ILLINOIS: AAP Will Not Publish Dissent

On his news feed, Hugh Young brings attention to the fact that the AAP is being very selective with the letters it is choosing to publish regarding its new policy statement.

The policy came out at midnight (ET) on August 27, 2012. In the following weeks, several letters have appeared, mainly critical of the policy (previously here, previously here and still here as of September 13, 0510 ET).

He writes, "But more hard-hitting letters, despite being fully referenced, have not appeared, and others have been added and removed in capricious ways."

He takes the liberty to publish letters that were up for several days, but have since been removed. (The unpublished letters are viewable here and here.)

Strangely enough, while they won't publish dissenting letters from intactivists, despite being fully referenced, they will publish Brian Morris praising the new AAP policy statement and tooting his own horn. (See Morris' "Welcome" of the new policy here.)

EDIT:
On a different medium, Brian Morris' tone on the new AAP policy statement was different, showing disappointment in the fact that the AAP stopped short of recommending infant circumcision. On this Patch article, Morris comments:

"The AAP's policy is not strong enough. The benefits exceed risks by over 100 to 1 just from number-crunching. But if the severity of the perils of not circumcising are compared with the trivial nature of the risks, then the benefits would be something like a million to 1 in favor. The ridiculous nonsense by the anti-circs stands condemned. This includes fallacious claims that circumcision is detrimental to sex. High quality research findings prove such propaganda to be absurd. In fact sex is better for a circumcised man. And women prefer circumcised lovers.
~Brian Morris
8:59 pm on Saturday, September 1, 2012

The "nonsense" stands condemned by WHOM? And just what are the "high quality research findings" he is talking about? "Women prefer circumcised lovers" WHERE? And why does it matter here, where we are talking about the circumcision of newborns?

While Brian "welcomes" the new AAP statement on Pediatrics, on September the 7th, he doesn't seem too enthused on Patch a few days earlier.

On my blog I will publish a letter I wrote in response to Brian Morris' piece praising the AAP, which I'm sure will never get published. In response to Brian Morris' letter titled "New Circumcision Policy Welcomed,"I wrote the following:

Re:New Circumcision Policy Welcomed

 In its simplest reduction, this appears to be yet another instance of Brian Morris taking the opportunity to promote circumcision, mostly by quoting mostly himself. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]

At first glance, it would appear as if this post was collectively written by the authors that appear. But upon further inspection, it looks like whoever responds with an e-letter such as this one can include other authors at will, resulting in what looks like a letter written by a collective. Are the other authors aware that Brian Morris is including them as co-authors? Or is Brian Morris seeking to bolster his own credibility?

Brian Morris quotes some authors selectively, but this appears to be a tactic to insert claims which are backed by works written none other than himself.

For example: "We congratulate the AAP Task Force on Circumcision for concluding that "the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. [6]" Excluded is the fact that the AAP has maintained its previous stance, which states that the benefits are not great enough to recommend infant circumcision.

Then we have: "While the Task Force considered evidence up until early 2010, further evidence of the benefits of circumcision has accumulated since then.[1]"

He says: "Meta-analyses indicate circumcision provides 73% protection against HIV in men who exclusively practice insertive intercourse with men,[7] lowers risk of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection by 57%,7[8] and that phimosis, balanitis and smegma increase penile cancer risk by 12-, 4- and 3-fold, respectively.[2]"

Here, he takes advantage of other meta-analyses [7, 8] to include his own [2]. 

He follows this by yet another claim that can only be backed by none other than himself: "While the Task Force noted the importance of circumcising newborns in protecting the vulnerable pediatric kidney from common bacterial infections during infancy, protection against urinary tract infections continues over the lifetime.[1]"

And yet another: "An analysis of all conditions that circumcision protects against found benefits exceed risks by a substantial margin, generating a number needed to treat value of two.[1]"

These claims do not correlate with reality. The claimed detriments of having a foreskin are simply not observable in developed countries where circumcision is rare, including Australia, Brian Morris' own country of origin.

