Studies showing "benefits of circumcision" highly flawed

[JackRiddler]

33. I knew that someone would employ this outright lie.

Shame on you.

It's like you're depending on no one even reading the OP. I anticipated this anyway, which is why I quoted his simply incredible resume in full. He has a lot more degrees, not just in philosophy - from Oxford - than you are ever going to accumulate.

Not that there is any shame in philosophy. It's about taking care in thinking for yourself - you should try that some time, instead of scanning down to the part where you can locate something for an ad hominem attack. Your cheap resort to imputed authority and avoidance of actual facts and argument is merely your own declaration of intellectual bankruptcy.

He commands logic and method, unlike the fraudulent studies he dismantles.

By the way, is anyone who isn't a doctor allowed to have an informed opinion? Up to the late 18th century, would you have supported the still-prevailing belief in bleeding the patient? Because the big lie about circumcision as a preventative to AIDS is the modern analogue, and just as dangerous.

(What about politics - should that only belong to designated experts?)

However, and this is the kicker, the blog entry (and he has publications, obviously, as well) is a treatment of a report by medical doctors. As my own post makes clear. The main arguments come from them. And I included the link to that study. Which of course you ignore.

If the media had any integrity, they would have made news of that report, rather than treating every pro-circumcision press release as though it were news.