(no subject)
Dec. 14th, 2006 04:18 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
guppiecatI don't know how I feel about this article..
(It describes a study which shows that circumcised men have an AIDS infection rate that is 50% less than uncircumcised.)
Part of me thinks that this is interesting, but another part is concerned that many men will see this as a license to have more unprotected sex. It seems to me that, as a species, we are not very good at analyzing risk, so that instead of seeing "circumcision == safer", people will instead see "circumcision == safe".
I suspect that we will see an unintended consequence of increasing the infected population, as men assume that they are safe, and have more unprotected sex... In effect spreading the virus to more people once they have been infected.
Thoughts?
(It describes a study which shows that circumcised men have an AIDS infection rate that is 50% less than uncircumcised.)
Part of me thinks that this is interesting, but another part is concerned that many men will see this as a license to have more unprotected sex. It seems to me that, as a species, we are not very good at analyzing risk, so that instead of seeing "circumcision == safer", people will instead see "circumcision == safe".
I suspect that we will see an unintended consequence of increasing the infected population, as men assume that they are safe, and have more unprotected sex... In effect spreading the virus to more people once they have been infected.
Thoughts?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 11:07 pm (UTC)Aside from that, yeah, the human mind will probably rationalize the risk away completely, as we're so liable to do.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 11:14 pm (UTC)/me goes afk to scrub away the mental image of "de cocking"