Morris continues: "While it is true that 'the procedure has the least surgical risk and the greatest accumulated health benefits if performed during the newborn period' and that 'newborn males who are not circumcised at birth are much less likely to elect circumcision in adolescence or early adulthood',[6] other substantial barriers have been identified should circumcision be delayed.[3]  Arguments by circumcision opponents have been refuted,[4] as has a policy statement on infant male circumcision in Australia.[5]"

The first reference is the AAP policy statement [6], but the last three references are all none other than himself. [3,4,5]

Perhaps he feels circumcision opponents have been refuted [4], and that he has single-handedly trumped the Royal Australasian College of Physicians [5], but so far, the RACP has ignored Morris and their policy statement remains un-withdrawn.

Morris concludes: "We support the AAP recommendations, including better training, universal access, provision of accurate unbiased information to parents, use of effective anesthesia, and third party reimbursement."

Given the rest of this article, Morris' usage of "we" in this statement seems to serve the illusion that he speaks for a number of authors, when in reality, he may be speaking for none other than himself.

I could have just as easily included a number of authors that I believe support my arguments in the form for this e-letter, but I have chosen on the side of integrity and I speak for none other than myself. 

I do not hesitate to declare my conflict of interests, as readers can see for themselves. However, readers must know that Brian Morris has competing interests that he is failing to declare here.

Brian Morris is the most vocal circumcision promoter in Australia, [9] and he uses regular scare tactics in an attempt to frighten parents into circumcising their children.[10] He neither holds degrees in surgery, urology, pediatrics, nor epidemiology, and his field of study is only remotely related to medicine (he is a molecular biologist and professor of molecular medical sciences).[11] He is in no way an authority on circumcision, much less male genitalia, child care, nor disease prevention. Yet, Morris is constantly producing publications for parents compelling them to circumcise their children,[12] and for women compelling them to stigmatize intact males,[13,14] and he is a prolific publisher of "studies" and "appraisals" of circumcision, which are mostly, as he does here, quoting himself. [1,2,3,4,5] Brian Morris often repeats inconclusive or flawed circumcision "research," and is constantly antagonizing the RACP calling for it to instate "mandatory circumcision" for all males in Australia.[5]

Morris belongs, or once belonged to Gilgal Society, his name appearing alongside their logo in numerous publications that promote circumcision.[12, 13, 14] Aside from many pro-circumcision tracts, Gilgal Society has published circumcision-based erotica, and the founder, Vernon Quaintance, was caught with many hours of child pornography.[15, 16] Morris has since tried to sever ties with Gilgal Society,[17] but he, and numerous others who have tried to abandon Gilgal Society, have come together to form the so-called “Circumcision Foundation of Australia.” [18]

Brian Morris also runs a website which he uses to promote circumcision.[19] Morris' website links to the following recommended websites and groups[20] (8 of which are sites that eroticize circumcised penises and circumcision itself, and 7 that sell devices to perform circumcisions[34][35][36][37][38][39]):

The Gilgal Society[21]

 Circlist (German)[22]

 Circlist (Yahoo Asian)[23]

 Erotic Male Circumcision[24]

 Circumcised Kids[25]

 Circumcision Fetish[26]

 SCARandACORN[27]

 Teen Circ[28]

 Cutting Club[29]

 Beschnittene Gay Boys[30]

 Misc. Kids[31]

 Misc. Kids Health[32]

 Misc. Kids Pregnancy[33]

Readers need to be made aware that Brian Morris is not the objective, impartial, dispassionate observer he leads on to believe. As someone who neither holds degrees in surgery, urology, pediatrics, nor epidemiology, and his field of study is only remotely related to medicine (he is a molecular biologist and professor of molecular medical sciences),[11] Morris is not any kind of authority on circumcision, much less male genitalia, child care, nor disease prevention. Furthermore, Brian Morris is known to be a prolific advocate of circumcision, particularly the circumcision of healthy, non-consenting infants. His lack of academic qualification and his known special interests raise the question of how he feels his word is of any value to the American Academy of Pediatrics, and how it adds any to their policy statement.

