Prevalence of circumcision: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: references removed Mobile edit Mobile web edit
consistent citation formatting
Line 4: Line 4:
The '''prevalence of circumcision''' is the percentage of males in a given population who have been [[circumcision|circumcised]]. The rates vary widely by country, from 1% in [[Brazil]], to 7% in [[Spain]], to 14% in [[France]] and [[China]], to 20% in the [[United Kingdom]], to 45% in [[South Africa]], to 81% in the [[United States of America|United States]], to over 90% in many [[Muslim world|Muslim-majority countries]]. Worldwide it is estimated that 25% to 33% of males are circumcised, by various sources.<ref>https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/circumcision-faqs</ref>
The '''prevalence of circumcision''' is the percentage of males in a given population who have been [[circumcision|circumcised]]. The rates vary widely by country, from 1% in [[Brazil]], to 7% in [[Spain]], to 14% in [[France]] and [[China]], to 20% in the [[United Kingdom]], to 45% in [[South Africa]], to 81% in the [[United States of America|United States]], to over 90% in many [[Muslim world|Muslim-majority countries]]. Worldwide it is estimated that 25% to 33% of males are circumcised, by various sources.<ref>https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/circumcision-faqs</ref>
<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA">{{Cite web
<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA">{{Cite web
| url = http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf| title = Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability| accessdate = 2009-03-04| year = 2007| publisher = [[World Health Organization]]|format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web
| url = http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf| title = Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability| access-date = 2009-03-04| year = 2007| publisher = [[World Health Organization]]|format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web
| url = http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatal_child_MC_UNAIDS.pdf| title = Neonatal and child male circumcision: a global review|
| url = http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatal_child_MC_UNAIDS.pdf| title = Neonatal and child male circumcision: a global review|
accessdate = 2015-04-12| year = 2010| publisher = [[World Health Organization]]|format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Morris|first=Brian J|last2=Wamai|first2=Richard G|last3=Henebeng|first3=Esther B|last4=Tobian|first4=Aaron AR|last5=Klausner|first5=Jeffrey D|last6=Banerjee|first6=Joya|last7=Hankins|first7=Catherine A|date=2016-03-01|title=Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision|url=https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5|journal=Population Health Metrics|language=En|volume=14|issue=1|doi=10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5|issn=1478-7954|pmc=PMC4772313|pmid=26933388}}</ref>
access-date = 2015-04-12| year = 2010| publisher = [[World Health Organization]]|format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA | title = Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision | language = En | journal = Population Health Metrics | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 4 | date = 2016-03-01 | pmid = 26933388 | pmc = 4772313 | doi = 10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5 | url = https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5 }}</ref>


It is not the current [[Rate (mathematics)|rate]] of newborn males who undergo neonatal circumcision, which may influence future [[prevalence]]. In 2007, the [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) estimated that globally, the vast majority of men who are circumcised are Muslims. They estimated 33% of adult males worldwide (aged 15+) are circumcised, with almost 70% of those being Muslims.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" />
It is not the current [[Rate (mathematics)|rate]] of newborn males who undergo neonatal circumcision, which may influence future [[prevalence]]. In 2007, the [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) estimated that globally, the vast majority of men who are circumcised are Muslims. They estimated 33% of adult males worldwide (aged 15+) are circumcised, with almost 70% of those being Muslims.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" />
Line 14: Line 14:
Male circumcision is nearly universal in the [[Muslim world]] and in [[Israel]] due to the religious beliefs of the majority of [[Muslims]]{{Additional citation needed|date=April 2017}} and [[Jews]]; however, some non-Muslim groups living within Muslim-majority countries, such as [[Armenians]] and [[Assyrian people|Assyrians]], do not practice it.<ref>https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-6407-1_20</ref> It is prevalent in some Muslim-majority countries in [[southeast Asia]] such as [[Indonesia]] and [[Malaysia]]; however, the WHO states that there is "little non-religious circumcision in [[Asia]], with the exceptions of the [[South Korea|Republic of Korea]] and the [[Philippines]]".<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA"/> In parts of [[Africa]] it is often practiced as part of tribal or religious customs. The prevalence of circumcision is also high in the [[United States]], although there has reportedly been a decrease in routine neonatal circumcision in recent years.
Male circumcision is nearly universal in the [[Muslim world]] and in [[Israel]] due to the religious beliefs of the majority of [[Muslims]]{{Additional citation needed|date=April 2017}} and [[Jews]]; however, some non-Muslim groups living within Muslim-majority countries, such as [[Armenians]] and [[Assyrian people|Assyrians]], do not practice it.<ref>https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-6407-1_20</ref> It is prevalent in some Muslim-majority countries in [[southeast Asia]] such as [[Indonesia]] and [[Malaysia]]; however, the WHO states that there is "little non-religious circumcision in [[Asia]], with the exceptions of the [[South Korea|Republic of Korea]] and the [[Philippines]]".<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA"/> In parts of [[Africa]] it is often practiced as part of tribal or religious customs. The prevalence of circumcision is also high in the [[United States]], although there has reportedly been a decrease in routine neonatal circumcision in recent years.


In contrast, it is relatively rare in most of [[Europe]], parts of [[southern Africa]], most of Asia, [[Oceania]] and [[Latin America]], constituting [[South America]], [[Central America]], the [[Caribbean]] and [[Mexico]].<ref name="Drain">{{Cite journal|vauthors=Drain PK, Halperin DT, Hughes JP, Klausner JD, Bailey RC |title=Male circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis of 118 developing countries |journal=BMC Infectious Diseases |volume=6|pages=172 |year=2006 |pmid=17137513 |pmc=1764746 |doi=10.1186/1471-2334-6-172 |issue=1}}</ref>
In contrast, it is relatively rare in most of [[Europe]], parts of [[southern Africa]], most of Asia, [[Oceania]] and [[Latin America]], constituting [[South America]], [[Central America]], the [[Caribbean]] and [[Mexico]].<ref name="Drain">{{cite journal | vauthors = Drain PK, Halperin DT, Hughes JP, Klausner JD, Bailey RC | title = Male circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis of 118 developing countries | journal = BMC Infectious Diseases | volume = 6 | issue = 1 | pages = 172 | date = November 2006 | pmid = 17137513 | pmc = 1764746 | doi = 10.1186/1471-2334-6-172 }}</ref>


Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and the United Kingdom are examples of countries that have seen a significant decline in male circumcision in recent decades, while there have been indications of increasing demand in southern Africa, partly for preventative reasons due to the [[HIV]] [[HIV/AIDS in Africa|epidemic there]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Demand for male circumcision rises in a bid to prevent HIV |journal=Bulletin of the World Health Organization |volume=84 |issue=7 |year=2006 |pages=505–588 |url=http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/bwho/v84n7/v84n7a05.pdf |format=PDF|quote=As a result, there are already indications of increasing demand for male circumcision in traditionally non-circumcising societies in Southern Africa. |pmid=16878217 |pmc=2627386 |author=Wise J}}</ref>
Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and the United Kingdom are examples of countries that have seen a significant decline in male circumcision in recent decades, while there have been indications of increasing demand in southern Africa, partly for preventative reasons due to the [[HIV]] [[HIV/AIDS in Africa|epidemic there]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Wise J | title = Demand for male circumcision rises in a bid to prevent HIV | journal = Bulletin of the World Health Organization | volume = 84 | issue = 7 | pages = 509–11 | date = July 2006 | pmid = 16878217 | pmc = 2627386 | url = http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/bwho/v84n7/v84n7a05.pdf | quote = As a result, there are already indications of increasing demand for male circumcision in traditionally non-circumcising societies in Southern Africa. | format = PDF }}</ref>


