched controls."

-courtesy intacnet@polaristel.net