Readers may say that I am engaging in ad-hominem, but this accusation is unwarranted. Where a source seeks to convince by a claim of authority or by personal observation, identification of undeclared conflicts of interest are not ad hominem;  it is generally well-accepted that an "authority" needs to be objective and impartial, and that an audience can only evaluate information from a source if they know about conflicts of interest that may affect the objectivity of the source. Identification of a conflict of interest is appropriate, and concealment of a conflict of interest is a problem.

I feel it necessary to identify Morris’ undeclared conflicts, as these affect his objectivity as a source. As a known, avid circumcision promoter, and as someone who holds no degrees in pediatrics, let alone surgery, urology, and epidemiology, I feel Brian Morris’ words of congratulation are inappropriate to appear in the publication of a known medical organization whose purview is the health and well-being of children. The American Academy of Pediatrics ought to distance itself from Brian Morris if they would like to preserve any semblance of credibility.

References:

1. Morris BJ, Wodak AD, Mindel A, Schrieber L, Duggan KA, Dilly A, Willcourt RJ, Cooper DA, Lumbers ER, Russell CT, Leeder SR. Infant male circumcision: An evidence-based policy statement. Open J Prevent Med. 2012;2:79-82.

2. Morris BJ, Gray RH, Castellsague X, Bosch FX, Halperin DT, Waskett JH, Hankins CA. The strong protection afforded by circumcision against cancer of the penis. (Invited Review). Adv Urol. 2011(Article ID 812368):1-21.

3. Morris BJ, Waskett JH, Banerjee J, Wamai RG, Tobian AAR, Gray RH, Bailis SA, Bailey RC, Klausner JD, Willcourt RJ, Halperin DT, Wiswell TE, Mindel A. A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise? BMC Pediatr. 2012;12:20.

4. Morris BJ, Bailey RC, Klausner JD, Leibowitzd A, Wamai RG, Waskett JH, Banerjee J, Halperin DT, Zoloth L, Weiss HA, Hankins CA. A critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision for HIV prevention in developed countries. AIDS Care. 2012:Mar 28 [Epub ahead of print].

5. Morris BJ, Wodak AD, Mindel A, Schrieber L, Duggan KA, Dilly A, Willcourt RJ, Cooper DA. The 2010 Royal Australasian College of Physicians' policy statement 'Circumcision of infant males' is seriously flawed. Intern Med J. 2012;42:822-828.

6. American Academy of Pediatrics. Circumcision policy statement. Task Force on Circumcision. Pediatrics. 2012;130:e756-e785.

7. Wiysonge CS, Kongnyuy EJ, Shey M, Muula AS, Navti OB, Akl EA, Lo YR. Male circumcision for prevention of homosexual acquisition of HIV in men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;6:CD007496.

8. Albero G, Castellsagu? X, Giuliano AR, Bosch FX. Male circumcision and genital human papillomavirus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sex Transm Dis. 2012;39:104-113.

9. "Sunday Night Circumcision". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yDvL4hNny4#t=1m18s. Retrieved 2011-03-06. Archive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdGbXdEo93U

10. Morris, Brian J. (2010). "Why Medical Bodies and Others Should Not Advise That Circumcision Should be Delayed Until the Boy Can Make the Decision for Himself". circinfo.net. http://www.circinfo.net/circumcision_why_you_should_not_delay.html. Retrieved 2011-03-07. Archive: File:Circinfo why-you-should-not-delay.pdf

11. Morris, Brian J. (2010-03-04). "Professor Brian Morris". The University of Sydney.. Head of Discipline. http://sydney.edu.au/medicine/genetic/staff/profiles/bmorris.php. Retrieved 2011-03-07.

12. Morris, Brian; Quaintance, Vernon (2007). Vernon Quaintance. ed. Circumcision: A guide for parents. London, England: Gilgal Society. http://www.circinfo.net/pdfs/GFP-ENAU.pdf. Retrieved 2011-03-06. Archive: File:Gilgal Parents-Guide.pdf

13. Morris, Brian (2007). Vernon Quaintance. ed. Sex and circumcision: What every woman needs to know.. London, England: Gilgal Society. http://www.circinfo.net/pdfs/GFW-EN%200712-1.pdf. Archive: File:Gilgal For Women leaflet.pdf

14. "Guide For Women". http://web.archive.org/web/20110518085430/http://www.circinfo.net/. Retrieved 2011-05-81.