==Africa==
==Africa==
Studies indicate that about 62% of African males are circumcised. However, the rate varies widely between different regions, and among ethnic and religious groups, with Muslim North Africans practicing it for religious reasons, central Africans as part of tribal rituals or local custom, (with some practicing [[female genital mutilation]] as well) and some traditionally non-circumcising populations in the South recently adopting the practice due to measures by the World Health Organization to prevent AIDS.<ref>{{cite web |title=Questions and answers: NIAID-sponsored adult male circumcision trials in Kenya and Uganda |publisher=National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases |date=December 2006 |url=http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/AMC12_QA.htm |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100309060025/https://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/AMC12_QA.htm |archivedate=9 March 2010 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
Studies indicate that about 62% of African males are circumcised. However, the rate varies widely between different regions, and among ethnic and religious groups, with Muslim North Africans practicing it for religious reasons, central Africans as part of tribal rituals or local custom, (with some practicing [[female genital mutilation]] as well) and some traditionally non-circumcising populations in the South recently adopting the practice due to measures by the World Health Organization to prevent AIDS.<ref>{{cite web |title=Questions and answers: NIAID-sponsored adult male circumcision trials in Kenya and Uganda |publisher=National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases |date=December 2006 |url=http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/AMC12_QA.htm |deadurl=yes |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100309060025/https://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/AMC12_QA.htm |archive-date=9 March 2010 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
Williams, B.G. ''et al.'' commented that: "Most of the currently available data on the prevalence of [male circumcision] are several decades old, while several of the recent studies were carried out as adjuncts to demographic and health surveys and were not designed to determine the prevalence of [male circumcision]."<ref name="williams">{{cite journal |title=The potential impact of male circumcision on HIV in sub-Saharan Africa |author=Williams, B G |display-authors=etal |journal=PLoS Med |year=2006 |volume=3 |issue=7 |pages=e262 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0030262 |pmid=16822094 |pmc=1489185}}</ref>
Williams, B.G. ''et al.'' commented that: "Most of the currently available data on the prevalence of [male circumcision] are several decades old, while several of the recent studies were carried out as adjuncts to demographic and health surveys and were not designed to determine the prevalence of [male circumcision]."<ref name="williams">{{cite journal | vauthors = Williams BG, Lloyd-Smith JO, Gouws E, Hankins C, Getz WM, Hargrove J, de Zoysa I, Dye C, Auvert B | title = The potential impact of male circumcision on HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa | journal = PLoS Medicine | volume = 3 | issue = 7 | pages = e262 | date = July 2006 | pmid = 16822094 | pmc = 1489185 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030262 }}</ref>


{| class="wikitable sortable" style="margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; margin-top:0;"
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; margin-top:0;"
Line 31: Line 31:
(2006)<ref name="williams" />
(2006)<ref name="williams" />
!data-sort-type="number"|Morris ''et al''
!data-sort-type="number"|Morris ''et al''
(2016)<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Morris|first=Brian J|last2=Wamai|first2=Richard G|last3=Henebeng|first3=Esther B|last4=Tobian|first4=Aaron AR|last5=Klausner|first5=Jeffrey D|last6=Banerjee|first6=Joya|last7=Hankins|first7=Catherine A|date=2016-03-01|title=Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision|url=https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5|journal=Population Health Metrics|language=En|volume=14|issue=1|doi=10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5|issn=1478-7954}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Morris|first=Brian J.|last2=Wamai|first2=Richard G.|last3=Henebeng|first3=Esther B.|last4=Tobian|first4=Aaron A. R.|last5=Klausner|first5=Jeffrey D.|last6=Banerjee|first6=Joya|last7=Hankins|first7=Catherine A.|date=2016-04-04|title=Erratum to: Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision|url=https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-016-0080-6|journal=Population Health Metrics|language=En|volume=14|issue=1|doi=10.1186/s12963-016-0080-6|issn=1478-7954}}</ref>
(2016)<ref name=":0">{{cite journal | vauthors = Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA | title = Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision | language = En | journal = Population Health Metrics | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 4 | date = 2016-03-01 | pmid = 26933388 | doi = 10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5 }}</ref><ref name=":1">{{cite journal | vauthors = Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA | title = Erratum to: Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision | language = En | journal = Population Health Metrics | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 11 | date = 2016-04-04 | pmid = 27051352 | doi = 10.1186/s12963-016-0080-6 }}</ref>
|-----
|-----
| {{flag|Angola }} || >80|| 66
| {{flag|Angola }} || >80|| 66
Line 167: Line 167:


==== South Africa ====
==== South Africa ====
A national study from 2014 found an overall prevalence of 42.8% for self-reported male circumcision. 48.2% of black Africans were circumcised, with 32.1% of those traditionally circumcised and 13.4% circumcised for medical reasons.<ref name="SouthAfrica2014">{{cite journal |title=Prevalence and acceptability of male circumcision in South Africa. |author= Peltzer K1, Onoya D2, Makonko E2, Simbayi L2.|journal=Afr J Tradit Complement Altern Med |year=2014 |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=126–130 |pmid= 25392591 |doi=10.4314/ajtcam.v11i4.19 |pmc=4202407}}</ref>
A national study from 2014 found an overall prevalence of 42.8% for self-reported male circumcision. 48.2% of black Africans were circumcised, with 32.1% of those traditionally circumcised and 13.4% circumcised for medical reasons.<ref name="SouthAfrica2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Peltzer K, Onoya D, Makonko E, Simbayi L | title = Prevalence and acceptability of male circumcision in South Africa | journal = African Journal of Traditional, Complementary, and Alternative Medicines | volume = 11 | issue = 4 | pages = 126–30 | year = 2014 | pmid = 25392591 | pmc = 4202407 | doi = 10.4314/ajtcam.v11i4.19 }}</ref>


===More than 80% ===
===More than 80% ===
Line 182: Line 182:


===Less than 20%===
===Less than 20%===
Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela.<ref name="WHO"/>
Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, JAMAica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela.<ref name="WHO"/>


The overall prevalence of circumcision is reported to be 6.9% in Colombia, and 7.4% in Brazil (13% in Rio de Janeiro), with most of those being done due to medical issues later in life.<ref name="castellsague">{{cite journal |title=Chlamydia trachomatis infection in female partners of circumcised and uncircumcised adult men |author=Castellsagué, X |display-authors=etal |journal=Am J Epidemiol |year=2005 |volume=162 |issue=9 |pages=907–916 |url=http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/162/9/907 |doi=10.1093/aje/kwi284 |pmid=16177149}}</ref>
The overall prevalence of circumcision is reported to be 6.9% in Colombia, and 7.4% in Brazil (13% in Rio de Janeiro), with most of those being done due to medical issues later in life.<ref name="castellsague">{{cite journal | vauthors = Castellsagué X, Peeling RW, Franceschi S, de Sanjosé S, Smith JS, Albero G, Díaz M, Herrero R, Muñoz N, Bosch FX | title = Chlamydia trachomatis infection in female partners of circumcised and uncircumcised adult men | journal = American Journal of Epidemiology | volume = 162 | issue = 9 | pages = 907–16 | date = November 2005 | pmid = 16177149 | doi = 10.1093/aje/kwi284 }}</ref>


