While this is academically interesting, I would caution readers not to draw any personal or public policy conclusions. Most importantly, bear in mind that this study involves men having unprotected sex. Currently 1% of the Ugandan population are adult males with HIV/AIDS. Given limited resources, would a good solution to this problem be to train personnel and create facilities to circumcise 15 million Ugandan males so that it might protect approximately one half of one percent of the population (a percentage who are only male), or would it be better to teach the use of condoms and make them available so that the males and females who use them are protected from not only HIV, but syphilis, chlamydia, HPV, and countless other STDs?  Further, will a circumsised male see himself as having a license to have more unprotected sex than an uncircumsised male, thereby actually increasing the HIV infection rate?  These are questions that need as much study as correlating foreskin area to HIV infection for Ugandan men.