15. "Croydon circumcision campaigner caught with child porn videos". Croydon Advertiser. 2012-04-21. http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Croydon-circumcision-campaigner-caught-child-porn/story-15866127-detail/story.html. Retrieved 2012-04-22. Archive 2012-04-21: http://circleaks.org/images/2/27/Www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk-Croydon-circumcision-campaigner-caught-child-porn-s.pdf

16. Kay, Richard (2012-04-25). "Sex scandal rocks Order of the Knights". MailOnline (GlamEntertainment). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2134978/David-Cameron-son-PM-wife-Samantha-unveil-church-tribute-son-Ivan.html. Retrieved 2012-04-26. Archive (2012-04-27): http://circleaks.org/images/6/66/Quaintance-disrupts-the-church%28malta%29.pdf

17. Young, Hugh. "Intactivism News". Circumstitions. http://www.circumstitions.com/news/news45.html#vernon2. Retrieved 2012-04-27.

18. http://www.circumcisionaustralia.org/

19. Morris, Brian J. (2010). "About the Author - Professor Brian J. Morris". circinfo.net. http://www.circinfo.net/about_the_author_professor_brian_j_morris.html. Retrieved 2011-03-07. Archive: File:Circinfo about-the-author.pdf

20. Morris, Brian J. (2007-08-29). "Circumcision Websites & Online Discussion Groups". circinfo.net. http://circleaks.org/images/3/31/Web.archive.org-web-20070829145507-circinfo.net-circumcision_websites_online_discussion_groups.html-1.pdf. Retrieved 2011-03-06. Archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20070829145507/circinfo.net/circumcision_websites_online_discussion_groups.html

21. Quaintance, Vernon. "The Gilgal Society". The Gilgal Society. http://www.gilgalsoc.org/. Retrieved 2011-03-07. Archive: File:Gilgalsoc mainpage.pdf

22. "Circlist". Circlist. http://www.circlist.hasibubu.de.

23. "Asian-pro-circumcision". Yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/asian_circlist/.

24. "Erotic Male Circumcision". Yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eroticmalecircumcision/.

25. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circumcisedkids/

26. Morris, Brian J. (2007-08-29). "Circumcision Websites & Online Discussion Groups". circinfo.net. http://circleaks.org/images/3/31/Web.archive.org-web-20070829145507-circinfo.net-circumcision_websites_online_discussion_groups.html-1.pdf. Retrieved 2011-03-06. Archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20070829145507/circinfo.net/circumcision_websites_online_discussion_groups.html

27. "SCARandACORN: Interseted in the subject of circumcision, particularly those with personal experience. Against the tide of anti-circumcision.". Yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SCARandACORN/.

28. "Teen Circumcision". Yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teen_circ_/.

29. "The Cutting Club". EuroCirc. http://www.eurocirc.org/cuttingclub.

30. "BeschnitteneGayBoys • Circumcised guys do it better!!". Yahoo. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BeschnitteneGayBoys/.

31. "Usenet Newsgroup: misc.kids". http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/topics?pli=1.

32. "Usenet Newsgroup: misc.kids.health". http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids.health/topics?lnk=srg.

33. "Usenet Newsgroup: misc.kids.pregnancy". http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids.pregnancy/topics?lnk=srg.

34. "Tara Klamp". Tara Klamp. http://www.taraklamp.com/. Retrieved 2011-03-06.

35. "Find Supplies". http://www.findsupplies.com/.

36. "Smart Klamp". http://www.smartklamp.com/.

37. "Weihai Zhenxi Medical". http://www.zhenxi-korea.com/.

38. "Circ-Ring International". http://www.zhenxi-europe.com/.

39. "Cutting Ring". http://www.cutting-ring.com/.