The prevalence of circumcision in Mexico is estimated to be 10% to 31%.<ref name="Lajous, M 2006 405–6">{{cite journal |title=Human papillomavirus link to circumcision is misleading (author's reply) |author=Lajous, M |display-authors=etal |journal=Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev |year=2006 |volume=15 |issue=2 |pages=405–6 |quote=Circumcision is not usually performed by public sector health care providers in Mexico and we estimate the prevalence to be 10% to 31%, depending on the population. |doi=10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0818 |pmid=16492939}}</ref>
The prevalence of circumcision in Mexico is estimated to be 10% to 31%.<ref name="Lajous, M 2006 405–6">{{cite journal | vauthors = Van Howe RS, Cold CJ, Lajous M, Lazcano-Ponce E, Mueller N | title = Human papillomavirus link to circumcision is misleading | journal = Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | volume = 15 | issue = 2 | pages = 405; author reply 405-6 | date = February 2006 | pmid = 16492939 | doi = 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0818 | quote = Circumcision is not usually performed by public sector health care providers in Mexico and we estimate the prevalence to be 10% to 31%, depending on the population. }}</ref>


===Between 20% and 80%===
===Between 20% and 80%===
Line 195: Line 195:
[[File:MaternalExperiencesSurveyCanada.svg|thumb|Rate of neonatal circumcision by province according to data from the Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) in 2006-2007.<ref name="phac">{{cite web |url=http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/rhs-ssg/pdf/tab-eng.pdf |pages=267 |title=Data Tables — The Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) 2006–2007 Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey |publisher=Public Health Agency of Canada}}</ref>]]
[[File:MaternalExperiencesSurveyCanada.svg|thumb|Rate of neonatal circumcision by province according to data from the Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) in 2006-2007.<ref name="phac">{{cite web |url=http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/rhs-ssg/pdf/tab-eng.pdf |pages=267 |title=Data Tables — The Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) 2006–2007 Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey |publisher=Public Health Agency of Canada}}</ref>]]


Circumcision in Canada followed the pattern that existed in other English speaking countries, picking up the practice during the 1900s to prevent masturbation and other perceived issues of the time, and then had its rate of circumcision decline due to new policy statements passed and due to coverage for the procedure being dropped, with a pattern of declining incidence of circumcision occurring from 1970 to 1979 after a new policy statement was released In 1975.<ref>http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/</ref> The [[Canadian Paediatric Society]] offered an estimate of 48 percent for the prevalence of male circumcision in Canada in 1970 prior to this fall in prevalence.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Neonatal Circumcision Revisited |journal=Canadian Medical Association Journal |volume=154 |issue=6 |year=1996 |pages=769–780 |url=http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm |pmid=8634956 |pmc=1487803 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023064930/http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm |archivedate=23 October 2007 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> However, when conducting new studies to determine is prevalence in 1977-1978 There was a wide variation in the incidence of circumcision between different provinces and territories. For Example, [[Yukon]] reported a rate of 74.8 percent in while [[Newfoundland]] reported an incidence of 1.9 to 2.4 percent in 1977-78.<ref>{{cite journal | author= Wirth JL | title= Current circumcision practices: Canada | journal= Pediatrics |year=1980 | volume= 66 | issue= 5 | pages= 705–8 | url= http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/66/5/705.abstract | doi= | pmid= 7432876 | pmc= }}</ref> The rate continued to drop, with the newborn circumcision rate in Ontario In 1994-95 dropping to 29.9%.<ref>{{cite book |last= Goel |first= V. (ed.) |title= Patterns of Health Care in Ontario, 2nd edition |publisher= Canadian Medical Association |date=May 1996 |isbn= 0-920169-79-1 |pages=295 |url=http://www.ices.on.ca/~/media/Files/Atlases-Reports/1996/Patterns-of-health-care-in-Ontario-2nd-edition/Full%20report.ashx|format=PDF}}</ref>
Circumcision in Canada followed the pattern that existed in other English speaking countries, picking up the practice during the 1900s to prevent masturbation and other perceived issues of the time, and then had its rate of circumcision decline due to new policy statements passed and due to coverage for the procedure being dropped, with a pattern of declining incidence of circumcision occurring from 1970 to 1979 after a new policy statement was released In 1975.<ref>http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/</ref> The [[Canadian Paediatric Society]] offered an estimate of 48 percent for the prevalence of male circumcision in Canada in 1970 prior to this fall in prevalence.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = | title = Neonatal circumcision revisited. Fetus and Newborn Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society | journal = Cmaj | volume = 154 | issue = 6 | pages = 769–80 | date = March 1996 | pmid = 8634956 | pmc = 1487803 | url = http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071023064930/http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm | df = dmy-all | deadurl = yes | archive-date = 23 October 2007 }}</ref> However, when conducting new studies to determine is prevalence in 1977-1978 There was a wide variation in the incidence of circumcision between different provinces and territories. For Example, [[Yukon]] reported a rate of 74.8 percent in while [[Newfoundland]] reported an incidence of 1.9 to 2.4 percent in 1977-78.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Wirth JL | title = Current circumcision practices: Canada | journal = Pediatrics | volume = 66 | issue = 5 | pages = 705–8 | date = November 1980 | pmid = 7432876 | pmc = | doi = | url = http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/66/5/705.abstract }}</ref> The rate continued to drop, with the newborn circumcision rate in Ontario In 1994-95 dropping to 29.9%.<ref>{{cite book |last= Goel |first= V. (ed.) |title= Patterns of Health Care in Ontario, 2nd edition |publisher= Canadian Medical Association |date=May 1996 |isbn= 0-920169-79-1 |pages=295 |url=http://www.ices.on.ca/~/media/Files/Atlases-Reports/1996/Patterns-of-health-care-in-Ontario-2nd-edition/Full%20report.ashx|format=PDF}}</ref>


A survey of Canadian maternity practices conducted in 2006/2007 and published in 2009 by the national public health agency found a newborn circumcision rate of 31.9%.<ref name="phac"/> Rates varied markedly across the country, from close to zero in [[Newfoundland]] and [[Labrador]] to 44.3% in [[Alberta]]. In 2015, the Canadian Paediatric Society used those statistics in determining their national circumcision rate, with that being the one which is currently used.<ref name="phac" /><ref name="sorakan">{{vcite journal | author=Sorakan ST, Finlay JC, Jefferies AL | title=Newborn male circumcision | journal=Paediatr Child Health | date=2015 | volume=20 | issue=6 | pages=311-5 | url=http://www.cps.ca/en/documents/position/circumcision | doi= | pmid=26435672 | pmc=4578472 }}</ref>
A survey of Canadian maternity practices conducted in 2006/2007 and published in 2009 by the national public health agency found a newborn circumcision rate of 31.9%.<ref name="phac"/> Rates varied markedly across the country, from close to zero in [[Newfoundland]] and [[Labrador]] to 44.3% in [[Alberta]]. In 2015, the Canadian Paediatric Society used those statistics in determining their national circumcision rate, with that being the one which is currently used.<ref name="phac" /><ref name="sorakan">{{cite journal | vauthors=Sorakan ST, Finlay JC, Jefferies AL | title=Newborn male circumcision | journal=Paediatr Child Health | date=2015 | volume=20 | issue=6 | pages=311-5 | url=http://www.cps.ca/en/documents/position/circumcision | doi= | pmid=26435672 | pmc=4578472 }}</ref>


{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable"
Line 236: Line 236:


