Neat article - thanks. I've been reading about circumcision as a method of AIDS prevention for a while, ever since scientists stopped the orginal study to tell the control group to get circumcised because of the difference in infection rates between the two groups. Interruption of a study is very, very unusual, and there has to be a good reason, usually that someone's life should be in danger to interrupt it. I know that circumcision is a hot topic in some circles (ha ha) as well.
As with many discoveries related to AIDS, I am glad that researchers have found something relatively cheap that has a high rate of HIV prevention. My worries are that people will drop all sorts of safe sex behavior they have learned, confuse what the studies found (whether this was effective against vaginal intercourse or anal intecourse, which tends to have a higher rate of infection for certain subtypes of HIV), and let all kinds of common sense fall by the wayside. Still, low-cost, well-established stopgap measures are great.
Comments 1
As with many discoveries related to AIDS, I am glad that researchers have found something relatively cheap that has a high rate of HIV prevention. My worries are that people will drop all sorts of safe sex behavior they have learned, confuse what the studies found (whether this was effective against vaginal intercourse or anal intecourse, which tends to have a higher rate of infection for certain subtypes of HIV), and let all kinds of common sense fall by the wayside. Still, low-cost, well-established stopgap measures are great.
Reply
Leave a comment