Foreskin for Clear Skin?

Hopefully this will make it easier for STD's to appear on peoples faces...I know I'll LMAO when i see someone with genital warts on their face. I love science!

Wow, this is so ethically wrong. When will people learn not to harm children?

I wonder if my foreskin is sitting in someone's face right now...

As for the previous comment, sometimes it is a necessary process. I was circumcised at the age of eight as I had an excess of it, as skin would not pull back whenever I had an erection, and I had great discomfort throughout each day before I had the surgery done. It would have been better having it done as a baby, but you do what you have to.

I actually feel quite bad for the uncircumcised due to various reasons...

Sometimes - very rarely - circumcision is necessary, but not nearly as often where "routine" circumcision is uncommon and they know about alternatives. bkdude might have had a different outcome in Germany, for example. He should certainly not feel bad for the 3/4 of the world's men who enjoy an unmodified penis.

"There are also ethical issues to consider ... does blending them into an epithelial milkshake and injecting them into aging faces like so much Botox cross some kind of line?" That line was crossed long ago when they started cutting them off babies. No other healthy body part is treated with such contempt for its owner's future wishes or rights.

I do think they should pay the parents for their children's foreskin, but I doubt they were doing this very much 7 years ago when I had mine cut, but other than that I find nothing really wrong with it.

Then again, our insurance covered my treatment as it was necessary as opposed to cosmetic. At first, I was against it, (who wouldn't be at age 8?) but now I'm very glad I had it done.

Just think, they could get Paris Hilton to endorse it! Surely she is the expert on having foreskin on your face.

I can understand skin grafts, unfortunately I also understand vanity and the almighty dollar.

This product wouldn't even exist if the foreskin where that of girls' clitoral hoods. It's very sad that in this country (USA) boys are not guarenteed the basic human right of genital integrity as girls are. Had bkdude been a girl with a similar problem, the doctors would have explored alternatives to cutting away genitalia. However, since he is a boy, I'm willing to bet that the only suggestion made to his parents was to cut off the most sensitive part of his penis.

bkdude, I really feel for guys who were circumcised, and you are no different. I hope that before you decide to have your children circumcised that you research it a little and ask a few in depth questions. Like for starters your diagnosis. Please also realise that an 8 y/o and a newborn are treated totally different by the circumciser. You were most likely put to sleep where as most newborns aren't given ample anesthesia. If you felt pain afterwards, you could voice that.

Back on topic, this is a dispecable product.

Bkdude, if that happened at 8 yrs, the surgery was probabaly not needed. A big problem in the US is that medical professionals did not (still don't ) know how to deal with the foreskin. My sons dr wanted to pull back the foreskin and that is known to cause problems. One should wait till older (15 yrs for some). Most of the infections/tight... is due to toucing and forcing by drs and parents.

Having this part of the male genitals, I can say it feels so very good. It is really bad that people cheat their boys out of the possible sensory aspect of their body.

Just some science for pop sci.:
Male Glans (head): 4,000 nerve endings
Female Clitoris: 8,000 nerve endings
Male Foreskin: 20,000 nerve endings

The Male Glans:
Contains about 4,000 nerve endings, but they are pressure/pain-sensitive, not touch sensitive. These pain-sensitive nerves are called "Free Nerves"

Male Foreskin:
Contains about 20,000 nerve endings which are extremely touch sensitive (like the female clitoris). These touch-sensitive nerves are called "Meissner's Corpuscles"

"Circumcision cuts off 'more than 3 feet of veins, arteries and capillaries, 240 feet of nerves, and 20,000 nerve endings"
(Fleiss 1997: 5)

If you are circumcised, your nerves are pressure nerves, not touch nerves, so you are unable to ever feel true touch, only pressure. This is one of the reasons circumcised males tend to focus on getting to the orgasm instead of enjoying the sensation, and is also a reason so many circumcised males prefer anal sex (tighter = more pressure).

