Despite the positive results obtained from circumcision studies of heterosexual men in Africa, findings of a study published in the December 15 issue of the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes show there is no evidence that being circumcised protects against HIV infection among U.S. black or Latino men who have sex with men (MSM), even among those who said they also had sex with women and/or practiced insertive intercourse only, AIDSmap.com reports. The results of the study were also presented at the National HIV Prevention Conference, which was held in Atlanta December 2–5.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted its "Brothers y Hermanos" study between May 2005 and April 2006, recruiting 2,235 black and Latino MSM in New York City, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles. Participants were asked, "Is your penis circumcised or cut?" The black participants were more than twice as likely to be circumcised as the Latinos: 74% versus 33%. Circumcised black MSM were more likely to be older, have a higher level of education, have a higher income, and identify as gay than were uncircumcised black MSM. There were fewer differences between circumcised and uncircumcised Latino MSM.
Investigators analyzed all data pertaining to demographics and sexual risks and determined that there was no statistically significant association between circumcision and HIV status among both groups. Investigators then compared men who reported recent male sex partners only with men who reported recent male and female sex partners and again found no significant association between circumcision and HIV status.
"If the results from the African circumcision trials were directly applicable to the MSM in our study, we would have expected to observe a significantly higher prevalence of HIV infection among uncircumcised men," investigators told AIDSmap.com. "Circumcision conferred neither risk nor protection among black men or Latino men in our study, however, and was unrelated to seroconversion among MSM who reported that their last HIV test was negative. Further, there was no evidence that circumcision was protective among men who had only engaged in unprotected insertive anal sex in any of the models."
Investigators were careful to point out, however, that they do not rule out circumcision entirely as a prevention method, adding that this study is not conclusive. (The Advocate)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.