This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Preiser;, G.
Right arrow Articles by Lannon, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Preiser;, G.
Right arrow Articles by Lannon, C. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Miscellaneous

PEDIATRICS Vol. 105 No. 3 March 2000, pp. 681-684

Circumcision---The Debates Goes On

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

To the Editor.

The AAP circumcision policy in the March issue of Pediatrics still leaves me with the following questions concerning foreskin and penile hygiene.

  1. What active interventions are recommended to ensure eventual retraction of the foreskin, if indeed such retraction is necessary for intercourse and reproduction? I understand that the production of smegma dissects free the foreskin's adhered epithelial layers over time. Does this process . . . [Full Text of this Article]