====United States====
====United States====
The [[Centers For Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) uses two data sources to track circumcision rates. The first is the [[National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey]] (NHANES), which records circumcisions performed at any time at any location. The second is the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), which does not record circumcisions performed outside the hospital setting or those performed at any age following discharge from the birth hospitalization.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Morris|first=Brian J.|last2=Bailis|first2=Stefan A.|last3=Wiswell|first3=Thomas E.|date=May 2014|title=Circumcision Rates in the United States: Rising or Falling? What Effect Might the New Affirmative Pediatric Policy Statement Have?|url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001|journal=Mayo Clinic Proceedings|volume=89|issue=5|pages=677–686|doi=10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001|issn=0025-6196|via=}}</ref>
The [[Centers For Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) uses two data sources to track circumcision rates. The first is the [[National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey]] (NHANES), which records circumcisions performed at any time at any location. The second is the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), which does not record circumcisions performed outside the hospital setting or those performed at any age following discharge from the birth hospitalization.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal | vauthors = Morris BJ, Bailis SA, Wiswell TE | title = Circumcision rates in the United States: rising or falling? What effect might the new affirmative pediatric policy statement have? | journal = Mayo Clinic Proceedings | volume = 89 | issue = 5 | pages = 677–86 | date = May 2014 | pmid = 24702735 | doi = 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001 }}</ref>


Based off NHANES data, the CDC estimated that 80.5% of American males aged 14 to 59 years old from 2005 to 2010 were circumcised. Among racial breakdown, 90.8% of [[Non-Hispanic whites|non-Hispanic whites males]], 75.7% of non-Hispanic [[African Americans|black]], and 44% of [[Mexican Americans]] males from that same age group and time span were circumcised.<ref name=":2" />
Based off NHANES data, the CDC estimated that 80.5% of American males aged 14 to 59 years old from 2005 to 2010 were circumcised. Among racial breakdown, 90.8% of [[Non-Hispanic whites|non-Hispanic whites males]], 75.7% of non-Hispanic [[African Americans|black]], and 44% of [[Mexican Americans]] males from that same age group and time span were circumcised.<ref name=":2" />
Line 247: Line 247:


[[Medicaid]] funding for infant circumcision used to be available in every state, but starting with California in 1982, eighteen states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington) had eliminated Medicaid coverage of routine (non-therapeutic) circumcision by July 2011.<ref name = "adler">
[[Medicaid]] funding for infant circumcision used to be available in every state, but starting with California in 1982, eighteen states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington) had eliminated Medicaid coverage of routine (non-therapeutic) circumcision by July 2011.<ref name = "adler">
{{cite journal | author= Adler PW | title= Is it lawful to use Medicaid to pay for circumcision? | journal= J Law Med |year=2011 | volume= 19 | issue= 2| pages= 335–353 | url= | pmid= 22320007}}</ref> One study in the Midwest of the U.S. found that this had no effect on the newborn circumcision rate but it did affect the demand for circumcision at a later time.<ref name="Quayle">{{cite journal | last = Quayle | first = SS. |author2=DE. Coplen |author3=PF. Austin |date=October 2003 | title = The effect of health care coverage on circumcision rates among newborns | journal = Journal of Urology | volume = 170 | issue = 4 Pt 2 | pages = 1533–1536 | doi = 10.1097/01.ju.0000091215.99513.0f | pmid = 14501653}}
{{cite journal | vauthors = Adler PW | title = Is it lawful to use Medicaid to pay for circumcision? | journal = Journal of Law and Medicine | volume = 19 | issue = 2 | pages = 335–53 | date = December 2011 | pmid = 22320007 }}</ref> One study in the Midwest of the U.S. found that this had no effect on the newborn circumcision rate but it did affect the demand for circumcision at a later time.<ref name="Quayle">{{cite journal | vauthors = Quayle SS, Coplen DE, Austin PF | title = The effect of health care coverage on circumcision rates among newborns | journal = The Journal of Urology | volume = 170 | issue = 4 Pt 2 | pages = 1533–6; discussion 1536 | date = October 2003 | pmid = 14501653 | doi = 10.1097/01.ju.0000091215.99513.0f }}
</ref> Another study, published in early 2009, found a difference in the neonatal male circumcision rate of 24% between states with and without Medicaid coverage. The study was controlled for other factors such as the percentage of Hispanic patients.<ref name="Leibovitz">
</ref> Another study, published in early 2009, found a difference in the neonatal male circumcision rate of 24% between states with and without Medicaid coverage. The study was controlled for other factors such as the percentage of Hispanic patients.<ref name="Leibovitz">
{{cite journal | last = Leibowitz | first = Arleen A. |author2=Katherine Desmond |author3=Thomas Belin | date = January 2009 | title = Determinants and Policy Implications of Male Circumcision in the United States | journal = [[American Journal of Public Health]] | volume = 99| issue = 1 | pages = 138–145 | doi = 10.2105/AJPH.2008.134403 | url = http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/1/138 | quote = The mean mewborn male circumcision rate was 55.9%. When we controlled for other factors, hospitals in states in which Medicaid covers routine male circumcision had circumcision rates that were 24 percentage points higher than did hospitals in states without such coverage (P < .001). | pmid = 19008503 | pmc = 2636604 }}</ref>
{{cite journal | vauthors = Leibowitz AA, Desmond K, Belin T | title = Determinants and policy implications of male circumcision in the United States | journal = American Journal of Public Health | volume = 99 | issue = 1 | pages = 138–45 | date = January 2009 | pmid = 19008503 | pmc = 2636604 | doi = 10.2105/AJPH.2008.134403 | quote = The mean mewborn male circumcision rate was 55.9%. When we controlled for other factors, hospitals in states in which Medicaid covers routine male circumcision had circumcision rates that were 24 percentage points higher than did hospitals in states without such coverage (P < .001). }}</ref>


Circumcision was the second-most common procedure performed on patients under one year of age.<ref>Pfuntner A., Wier L.M., Stocks C. Most Frequent Procedures Performed in U.S. Hospitals, 2011. HCUP Statistical Brief #165. October 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. [http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb165.jsp].</ref> There are various explanations for why the infant circumcision rate in the United States is different from comparable countries. Many parents’ decisions about circumcision are preconceived, which may contribute to the high rate of elective circumcision.<ref name="CSA:I-99">{{cite web|date=December 1999 |url=http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13585.html |title=Report 10 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (I-99):Neonatal Circumcision |work=1999 AMA Interim Meeting: Summaries and Recommendations of Council on Scientific Affairs Reports |pages=17 |publisher=[[American Medical Association]] |accessdate=2006-06-13 |deadurl=unfit |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070705182814/http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13585.html |archivedate=5 July 2007 }}
Circumcision was the second-most common procedure performed on patients under one year of age.<ref>Pfuntner A., Wier L.M., Stocks C. Most Frequent Procedures Performed in U.S. Hospitals, 2011. HCUP Statistical Brief #165. October 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. [http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb165.jsp].</ref> There are various explanations for why the infant circumcision rate in the United States is different from comparable countries. Many parents’ decisions about circumcision are preconceived, which may contribute to the high rate of elective circumcision.<ref name="CSA:I-99">{{cite web|date=December 1999 |url=http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13585.html |title=Report 10 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (I-99):Neonatal Circumcision |work=1999 AMA Interim Meeting: Summaries and Recommendations of Council on Scientific Affairs Reports |pages=17 |publisher=[[American Medical Association]] |access-date=2006-06-13 |deadurl=unfit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070705182814/http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13585.html |archive-date=5 July 2007 }}
</ref> Brown & Brown (1987) reported the most important factor is whether the father is circumcised.<ref name="brown">{{vcite journal |
</ref> Brown & Brown (1987) reported the most important factor is whether the father is circumcised.<ref name="brown">{{cite journal |
author=Brown MS, Brown CA | title= Circumcision decision: prominence of social concerns | journal= Pediatrics | date= 1987 | volume= 60 | issue= 2 | pages= 215–9 | url= http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/80/2/215.abstract | doi= | pmid= 3615091 | pmc= }}</ref>
author=Brown MS, Brown CA | title= Circumcision decision: prominence of social concerns | journal= Pediatrics | date= 1987 | volume= 60 | issue= 2 | pages= 215–9 | url= http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/80/2/215.abstract | doi= | pmid= 3615091 | pmc= }}</ref>


