Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 354, Issue 9192, 20 November 1999, Pages 1813-1815
The Lancet

Viewpoint
Male circumcision and HIV infection: 10 years and counting

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)03421-2Get rights and content

Section snippets

Epidemiological findings

In their study of the risk factors for HIV infection among 422 men who visited commercial sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya, Cameron and colleagues found that men who were not circumcised had a 8·2-fold increased risk of seroconversion, compared with circumcised men.1 Subsequently, six more prospective studies from four countries investigated the relative risk of heterosexual HIV-1 infection in uncircumcised men. Four studies reported significant relative risks that ranged from 2·3 to 4·5 after

Biological mechanisms

For over a decade researchers have suggested that the foreskin provides a vulnerable portal of entry to HIV and other pathogens.6 The highly vascularised prepuce has been discovered to contain a higher density of Langerhans cells—primary target cells for sexual transmission of HIV—than cervical, vaginal, or rectal mucosa.7 Other scientists and clinicians have noted that the foreskin is more susceptible to traumatic epithelial disruptions during intercourse, which allows additional vulnerability

Public-health response

In the face of such compelling evidence, we would expect the international health community to at least consider some form of action. However, the association between lack of male circumcision and HIV transmission has met with fierce resistance,12 cautious scepticism,13 or, more typically, utter silence, which is evidenced by a dearth of public-health information on the issue. For example, the Johns Hopkins Media/Materials Clearinghouse has been unable to identify among its comprehensive

Response on the ground

In east and southern Africa, increasing numbers of people are becoming aware of the differences in prevalence of AIDS and STDs between circumcised and uncircumcised men, and they are taking action. Male circumcision is increasingly recommended by traditional healers.14 Private clinics that specialise in male circumcision, many of which are run by people with minimum or no medical training, are sprouting up in Tanzania, western Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda,2, 9 and many advertise their services as

Time for action

By avoiding this issue althogether, medical professionals and public-health authorities may inadvertently be harming the very individuals whom they are trying to help. As increasing numbers of men and boys turn to circumcision as perceived protection from AIDS, many will be exposed to harm by untrained practitioners who use unsafe methods. Yet, contrary to some popular misconceptions, safe and inexpensive male circumcision is routinely performed in developing countries in clinical settings. The

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

References (17)

  • CameronDW et al.

    Female to male transmission of human immunideficiency virus type 1: risk factors for seroconversion in men

    Lancet

    (1989)
  • MosesS et al.

    Male circumcision: assessment of health risks and benefits

    Sex Transm Infect

    (1998)
  • MosesS et al.

    The association between lack of male circumcision and risk for HIV infection: a review of the epidemiological data

    Sex Transm Dis

    (1994)
  • SeedJ et al.

    Male circumcision, sexually transmitted disease, and risk of HIV

    J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol

    (1995)
  • Bailey RC, Neema S, Othieno R. Sexual behaviours and other HIV risk factors in circumcised and uncircumcised men in...
  • SimonsenJN et al.

    Human immunodeficiency virus infection among men with sexually transmitted diseases

    N Engl J Med

    (1988)
  • HussainLA et al.

    Comparative investigation of Langerhans' cells and potential receptors for HIV in oral, genitourinary and rectal epithelia

    Immunology

    (1995)
  • PadianNS et al.

    Heterosexual transmission of HIV in nothern California: Results from a ten-year study

    Am J Epidemiol

    (1997)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (168)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text