CIRCUMGATE: UK Circumfetish Czar Finally Caught Red-Handed

Intactivists had known about about Vernon Quaintance and  Gilgal Society for years. Intactivist groups had been trying to warn British authorities about this man and his activity, but it seemed this was a hot potato they wanted nothing of. And now, it looks like our prayers have been answered. According to this source, it looks like Vernon Quaintance has been finally caught in his tracks!

Who is Vernon Quaintance?

Why is this event significant? To all intactivists in the know, Vernon Quaintance is circumcision fetishist extraordinaire. The Gilgal Society is the worldwide NAMBLA of circumcision fetishism, and Vernon Quaintance is/was the head. Aside from heading the Gilgal Society, Vernon Quaintance was also a moderator at Circlist, another social group for circumcision enthusiasts, which has been around since the dawn of the internet, as well as a member of Acorn Society, another group of exactly the same nature. He was also a writer of erotic stories that include graphic descriptions of circumcising young boys while others masturbate.

The following is a piece of poetry written by Vernon Quaintance himself:

Decision
Some people claim that foreskins are fun
And keep the 'muzzle' on the gun.
But many doctors do declare;
'It's healthier with the glans laid bare'
So, mum & dad, we say to you,
You must decide what's best to do,
Your son will benefit throughout his life,
As, incidentally, will his wife;
If you make the choice that's always wise
and do decide to circumcise.

(It must be noted, that the above prose was quoted by none other than Professor Brian J. Morris in the October 2007 issue of HPV Today, pages 12-13, who is also a prominent advocate of circumcision, particularly infant circumcision, a prolific author of circumcision "studies" and "appraisals," and also happens to be a very proud and prominent member of Gilgal Society.)

Correction:
The poetry does NOT appear in the article on HPV Today. However Brian Morris still attributes it to Vernon Quaintance on his website, here. (Last accessed 4/23/2012)

Vernon Quaintance is also the owner of circinfo.com as well as gilgalsociety.org, websites which glorify circumcision and try to sound authoritative on the subject. The following quotes can be found on his website:

"Like the appendix, the foreskin is a remnant from our evolutionary past and now serves no essential purpose. Unlike the appendix, which is buried deep inside the abdomen, the foreskin is easily and safely removed as a preventative measure."

"An additional hazard of having a redundant foreskin is the ease with which it can get caught in a zipper. Many women complain of a lack of stimulation because a long or tight foreskin can stick to the walls of the vagina..." 

It is now irrefutable that he has further interests in circumcision and youth than just public health.

Caught Red-handed

According to this source, police raided Quaintance's home on April 11 of last year, after receiving a tip-off. Movies seized included graphic footage of child abuse, which ranked at the second-highest level of severity. Of the five tapes seized, three were found to contain indecent images. They comprise a total of seven to nine hours. The children were estimated to be between 11 and 16 years old.

According to the report, Quaintance claims to have been celibate his whole life, and that he gained no sexual gratification of any kind from the videotapes, something the judge has a hard time believing, considering the fact that he had kept the videotapes found in his possession up until today.

Intactivists have known of this man's antics for years, and are relieved to hear he has finally been caught in his tracks. We can already guess what was on those videotapes.

What is Gilgal Society?

There are those on the Internet who have a sexual fixation for the circumcised penis, and/or derive sexual gratification from the act of circumcision itself. Some call them circumfetishists. They gather in groups to discuss the erotic stimulation they experience by watching other males being circumcised, swap erotic fiction and trade videotapes of actual circumcisions, and justify circumcision and their enthusiasm for it by wrapping it in pseudo-scientific jargon. Gilgal Society is one such group, based in the UK.

Other circumfetish groups exist, such as Circlist, Acorn Society, and the Cutting Club, and they openly admit to a morbid fascination with circumcision to the point of sado-masochistic fetish. These groups advertise that doctors are among their members. Furthermore, there are anecdotal accounts of doctors becoming sexually aroused when circumcising boys. Circumcision certainly provides an opportunity not only to handle boys' penises without the condemnation that a sexual assault (in the sense that phrase is normally used) would attract, but also the opportunity to exercise power over another human being, to alter the penis and to control it and the boy's future sexual life.