Line 263: Line 263:


===Between 60% and 80%===
===Between 60% and 80%===
Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan and South Korea.<ref name="Kimetal">{{cite journal |title=Decline in male circumcision in South Korea |author1=DaiSik Kim |author2=Sung-Ae Koo |author3=Myung-Geol Pang |url=http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-12-1067.pdf |year=2012}}</ref>
Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan and South Korea.<ref name="Kimetal">{{cite journal | vauthors = Kim D, Koo SA, Pang MG | title = Decline in male circumcision in South Korea | journal = BMC Public Health | volume = 12 | pages = 1067 | date = December 2012 | pmid = 23227923 | doi = 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1067 }}</ref>


====South Korea====
====South Korea====
Circumcision is largely a modern-day phenomenon in South Korea. While the rate in the twentieth century has been nearing 80%, virtually no circumcision was performed just a century ago, as it was against Korea's long and strong tradition of preserving the body as a gift from parents.<ref name="Kimetal"/> A 2001 study of 20-year-old South Korean men found that 78% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Circumcision practice patterns in South Korea: community based survey |author=Ku, J H |display-authors=etal |journal=Sex Transm Infect |volume=79 |pages=65–67 |url=http://sti.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/79/1/65 |doi=10.1136/sti.79.1.65 |year=2003 |pmid=12576619 |issue=1 |pmc=1744613}}</ref> At the time, the authors commented that "South Korea has possibly the largest absolute number of teenage or adult circumcisions anywhere in the world. Because circumcision started through contact with the American military during the Korean War, South Korea has an unusual history of circumcision." According to a 2002 study, 86.3% of South Korean males aged 14–29 were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Pang MG, Kim DS | year = | title = Extraordinarily high rates of male circumcision in South Korea: history and underlying causes | url = http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-12-1067.pdf | format = PDF | journal = BJU Int | volume = 89| pages = 48–54 | doi = 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2002.02545.x }}</ref> In 2012, it's the case of 75.8% of the same age group. Only after 1999 has some information against circumcision become available (at the time of the 2012 study, only 3% of Korean internet sites, using the most popular Korean search engine [[Naver]], are against indiscriminate circumcision and 97% are for).<ref name="Kimetal"/> The authors of the study speculate "that the very existence of information about the history of Korean circumcision, its contrary nature relative to a longstanding tradition, its introduction by the US military, etc., has been extremely influential on the decision-making process regarding circumcision."<ref name="Kimetal"/>
Circumcision is largely a modern-day phenomenon in South Korea. While the rate in the twentieth century has been nearing 80%, virtually no circumcision was performed just a century ago, as it was against Korea's long and strong tradition of preserving the body as a gift from parents.<ref name="Kimetal"/> A 2001 study of 20-year-old South Korean men found that 78% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Ku JH, Kim ME, Lee NK, Park YH | title = Circumcision practice patterns in South Korea: community based survey | journal = Sexually Transmitted Infections | volume = 79 | issue = 1 | pages = 65–7 | date = February 2003 | pmid = 12576619 | pmc = 1744613 | doi = 10.1136/sti.79.1.65 }}</ref> At the time, the authors commented that "South Korea has possibly the largest absolute number of teenage or adult circumcisions anywhere in the world. Because circumcision started through contact with the American military during the Korean War, South Korea has an unusual history of circumcision." According to a 2002 study, 86.3% of South Korean males aged 14–29 were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Pang MG, Kim DS | title = Extraordinarily high rates of male circumcision in South Korea: history and underlying causes | journal = BJU International | volume = 89 | issue = 1 | pages = 48–54 | date = January 2002 | pmid = 11849160 | doi = 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2002.02545.x }}</ref> In 2012, it's the case of 75.8% of the same age group. Only after 1999 has some information against circumcision become available (at the time of the 2012 study, only 3% of Korean internet sites, using the most popular Korean search engine [[Naver]], are against indiscriminate circumcision and 97% are for).<ref name="Kimetal"/> The authors of the study speculate "that the very existence of information about the history of Korean circumcision, its contrary nature relative to a longstanding tradition, its introduction by the US military, etc., has been extremely influential on the decision-making process regarding circumcision."<ref name="Kimetal"/>


===More than 80%===
===More than 80%===
Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Israel,<ref name="ynet1106">{{cite web |title=Israel teaches WHO about circumcision |publisher=ynet news |date=November 2006 |url=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3333564,00.html}}</ref> Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, the Philippines,<ref name="castellsague" /> Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<ref name="WHO" />
Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Israel,<ref name="ynet1106">{{cite web |title=Israel teaches WHO about circumcision |publisher=ynet news |date=November 2006 |url=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3333564,00.html}}</ref> Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, the Philippines,<ref name="castellsague" /> Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<ref name="WHO" />


The overall prevalence of circumcision (''[[tuli (rite)|tuli]]'') in the Philippines is reported to be 92.5%. Most circumcisions in the Philippines are performed between the ages of 11 to 13.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Darby|first=Robert|title=Routine peripubertal circumcision?|publisher=[[National Institutes of Health]]|date=9 August 2011|pmc=3153524|volume=183|issue=11|pages=1283–1284|doi=10.1503/cmaj.111-2060|journal=Canadian Medical Association Journal|pmid=21825054}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Ong|first=Christine|title=Philippine doctors question medical benefits of circumcision|url=http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/350729/1/.html|work=Channel News Asia|publisher=MediaCorp|accessdate=27 August 2012|date=29 May 2008}}</ref>
The overall prevalence of circumcision (''[[tuli (rite)|tuli]]'') in the Philippines is reported to be 92.5%. Most circumcisions in the Philippines are performed between the ages of 11 to 13.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Darby R | title = Routine peripubertal circumcision? | journal = Cmaj | volume = 183 | issue = 11 | pages = 1283–4 | date = August 2011 | pmid = 21825054 | pmc = 3153524 | doi = 10.1503/cmaj.111-2060 | publisher = [[National Institutes of Health]] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Ong|first=Christine|title=Philippine doctors question medical benefits of circumcision|url=http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/350729/1/.html|work=Channel News Asia|publisher=MediaCorp|access-date=27 August 2012|date=29 May 2008}}</ref>


==Europe==
==Europe==


===Less than 20%===
===Less than 20%===
Armenia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,<ref name="kamtsiuris">{{cite journal |doi=10.1007/s00103-007-0247-1 |title=Inanspruchnahme medizinischer Leistungen Ergebnisse des Kinder- und Jugendgesundheitssurveys (KiGGS) |trans-title=Use of medical services. Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS) |language=German |year=2007 |last1=Kamtsiuris |first1=P. |last2=Bergmann |first2=E. |last3=Rattay |first3=P. |last4=Schlaud |first4=M. |journal=Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz |volume=50 |issue=5–6 |pages=836–50 |pmid=17514470}}</ref> Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine,<ref name="WHO" /> and the United Kingdom.<ref name="Dave2003">{{cite journal |doi=10.1136/sti.79.6.499 |title=Male circumcision in Britain: Findings from a national probability sample survey |year=2003 |last1=Dave |first1=S S |journal=Sexually Transmitted Infections |volume=79 |issue=6 |pages=499–500 |pmid=14663134 |last2=Fenton |first2=KA |last3=Mercer |first3=CH |last4=Erens |first4=B |last5=Wellings |first5=K |last6=Johnson |first6=AM |pmc=1744763}}</ref>
Armenia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,<ref name="kamtsiuris">{{cite journal | vauthors = Kamtsiuris P, Bergmann E, Rattay P, Schlaud M | title = [Use of medical services. Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS)] | language = German | journal = Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz | volume = 50 | issue = 5-6 | pages = 836–50 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17514470 | doi = 10.1007/s00103-007-0247-1 | trans-title = Use of medical services. Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS) }}</ref> Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine,<ref name="WHO" /> and the United Kingdom.<ref name="Dave2003">{{cite journal | vauthors = Dave SS, Fenton KA, Mercer CH, Erens B, Wellings K, Johnson AM | title = Male circumcision in Britain: findings from a national probability sample survey | journal = Sexually Transmitted Infections | volume = 79 | issue = 6 | pages = 499–500 | date = December 2003 | pmid = 14663134 | pmc = 1744763 | doi = 10.1136/sti.79.6.499 }}</ref>


