The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.

Adjuvant radiotherapy in the treatment of rectal cancer has been shown to increase long-term morbidity causing severe anorectal dysfunction with physiologic changes whose interaction remains poorly understood. This study examines long-term anorectal morbidity from adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy. In a prospective study, patients with Dukes B or C rectal carcinoma were randomized to postoperative radiotherapy or no adjuvant treatment after anterior resection. The long-term effect of radiotherapy on anorectal function in a subset of surviving patients was assessed from a questionnaire on subjective symptoms and from physiology laboratory evaluation and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Twelve of 15 patients (80 percent) treated with radiotherapy had increased bowel frequency compared with 3 of the 13 patients (23 percent) who did not have radiation therapy (P = 0.003). The former group had loose or liquid stool more often (60 vs. 23 percent, P = 0.05), had fecal incontinence more often (60 vs. 8 percent, P = 0.004), and wore pad more often (47 vs. 0 percent, P = 0.004). They also experienced fecal urgency and were unable to differentiate stool from gas more often. Endoscopy revealed a pale and atrophied mucosa and telangiectasias in the irradiated patients. Anorectal physiology showed a reduced rectal capacity (146 vs. 215 ml, P = 0.03) and maximum squeeze pressure (59 vs. 93 cm H2O, P = 0.003) in the radiotherapy group. Impedance planimetry demonstrated a reduced rectal distensibility in these patients (P < 0.0001). Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy after anterior resection causes severe long-term anorectal dysfunction, which is mainly the result of a weakened, less sensitive anal sphincter and an undistensible rectum with reduced capacity.