Circumcision has always been an intervention looking for an excuse, more recently a "cure" in search of a disease, and nothing has changed, except that its advocates (almost all circumcised men who, like the fox who lost his tale in Aesop's fable, can't bear other men having something they lack) are now working in concert. Tobian is part of this small coterie. (They are not a conspiracy; their names are well known, since they often publish together.)

Most men in the world, and the vast majority in the developed world, are not circumcised. The rest of the English-speaking world gave up mass-circumcision a generation ago, with no outbreaks of any of the diseases it was supposed to be good against. A new study from Puerto Rico found circumcised men there were MORE likely to have STDS and HIV.  A study in Uganda by Wawer, Gray, et al. (also in the clique) started to find that circumcising men INcreases the risk to women, but that was cut short for no good reason before that could be confirmed. In 10 out of 18 countries for which USAID has figures, more of the circumcised men have HIV than the non-circumcised.

The current thrust is to restore public funding to male genital cutting, lest the rate fall below the 50% tipping point and the "locker room" argument can be used against it.

Other US studies have shown circumcision's risk and harm do NOT justify doing it. Why do they not get this level of publicity?

Infant circumcision is a human rights issue. HIS body, HIS choice.