A national survey on sexual attitudes in 2000 found that 15.8% of men or boys in the United Kingdom (ages 16–44) were circumcised by their parents' choosing. 11.7% of 16- to 19-year-olds, and 19.6% of 40- to 44-year-olds said they had been circumcised. Apart from black Caribbeans, men born overseas were more likely to be circumcised.<ref name="Dave2003" /> Rickwood ''et al.'' reported that the proportion of English boys circumcised for medical reasons had fallen from 35% in the early 1930s to 6.5% by the mid-1980s. An estimated 3.8% of male children in the UK in 2000 were being circumcised by the age of 15.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1136/bmj.321.7264.792 |title=Towards evidence based circumcision of English boys: Survey of trends in practice |year=2000 |last1=Rickwood |first1=A M K |journal=BMJ |volume=321 |issue=7264 |pages=792–3 |pmid=11009516 |last2=Kenny |first2=SE |last3=Donnell |first3=SC |pmc=27490}}</ref> The researchers stated that too many boys, especially under the age of 5, were still being circumcised because of a misdiagnosis of [[phimosis]]. They called for a target to reduce the percentage to 2%.
A national survey on sexual attitudes in 2000 found that 15.8% of men or boys in the United Kingdom (ages 16–44) were circumcised by their parents' choosing. 11.7% of 16- to 19-year-olds, and 19.6% of 40- to 44-year-olds said they had been circumcised. Apart from black Caribbeans, men born overseas were more likely to be circumcised.<ref name="Dave2003" /> Rickwood ''et al.'' reported that the proportion of English boys circumcised for medical reasons had fallen from 35% in the early 1930s to 6.5% by the mid-1980s. An estimated 3.8% of male children in the UK in 2000 were being circumcised by the age of 15.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Rickwood AM, Kenny SE, Donnell SC | title = Towards evidence based circumcision of English boys: survey of trends in practice | journal = BMJ | volume = 321 | issue = 7264 | pages = 792–3 | date = September 2000 | pmid = 11009516 | pmc = 27490 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.321.7264.792 }}</ref> The researchers stated that too many boys, especially under the age of 5, were still being circumcised because of a misdiagnosis of [[phimosis]]. They called for a target to reduce the percentage to 2%.


In Finland, the overall prevalence of circumcision is 2%, according to a recent publication by the Finnish Health Ministry.<ref>{{Cite web|url = http://www.terveyskirjasto.fi/xmedia/duo/duo98530.pdf|title = Esinahan kirurgia|date = |accessdate = 20 October 2015|website = |publisher = |last = Maija|first = Kolehmainen|first2 = Seppo|last2 = Taskinen}}</ref>
In Finland, the overall prevalence of circumcision is 2%, according to a recent publication by the Finnish Health Ministry.<ref>{{Cite web|url = http://www.terveyskirjasto.fi/xmedia/duo/duo98530.pdf|title = Esinahan kirurgia|date = |access-date = 20 October 2015|website = |publisher = |last = Maija|first = Kolehmainen|first2 = Seppo|last2 = Taskinen | name-list-format = vanc }}</ref>


In Germany, the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents found that 10.9% of boys aged 0–17 had been circumcised.<ref name="kamtsiuris"/>
In Germany, the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents found that 10.9% of boys aged 0–17 had been circumcised.<ref name="kamtsiuris"/>
Line 288: Line 288:
The overall prevalence of circumcision in Spain is reported to be 1.8%.<ref name="castellsague" />
The overall prevalence of circumcision in Spain is reported to be 1.8%.<ref name="castellsague" />


In 1986, 511 out of approximately 478,000 Danish boys aged 0–14 years were circumcised. This corresponds to a cumulative national circumcision rate of around 1.6% by the age of 15 years.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite journal |doi=10.1136/bmj.311.7018.1471 |title=Falling incidence of penis cancer in an uncircumcised population (Denmark 1943-90) |year=1995 |last1=Frisch |first1=M. |last2=Friis |first2=S. |last3=Kjaer |first3=S. K. |last4=Melbye |first4=M. |journal=BMJ |volume=311 |issue=7018 |pages=1471 |pmid=8520335 |pmc=2543732}}</ref>
In 1986, 511 out of approximately 478,000 Danish boys aged 0–14 years were circumcised. This corresponds to a cumulative national circumcision rate of around 1.6% by the age of 15 years.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite journal | vauthors = Frisch M, Friis S, Kjaer SK, Melbye M | title = Falling incidence of penis cancer in an uncircumcised population (Denmark 1943-90) | journal = BMJ | volume = 311 | issue = 7018 | pages = 1471 | date = December 1995 | pmid = 8520335 | pmc = 2543732 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.311.7018.1471 }}</ref>


In [[Slovenia]], a 1999-2001 national probability sample of the general population aged 18–49 years found that overall, 4.5% of Slovenian male citizens reported being circumcised. Prevalence strongly varied across religious groups, with 92.4% of Muslims being circumcised, 1.7% of Roman Catholics, 0% of other religious affiliations (Evangelic, Serbian Orthodox, other), and 7.1% of those with no religious affiliation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hamers |first=Françoise F |date=February 2008 |title=Male circumcision in Slovenia: Results from a national probability sample survey |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5962502_Male_circumcision_in_Slovenia_Results_from_a_national_probability_sample_survey |journal=[[Sexually Transmitted Infections (journal)|Sexually Transmitted Infections]] |publisher= |volume=84 |issue=1 |pages=:49–50 |doi=10.1136/sti.2007.027524 |accessdate=26 June 2018}}</ref>
In [[Slovenia]], a 1999-2001 national probability sample of the general population aged 18–49 years found that overall, 4.5% of Slovenian male citizens reported being circumcised. Prevalence strongly varied across religious groups, with 92.4% of Muslims being circumcised, 1.7% of Roman Catholics, 0% of other religious affiliations (Evangelic, Serbian Orthodox, other), and 7.1% of those with no religious affiliation.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Klavs I, Hamers FF | title = Male circumcision in Slovenia: results from a national probability sample survey | journal = Sexually Transmitted Infections | volume = 84 | issue = 1 | pages = 49–50 | date = February 2008 | pmid = 17881413 | doi = 10.1136/sti.2007.027524 | url = https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5962502_Male_circumcision_in_Slovenia_Results_from_a_national_probability_sample_survey }}</ref>


===Between 20% and 80%===
===Between 20% and 80%===
Line 303: Line 303:


===Australia===
===Australia===
Circumcision reached its peak in Australia in the 1950s with a rate of more than 80%, but has steadily fallen to an estimated 26% in 2012.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.circinfo.org/statistics.html |title=Incidence and prevalence of circumcision in Australia |work=Circumcision Information Australia |date=January 2013 |accessdate=26 June 2018}}</ref>
Circumcision reached its peak in Australia in the 1950s with a rate of more than 80%, but has steadily fallen to an estimated 26% in 2012.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.circinfo.org/statistics.html |title=Incidence and prevalence of circumcision in Australia |work=Circumcision Information Australia |date=January 2013 |access-date=26 June 2018}}</ref>


