An article by Ronald Goldman, PhD, published in Paediatrics & Chid Health, Vol. 9, No. 9, pp. 630-33 (November 2003).  The article provides a very good overview of the current social standing of male infant circumcision. The author makes the point that the current reluctance to confront the religious issue undermines the core values (e.g., the health of the patient is paramount) and ethics (e.g., first, do no harm) that drive medical decision-making.

Article published in Thymos: Journal of Boyhood Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1 / Spring 2010. doi 10.3149/thy.0401.71.

Author J. Steven Svoboda discusses how genital integrity advocates struggle to safeguard all children from genital cutting. Gender equity activists promote true equality of men and women. Commonalities and differences between the two movements are very illuminating. Three words relevant to genital integrity are: exceptional, muddle, and discomfort.

Shirley's Wellness Cafe is an educational website that promotes holistic health for humans and their animals.

The circcumcision page describes the harm of infant circumcision. The surgical procedure of infant circumcision is described, in detail. Various authorities are quoted regarding the pain of infant circumcision.

The circumcision information page includes links to various organizations and other sources that provide information on infant circumcision.

A well-researched article by Michael Fumento describing the transmission vectors of AIDS, as backed up by statistics. The author notes that much dis-information is promulgated regarding heterosexual AIDS. Citing statistics, Fumento notes that there are few cases of heterosexual AIDS that withstand scrutiny.

A paper published BJU International, Vol. 100, Issue 1, pp 5-6 (April 2007).  Three avid pro-circumcision advocates wrote a paper justifying male circumcision as a preventative against prostate cancer. The authors claim that lack of circumcision is a risk factor of prostate cancer.

Dr. Van Howe responded to the Morris paper in the BJU International, Vol. 100, Issue 5, pp. 1193-94 (2007). Dr. Van Howe identified faults and unsubstantiated assumptions in the original paper. He states, "The concept of using circumcision to reduce prostate cancer risk has no biological or epidemiological foundation. Even if one is willing to depart from reality and use the most extreme assumptions as put forth by Morris et al., circumcision of infants is not cost-effective."

Study published in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, Vol. 34 Issue 2, Pages 160 - 164 (April 2010).  The study concluded that "Circumcision appears to have minimal protective effects on sexual health in Australia." Translated into English, "Circumcised men do not have any additional protection against sexually transmitted diseases."