(The paragraph above is an excerpt from "In Male and Female Circumcision, Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Pediatric Practice," Denniston GC, Hodges FM and Milos MF eds., Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 1999, New York; 425-454)

Gilgal Erotica

A piece of erotica published by Gilgal Society can be read here.

Readers who have the stomach to read to the very end will find:

"-- Acknowledgements to VQ"

These initials belong to Vernon Quaintance.

The Plot Thickens

Vernon Quaintance is only the beginning. It ought to concern people that many prominent "circumcision experts" are members of, or closely associated with Gilgal Society, and/or other circumfetish groups. It ought to concern people that, groups such as Gilgal Society and Circlist are being referred to as respectable authorities on circumcision. Very recently, the New York Times actually dared to cite Circlist as an actual resource on circumcision.

Some circumcision "experts" would like their audience to believe that they are "objective," "impartial," and/or "dispassionate" authorities on the matter of circumcision, when, in fact, they are passionate circumcision enthusiasts, quite a few who are members of circumfetish groups, such as mentioned above.

Brian Morris

Brian Morris of the University of Sydney, Australia, is one of these individuals. Brian Morris is the most vocal circumcision promoter in Australia. Brian Morris is no expert on circumcision (though he likes to market himself as one, and the Australian media has swallowed the act, hook, line and sinker), but merely an enthusiastic circumcision fanatic of long standing. He neither holds degrees (nor genuine interests) in surgery, urology, pediatrics, nor epidemiology, and his field of study is only remotely related to medicine (he is a molecular biologist and professor of molecular medical sciences). He is in no way an authority on circumcision, much less male genitalia, child care, nor disease prevention.

And yet, Morris is constantly producing publications for parents compelling them to circumcise their children, and the Australian media is constantly giving him the spotlight, oftentimes uncontested by any real authority on the matter. Furthermore, he is a prolific publisher of "studies" and "appraisals" of circumcision, which are basically Brian Morris quoting himself, and repeating inconclusive or flawed circumcision "research," and calling for the RACP to instate "mandatory circumcision" for all males in Australia.

Morris is also an outspoken member of Gilgal Society, and his name can be found in pamphlets, alongside the Gilgal Society logo. Two such publications can be seen here, and here. In one paper he wrote regarding circumcision devices, which was published in Biomedical Engineering, he actually collaborates with Circlist (methinks he invited them on-board his project), as if they were any sort of reliable authority on circumcision. I wonder if the University of Sydney is aware that their name is being used by Brian Morris to give himself, and the groups he associates with, an air of authority in the literature he writes.

Brian Morris also runs a website which he uses to promote circumcision. He does his best to market the website as a legitimate circumcision resource, but upon closer inspection, is really no different than Circlist's website. His website was at one point hosted on University of Sydney servers, but he was recently asked to move it elsewhere, as the University of Sydney found content on it that was inappropriate. We believe that the inappropriate content was a picture of a naked child, with a folding cellphone clamped onto his foreskin, dangling from the end of his penis, on the humor section of his website. (Be warned, it is rather tasteless, if not off-putting.) Clearly, an adult put the cell phone there and took the picture. The picture seems to still be there. (Accessed 4/22/2012) Brian Morris links to Gilgal Society, as well as eight other "recommended" circumfetish websites and he also includes a list of places to get circumcision devices. (For an in depth analysis of Brian Morris' website, go here.)

Circumcision Tourism

Morris has gone as far as Africa to satisfy his morbid obsession.

Brian Morris Watching Masai Boys During Circumcision Ritual in Kenya, 1989

I have some wonderful photographs of a group of Masai boys in their early teens that I met in Kenya in 1989 dressed in their dark circumcision robes, with white feathers as headwear, and white painted facial decoration that stood out against their very black skin. Each wore a pendant that was the razor blade used for their own circumcision. The ceremony that they had gone through is a special part of their tribal culture and was very important to these boys, who were proud to show that they were now ‘men’. In other cultures it is associated with preparation for marriage and as a sign of entry into manhood.