The Australian Longitudinal Study of Health and Relationships is a computer assisted telephone interview of males aged 16–64 that uses a nationally representative population sample.<ref>{{vcite journal | author=Smith AMA, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, et al | title=The Australian longitudinal study of health and relationships | journal=BMC Public Health | date=2007 | volume=7 | issue= | pages=139 | url= | doi=10.1186/1471-2458-7-139 | pmid= 17608953| pmc=1931435 }}</ref> In 2005 the interview found that the prevalence of circumcision in Australia was roughly 58%. Circumcision status was more common with males over 30 than males under 30, and more common with males who were born in Australia. 66% of males born in Australia were circumcised and less than 1/3 of males under 30 were circumcised.<ref name=Australia1>{{cite journal |title=Circumcision in Australia: further evidence on its effects on sexual health and wellbeing |author=Ferris JA1, Richters J, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, Simpson JM, Ryall R, Smith AM. |journal=Aust N Z J Public Health |year=2010|volume=34|issue=2 |pages=160–164 |pmid=23331360 |doi=10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00501.x | url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00501.x/abstract }}</ref> There has been a decline in the rate of infant circumcision in Australia.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" /><ref name="Richters2006">{{vcite journal |title=Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health |author=Richters, J |display-authors=etal |journal=Int J STD AIDS |year=2006 |volume=17 |pages=547–554 |doi=10.1258/095646206778145730 |pmid=16925903 |issue=8}}</ref> The [[Royal Australasian College of Physicians]] (RACP) estimated in 2010 that 10 to 20 percent of newborn boys are being circumcised,<ref name = "RACP2010">{{vcite web |url=http://www.racp.edu.au//index.cfm?objectid=65118B16-F145-8B74-236C86100E4E3E8E |title=Circumcision of Male Infants |publisher=Royal Australasian College of Physicians |year=2010}}</ref> but the prevalence of male circumcision is much higher due to the presence of older circumcised males remaining in the population.<ref>The incidence of circumcision in Australia was very high until 1971 when it started a steep decline. Consequently, circumcised males tend to be older.</ref> [[Medicare Australia]] records show the number of males younger than six months that underwent circumcision dropped from 19,663 in 2007/08 to 6309 (4%) in 2016/17.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/why-is-the-number-of-male-circumcisions-declining-in-australia |title=Why is the number of male circumcisions declining in Australia? |author=Rashida Yosufzai |work=SBS News |date=19 February 2018 |accessdate=26 June 2018}}</ref>
The Australian Longitudinal Study of Health and Relationships is a computer assisted telephone interview of males aged 16–64 that uses a nationally representative population sample.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Smith AM, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, Richters J, Ferris J | title = The Australian longitudinal study of health and relationships | journal = BMC Public Health | volume = 7 | issue = | pages = 139 | date = July 2007 | pmid = 17608953 | pmc = 1931435 | doi = 10.1186/1471-2458-7-139 }}</ref> In 2005 the interview found that the prevalence of circumcision in Australia was roughly 58%. Circumcision status was more common with males over 30 than males under 30, and more common with males who were born in Australia. 66% of males born in Australia were circumcised and less than 1/3 of males under 30 were circumcised.<ref name=Australia1>{{cite journal | vauthors = Ferris JA, Richters J, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, Simpson JM, Ryall R, Smith AM | title = Circumcision in Australia: further evidence on its effects on sexual health and wellbeing | journal = Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health | volume = 34 | issue = 2 | pages = 160–4 | date = April 2010 | pmid = 23331360 | doi = 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00501.x }}</ref> There has been a decline in the rate of infant circumcision in Australia.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" /><ref name="Richters2006">{{cite journal | vauthors = Richters J, Smith AM, de Visser RO, Grulich AE, Rissel CE | title = Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health | journal = International Journal of STD & AIDS | volume = 17 | issue = 8 | pages = 547–54 | date = August 2006 | pmid = 16925903 | doi = 10.1258/095646206778145730 }}</ref> The [[Royal Australasian College of Physicians]] (RACP) estimated in 2010 that 10 to 20 percent of newborn boys are being circumcised,<ref name = "RACP2010">{{cite web |url=http://www.racp.edu.au//index.cfm?objectid=65118B16-F145-8B74-236C86100E4E3E8E |title=Circumcision of Male Infants |publisher=Royal Australasian College of Physicians |year=2010}}</ref> but the prevalence of male circumcision is much higher due to the presence of older circumcised males remaining in the population.<ref>The incidence of circumcision in Australia was very high until 1971 when it started a steep decline. Consequently, circumcised males tend to be older.</ref> [[Medicare Australia]] records show the number of males younger than six months that underwent circumcision dropped from 19,663 in 2007/08 to 6309 (4%) in 2016/17.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/why-is-the-number-of-male-circumcisions-declining-in-australia |title=Why is the number of male circumcisions declining in Australia? |author=Rashida Yosufzai |work=SBS News |date=19 February 2018 |access-date=26 June 2018}}</ref>


===New Zealand===
===New Zealand===


According to the World Health Organisation, fewer than 20% of males are circumcised in New Zealand in 2007.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" /> In New Zealand routine circumcision for which there is no medical indication is uncommon and no longer publicly funded within the public hospital system.<ref name="afsari">{{cite journal |vauthors=Afsari M, Beasley SW, Maoate K, Heckert K |title=Attitudes of Pacific parents to circumcision of boys |journal=Pac Health Dialog |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=29–33 |date=March 2002 |pmid=12737414 | url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10769194_Attitudes_of_Pacific_parents_to_circumcision_of_boys |quote=Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in Pacific Island countries.}}</ref> In a study of men born in 1972–1973 in [[Dunedin]], 40.2% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Herpes simplex virus type 2 status at age 26 is not related to early circumcision in a birth cohort |author=Dickson, N |display-authors=etal |journal=Sex Transm Dis |year=2005 |volume=32 |issue=8 |pages=517–9 |pmid=16041257 |doi=10.1097/01.olq.0000161296.58095.ab}}</ref> In a study of men born in 1977 in [[Christchurch]], 26.1% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Circumcision status and risk of sexually transmitted infection in young adult males: an analysis of a longitudinal birth cohort |author=Fergusson, DM |display-authors=etal |journal=Pediatrics |year=2007 |volume=118 |issue=5 |pages=1971–7 |pmid=17079568 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1175}}</ref> A 1991 survey conducted in [[Waikato]] found that 7% of male infants were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Current practice of neonatal circumcision in the Waikato |author=Lawrenson RA |journal=N Z Med J |year=1991 |volume=104 |issue=911 |pages=184–5 |pmid=1898442}}</ref>
According to the World Health Organisation, fewer than 20% of males are circumcised in New Zealand in 2007.<ref name="WHO-GTPDSA" /> In New Zealand routine circumcision for which there is no medical indication is uncommon and no longer publicly funded within the public hospital system.<ref name="afsari">{{cite journal | vauthors = Afsari M, Beasley SW, Maoate K, Heckert K | title = Attitudes of Pacific parents to circumcision of boys | journal = Pacific Health Dialog | volume = 9 | issue = 1 | pages = 29–33 | date = March 2002 | pmid = 12737414 | url = https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10769194_Attitudes_of_Pacific_parents_to_circumcision_of_boys | quote = Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in Pacific Island countries. }}</ref> In a study of men born in 1972–1973 in [[Dunedin]], 40.2% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dickson N, van Roode T, Paul C | title = Herpes simplex virus type 2 status at age 26 is not related to early circumcision in a birth cohort | journal = Sexually Transmitted Diseases | volume = 32 | issue = 8 | pages = 517–9 | date = August 2005 | pmid = 16041257 | doi = 10.1097/01.olq.0000161296.58095.ab }}</ref> In a study of men born in 1977 in [[Christchurch]], 26.1% were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fergusson DM, Boden JM, Horwood LJ | title = Circumcision status and risk of sexually transmitted infection in young adult males: an analysis of a longitudinal birth cohort | journal = Pediatrics | volume = 118 | issue = 5 | pages = 1971–7 | date = November 2006 | pmid = 17079568 | doi = 10.1542/peds.2006-1175 }}</ref> A 1991 survey conducted in [[Waikato]] found that 7% of male infants were circumcised.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lawrenson RA | title = Current practice of neonatal circumcision in the Waikato | journal = The New Zealand Medical Journal | volume = 104 | issue = 911 | pages = 184–5 | date = May 1991 | pmid = 1898442 }}</ref>


