The health benefits of male circumcision are wide rangingIn this issue, John Hutson has reiterated the conventional Western medical view that “the surgical argument for circumcision of all neonatal males at present is very weak” and he criticises many of the circumcisions performed in later childhood, without anaesthesia, as “physically cruel and potentially dangerous” [see page 238].1 He is also of the opinion that “the diseases which circumcision is able to prevent are uncommon or even rare”. But therein he errs, (...) and greatly errs.He cites only two publications dealing with the protective effect of male circumcision against HIV infection, and makes no mention of the important recent meta-analysis of Weiss, Quigley, and Hayes2 which shows conclusively from a large number of studies that …. (shrink)

Two of the most important topics in the field of medical ethics today are insemination by donor (AID) and in-vitro fertilization. The conclusions of a working party set up by the British Association for the Advancement of Science are embodied in a small book reviewed on pate 108 of this issue, but we feel that more discussion than can be set out in the space allocated to book reviews is justified. Also, this journal in its first number has already devoted (...) a group of papers to the issue of abortion, so the conclusions of the working party and our own comments overlap and we hope illuminate further the problems enunciated. (shrink)