What's interesting is that on many occasions Brian Morris has accused intactivists of having a fetish for the foreskin. One of Morris' most prominent traits is his incorrigible projection. The trash he talks of human rights activists against the forced circumcision of healthy, non-consenting minors is true of himself!!!

Jake Waskett

Robin to Brian Morris' Batman, intactivists have been keeping an eye on Jake Waskett for a few years now, and we know him to be a circumfetishist who got himself circumcised in adulthood to fulfill a childhood fantasy. We have him on record confessing this to none other than Vernon Quaintance himself:

FROM: Jake H. Waskett 

TO: Vernon Quaintance 

SUBJECT: Circed at last

Hi Vernon
Thank you!
Yes, I recall our correspondence. I find it difficult to believe that I would regret something that I've regretted *not* having done since age 5!
...
 --Yahoo Circlist. Message #26333, 2003 July 30th

Waskett has since latched onto the idea that circumcision of healthy individuals, both infant and adult, can be justified by citing enough scientific "research."

Intactivists have saved records of him exchanging on Circlist. He is also known to lurk on parenting forums and news commentary threads, trying to convince parents to circumcise their children (examples here and here), citing all the usual "research," when we know for a fact that his true interests lie elsewhere.

Despite what is publicly known about him, Jake likes to portray himself as being "objective," "unbiased," and "dispassionate." His actions, however, speak louder than his words.

Why Wikipedia is an Unreliable Resource on Circumcision

Jake Waskett is a computer engineer who has been around since Wikipedia's inception. He is a favorite among the Wikipedia crowd, and he has used his clout at Wikipedia to make himself the sole gatekeeper on any and every article that has anything even remotely related to circumcision. He spends a considerable amount of time editing articles in Wikipedia to reflect a pro-circumcision bias (though he claims he's only making them "neutral"). As of early 2011, Waskett has made almost 14,000 edits on Wikipedia, more than 1,275 edits to the Circumcision article alone. Waskett's first edit to the article was on the 18th of October 2004, and his last edit was today. (You can monitor Jake Waskett's activity, here.) Waskett now averages about one edit every 1 days, 20 hours, 29 minutes and 21 seconds, for the Circumcision article. If Wikipedia appears to have a pro-circumcision bias, it is due entirely to this man.

Jake Waskett has full control of any and every page related to circumcision, to the extent that he allows or disallows whatever edits he desires. He likes to use the rules at Wikipedia to allow or disallow whatever sources he deems to be "acceptable." If the rules don't agree with his whim, he will actually bid to change them so that they do. He only allows sources that put circumcision in a positive light, however flawed and/or refuted they may be, but disallows sources that are devastating to circumcision. He does not allow others to post authoritative sources regarding the foreskin, or the flaws in circumcision "research," not even if they have been published in peer-reviewed journals. He will always find some sort of rule or reason why a paper or study that he doesn't like should not be allowed. Only his resources, or resources that support circumcision are "valid"; resources or studies that run contrary to his views are not. Jake Waskett quotes his own website, circs.org, as a resource on circumcision on Wikipedia.

Other intactivists have observed his activity on Wikipedia, and it continues, though it is seemingly against the rules on Wikipedia. He has been observed in shady behavior, such as getting people that can argue successfully against him permanently banned along with their IP, and getting clear rebuttals against him that reveal his ineptness stricken from the history record at Wikipedia.

All articles at Wikipedia related to circumcision are under Jake Waskett's complete control, and he only allows edits that suit his pro-circumcision bias.

For readers that would like to observe Jake's behavior first-hand, his Wikipedia profile can be found here. His latest edits can be observed here.

Jake also maintains his own pro-circumcision website, circs.org.

Are these the actions of someone who is "unbiased" and "dispassionate?"

Laymen Should Be Dismissed... Except For This One.