Interestingly European males tend to last longer and have less erectile issues than American males, and 95% of European males are NOT circumcised. PE and ED are more apt to occur for the cut.

I will apologize in advance, but this reminds me of an ancient joke, and I can't resist.

Just make sure they don't use it to treat crow's feet -- it could make you c**k-eyed!

popular lexicon meanings for "dick head" and "dick face" now have medical and cosmetic definitions -- thanks to science.

-jg

Some religions require that boys be circumcised like in Islam. Medically circumcision is recommended as it reduces the risk of transmitting and receiving diseases.

bkdude, there no such thing as a medical condition called "excess of foreskin". Maybe you suffered from a "frenulum breve" or a plain phymosis. But circumcision is easy money for urologist and they don't care to explain anything or propose alternatives.

Now, if you're happy with your circumcision, that's fine for me. But why should you "feel quite bad for the uncircumcised" ?

Vezineth, I won't comment about religions requiring circumcision. But you have to know that actually no medical public agency recommends circumcision to prevent diseases. This is because, as the AAP says : "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision."

Now, I think you refer to recent studies about AIDS transmission in Africa. According to these studies, circumcision may reduce transmission risks from female to male down to 60%. But it won't reduce transmission risks from male to female.

Would you feel safe with any security device that would reduce lethal risks by only 40% ? Or would you replace that device with something much more effective reducing risks by almost 100% ?

And, from my own experience, I know that the lack of a foreskin has long term consequences. And these are not potential. Feeling not much during sex from 35 yo on is the main "benefit" I got from that procedure.

I"m happy to see that this discussion is mostly anti circumcision. There are but three (3) reasons a male would ever need a circumcision:

1. Frostbite
2. Cancer
3. Gangrene

Also, 85% of the entire world's males are intact. So, the circumcised American is realy a minority. It is outlawed in Finland and discussions about about outlawiing it are going on in Denmark. I am fine with America outlawing it.

Well I see people are pretty concerned about me.

You guys don't seem to understand. I had been in constant pain and discomfort my whole life and it had slowly gotten worse up to the age of eight. I will take back my remark regarding feeling sorry for un-cut men, (I had irrationally based that statement on my own experience) but do you think I would really care about a lack of sensation when every day I felt like I had a clamp pressing on the head of my dick? Sure, the first thirty days after my surgery, I was in pain, but after that, all I felt was relief. I would also consider the extra foreskin a burden to my well-being as I had erections very frequently throughout the day (at age 8!) due to even the slightest actions. It took both of my hands to pull my foreskin back to urine! When I did have an erection, the foreskin would not pull back!

It had to be done, and if a doctor wants to use my old floppy foreskin to make a vial of some substance to make someone's face look like plastic, sobeit. (just pass a small portion of the profits over to my family...)

a lot of concern for those of us w/out foreskin. i see a lot of claimed evidence that the foreskin is better for sexual feeling and a whole slew of other reasons. reminds me of that Dr. Suess story of the guys w/ and w/out stars on their bellies. we all know how that turned out. in regard to the sexual issues, maybe you guys w/ foreskin are just doing it wrong :)

I think the babies might have something to say about this .... especially the female ones.

bkdude, you are probably a victim of foreskin fiddling. Medical personnel give caregivers incorrect information like the foreskin has to be retractable in infancy. So then Mom and Dad are taught to retract, use soaps and scrub and do all sorts of things that cause tearing, bleeding and introduce pathogens into the urinary opening that would not be there if they did not do these things. This causes scarring and inelasticity. The foreskin has to be elastic to function normally.

The body's orifices are more or less self-maintaining. Most boys will discover how their foreskin retracts when they begin to masturbate. Then they can be told to retract and rinse. Even if foreskin is completely non-retractable foreskin is ordinarily very elastic and can be stretched. Google the Beaugé technique. Not sure if the forum will let me post links. I'll give it a try:

cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/beauge

Your experience is unusual in cultures where circumcision is not practiced.