A recent study has found that men whose penises are circumcised have fewer chances of being affected with prostate cancer as compared to those who doesn't have. Previously, it was claimed by a research that female sexual partners of circumcised men are at least risk of being affected with human papillomavirus (HPV).
Although researchers have claimed that circumcised men are at least risk of being affected with prostate cancer, scientific evidences to support the claims have not been presented yet. The lead researcher of the recent study, Dr. Jonathan L. Wright, has also condemned the finding by saying, "I would not go out and advocate for widespread circumcision to prevent prostate cancer. We see an association, but it doesn't prove causality".
The findings of the study have been published in the journal Cancer. The findings of the study have raised questions over the need of circumcision. However, the Royal Dutch Medical Association is against the circumcision.
In the past, debates have been raised over the concept of circumcision. Religious and medical groups have been debating over the need of getting circumcision done. In San Francisco, a ban over circumcision was called for but it didn't come to affect as religious groups were against it.
It has been reported that for the success of the study, a group of 1,600 men was questioned about their sex life and about their penis. Half of the participants of the study were affected with prostate cancer, while the other half were free from it.
Later it was discovered that the majority of men who were not affected with prostate cancer had circumcised penis, while those who were affected with it didn't had circumcise penis. It is hoped that the findings of the study would help researchers in better understanding of prostate cancer.