Jake Waskett is not a doctor nor medical professional of any kind. He is a computer software engineer in his mid-30s, located in Radcliffe Manchester England. He is neither a surgeon, nor a urologist, nor a pediatrician, nor an epidemiologist. He is no medical authority of any kind, and yet, his name is beginning to appear on scientific papers, as if he were any kind of authority. His name appears in scientific journals any time Brian Morris' does. (This can be observed here, here, and here, though there may be other papers I don't list in this blog post.)

I speculate that, despite not being any actual authority, Brian admires Jake Waskett's pro-circumcision work on Wikipedia and on his own website. He is enamored by Jake's ability to clothe his circumcision bias in scientific jargon, that including his name on Brian's work is his way of paying tribute to one of his favorite circumcision advocates (which in turn feeds Jake's ego). As another example of Brian Morris' projection, he himself has accused intactivists of being nothing but lay people with no scientific authority.

There's more, lot's more...

It's relieving to hear that a known circumfetishist has finally been exposed for the pervert that he really is. But this barely scratches the surface; there's more, lot's more. The floodgates to the greatest medical hoax of all time are but beginning to collapse.

Look at the pamphlets put out by Brian Morris viz Gilgal Society (Two such publications can be seen here, and here.); you'll find the names of many prominent circumcision "researchers" and people who claim to be "experts" on circumcision.

Bertran Auvert, Robert Bailey, and Daniel Halperin appear as authors. These are some of the prominent men who are flooding the medical literature with "studies" that say circumcision "reduces HIV transmission," as well as other diseases.

Thomas Wiswell, author of debunked circumcision/UTI "research" that has been long dismissed by authorities such as the AAP, appears as an author on one of the Morris/Gilgal pamphlets.

So does Edgar Schoen. (Incidentally, Schoen has also written circumcision poetry.)

So does Jake Waskett.

Daniel Halperin has corresponded with Circlist, and apparently so has Edgar Schoen. Daniel Halperin has actually recommended Circlist as well as Brian Morris' website as authorities on circumcision.

Very recently, Brian Morris published another pro-circumcision paper where Jake H Waskett, Robert Bailey, Daniel Halperin, and Thomas Wiswell all appear simultaneously. An earlier such paper can be seen here, and although Robert Bailey does not appear in this one, it mentions "Jake H. Waskett is with the Circumcision Independent Reference and Commentary Service, Manchester, England." This "service," also known as "CIRCS" is nothing more than the acronym to Jake's pro-circumcision website.

These are the people responsible for all the recent circumcision "research." These are the people shaping the WHO's opinion. These are the people to whom media outlets look to as "experts." These are the people to whom others look to as "authorities" on the subject. These are the people helping shape policy in California and Colorado.

Can they be trusted to provide "impartial," "dispassionate," and "unbiased" information?

Is this about "public health?"

Or is "public health" and "research" a front for something darker and more sinister?

How far does this rabbit hole go?

The world is about to find out.

Calling All Intactivist Wiki Editors
For the time being, Wikipedia is a lost cause. The truth will never be known as long as Jake Waskett is hijacking Wikipedia for his own agenda. As a direct result of Jake's activity, important and factual information is currently being omitted from Wikipedia regarding human genital anatomy, and so concerned individuals have felt the need to create a resource where this omitted information can be found.

In response to the situation at Wikipedia, a number of concerned individuals have come together to create "Intactipedia" as an alternative wiki resource on the foreskin and circumcision. The objective is to archive all the information that Jake won't allow on Wikipedia, so that perhaps in the future, when he too is exposed, it would be easy to move information over to Wikipedia with the ease of Wiki markup language.

Please visit Intactipedia and help contribute, if not help shape its direction.

Disclaimer:
Some may argue that I am engaging in ad hominem. However, pointing out conflicts of interest is not ad hominem. The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia's entry on ad hominem (4/22/2012):


Conflict of Interest: Where a source seeks to convince by a claim of authority or by personal observation, identification of conflicts of interest are not ad hominem – it is generally well accepted that an "authority" needs to be objective and impartial, and that an audience can only evaluate information from a source if they know about conflicts of interest that may affect the objectivity of the source. Identification of a conflict of interest is appropriate, and concealment of a conflict of interest is a problem.