Male circumcision is rarely a matter of choice – it is most often done in infancy or on the recommendation of a medical professional. However, the topic is highly controversial. What do we know about this practice? What are the positives and negatives and sides? Although the procedure is seen primarily as a religious ritual, it is widespread today and often used in modern medicine. According to a state government study, more than 60% of all newborn boys in North America are circumcised soon after birth, with the parents’ informed consent. Circumcision is an operation in which the loose skin covering the head of the male penis – the foreskin – is removed. In case of insufficient hygiene, bacteria, viruses, residues of urine, sperm and secretions released by glands called smegma collect under the foreskin. Smegma creates conditions for a sharp increase in the activity of microorganisms and becomes a source of infections. According to a US study, uncircumcised men are twice as likely to develop an STD. This is due to the fact that the foreskin can be easily injured during more violent sexual activity – microscopic sores are an easy entrance for viruses and bacteria. Also, the folds formed by the skin are an ideal environment for the stay and development of microorganisms that cause gonorrhea, chlamydia, mycoplasma, etc. The use of a condom is a proven and almost certain way to protect against such diseases. But here too, circumcision is useful – without a foreskin, it is much easier to insert and keep the condom in place. If the foreskin is not removed, it slides along the inner wall of the condom and can dislodge it from its strategic location, even causing it to fall off. And this leads to the frequent need for “attitude”, which can negatively affect the act. NEWS_MORE_BOX Circumcision, however, is not entirely safe and, like any medical procedure, carries its own risks. A 2013 Danish study concluded that the surgery may lead to meatal stenosis – a narrowing of the opening of the urethra, which can lead to problematic and even painful urination. The study involved 810,000 men, 33,750 of whom were circumcised. In the entire group, 182 men were found to have meatal stenosis, 176 of whom were circumcised. There is another argument against circumcision – according to some, the absence of a foreskin reduces the sensitivity of the glans penis and takes away the pleasure of intercourse. These claims, although widespread, have not yet been proven by science.