What happens when supply goes down? Those who profit big time from the sale of foreskin scramble to come up with ‘new studies’ to promote circumcision, to increase their profits. It’s clearly evident, a recently released ‘study’ from Johns Hopkins University proves they have an agenda. Oprah wears foreskin on her face. Hospitals, after profiting from infant circumcision themselves (via insurance, cash payment from parents, etc), turn around and sell the tissue to biotech companies, thus profiting TWICE per each circumcision. Biotech companies then harvest the foreskin, making skin grafts out of some, and integrating foreskin into facial cream. These companies make a lot of money at the expense of your son’s foreskin!
Guess who endorsed the supposed AAP’s stance on circumcision? The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Why would a group, whose main purpose is to care for a woman’s needs, be so concerned with infant male circumcision, more importantly, the decline in infant male circumcision in the US? The majority of infant circumcisions in the US are performed by OBGYNs, so a negative statement from the AAP would affect their business and their income. The AAP is setting aside all ethical concerns and appeasing to the ACOG.