"

 I agree. I have had a small amount of time this evening to do a little research. This 2010 review  could perhaps help in bridging the void. It states that there is a ""lack of consensus"" and ""robust evidence"" within the medical literature for things such as penile cancer, STI and UTI, while maintaining there is evidence for HIV prevention (at least in the African trials). If I had the time I would be tempted to run a statistical analysis on the medical reviews themselves! I suspect there would be a clear correlation betweeen the conclusions reached and the country from which they originated. Which brings us (in my opinion) to the crux of the matter. Rightly or wrongly, this is primarily a ritualistic or cosmetic procedure, regardless of what evidence or opinion the medical community has, or will provide. Therefore, to treat this as almost an entirely statistically based article, while only giving a cursory nod to the ethical debate, just feels wrong to me. I am certainly not advocating any bias either for or against. I would be happy to see quotes from Rabbis, Imams, surgeons and scholars. I also believe that any medical consensus (if proven) should remain the basis of the article. Perhaps a sub-heading of ""controversy"" may be worthwhile? "