=== Pacific Islands ===
=== Pacific Islands ===
Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in [[Pacific Island]] countries.<ref name="afsari" />
Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in [[Pacific Island]] countries.<ref name="afsari" />


==See also==
== See also ==
*[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4772313/table/Tab1/?report=objectonly Circumcision rates of 237 countries around the world]
*[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4772313/table/Tab1/?report=objectonly Circumcision rates of 237 countries around the world]
*[[Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country]]
*[[Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country]]
* [[Genital modification and mutilation]]
* [[Genital modification and mutilation]]


==References==
== References ==
{{Reflist}}
{{Reflist}}


==External links==
== External links ==
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite journal | doi = 10.1186/1471-2334-6-172 | last1 = Drain | first1 = PK | last2 = Halperin | first2 = DT | last3 = Hughes | first3 = JP | last4 = Klausner | first4 = JD | last5 = Bailey | first5 = RC. | pmc = 1764746 |name-list-format=vanc | date =November 2006 | title = Male circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis of 118 developing countries | url = http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/6/172 | journal = BMC Infect Dis | volume = 6 | issue = 1 | page = 172 | pmid=17137513}}
* {{cite journal | vauthors = Drain PK, Halperin DT, Hughes JP, Klausner JD, Bailey RC | title = Male circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis of 118 developing countries | journal = BMC Infectious Diseases | volume = 6 | issue = 1 | pages = 172 | date = November 2006 | pmid = 17137513 | pmc = 1764746 | doi = 10.1186/1471-2334-6-172 }}
{{refend}}


{{Circumcision series}}
{{Circumcision series}}

Revision as of 05:18, 30 August 2018

Male circumcision prevalence (not rate) by country according to the World Health Organization's 2007 review of the global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety, and acceptability of circumcision[1]

The prevalence of circumcision is the percentage of males in a given population who have been circumcised. The rates vary widely by country, from 1% in Brazil, to 7% in Spain, to 14% in France and China, to 20% in the United Kingdom, to 45% in South Africa, to 81% in the United States, to over 90% in many Muslim-majority countries. Worldwide it is estimated that 25% to 33% of males are circumcised, by various sources.[2] [3][4][5]

It is not the current rate of newborn males who undergo neonatal circumcision, which may influence future prevalence. In 2007, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that globally, the vast majority of men who are circumcised are Muslims. They estimated 33% of adult males worldwide (aged 15+) are circumcised, with almost 70% of those being Muslims.[3]

Overview

Male circumcision is nearly universal in the Muslim world and in Israel due to the religious beliefs of the majority of Muslims[additional citation(s) needed] and Jews; however, some non-Muslim groups living within Muslim-majority countries, such as Armenians and Assyrians, do not practice it.[6] It is prevalent in some Muslim-majority countries in southeast Asia such as Indonesia and Malaysia; however, the WHO states that there is "little non-religious circumcision in Asia, with the exceptions of the Republic of Korea and the Philippines".[3] In parts of Africa it is often practiced as part of tribal or religious customs. The prevalence of circumcision is also high in the United States, although there has reportedly been a decrease in routine neonatal circumcision in recent years.

In contrast, it is relatively rare in most of Europe, parts of southern Africa, most of Asia, Oceania and Latin America, constituting South America, Central America, the Caribbean and Mexico.[7]

Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and the United Kingdom are examples of countries that have seen a significant decline in male circumcision in recent decades, while there have been indications of increasing demand in southern Africa, partly for preventative reasons due to the HIV epidemic there.[8]

Africa

Studies indicate that about 62% of African males are circumcised. However, the rate varies widely between different regions, and among ethnic and religious groups, with Muslim North Africans practicing it for religious reasons, central Africans as part of tribal rituals or local custom, (with some practicing female genital mutilation as well) and some traditionally non-circumcising populations in the South recently adopting the practice due to measures by the World Health Organization to prevent AIDS.[9] Williams, B.G. et al. commented that: "Most of the currently available data on the prevalence of [male circumcision] are several decades old, while several of the recent studies were carried out as adjuncts to demographic and health surveys and were not designed to determine the prevalence of [male circumcision]."[10]

Prevalence of circumcision in Africa
Country WHO

(2006)[11]

Williams et al

(2006)[10]

Morris et al

(2016)[12][13]

 Angola >80 66 57.5
 Central African Republic 20–80 67 63
 Chad >80 64 73.5
 Republic of the Congo >80 70 70
 Democratic Republic of the Congo >80 70 97.2
 Gabon >80 93 99.2
 Burundi <20 2 61.7
 Djibouti >80 94 96.5
 Eritrea >80 95 97.2
 Ethiopia >80 76 92.2
 Kenya >80 84 91.2
 Rwanda <20 10 13.3
 Somalia >80 93 93.5
 Sudan 20–80 47 39.4
 Tanzania 20–80 70 72
 Uganda 20–80 25 26.7
 Botswana <20 25 15.1
 Lesotho 20–80 0 52
 Malawi <20 17 21.6
 Mozambique 20–80 56 47.4
 Namibia <20 15 25.5
 South Africa 20–80 35 44.7
 Swaziland <20 50 8.2
 Zambia <20 12 21.6
 Zimbabwe <20 10 9.2
 Benin >80 84 92.9
 Burkina Faso >80 89 88.3
 Cameroon >80 93 94
 Equatorial Guinea >80 86 87
 Gambia >80 90 94.5
 Ghana >80 95 91.6
 Guinea >80 83 84.2
 Guinea-Bissau >80 91 93.3
 Côte d'Ivoire 20–80 93 96.7
 Liberia >80 70 97.7
 Mali >80 95 86
 Mauritania >80 78 99.2
 Niger >80 92 95.5
 Nigeria >80 81 98.9
 Senegal >80 89 93.5
 Sierra Leone >80 90 96.1
 Togo >80 93 95.2

Less than 20%

Botswana, Rwanda, Swaziland, Zimbabwe.[12][13]

Between 20% and 80%

Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo (Rep), Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia.[12][13]

South Africa

A national study from 2014 found an overall prevalence of 42.8% for self-reported male circumcision. 48.2% of black Africans were circumcised, with 32.1% of those traditionally circumcised and 13.4% circumcised for medical reasons.[14]

More than 80%

Benin, Burkin Faso, Cameroon, Congo (Dem Rep), Cote d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Togo.[12][13]

The Americas

Less than 20%

Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, JAMAica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela.[11]

The overall prevalence of circumcision is reported to be 6.9% in Colombia, and 7.4% in Brazil (13% in Rio de Janeiro), with most of those being done due to medical issues later in life.[15]

The prevalence of circumcision in Mexico is estimated to be 10% to 31%.[16]

Between 20% and 80%

Canada,[11] United States.[11] The Bahamas

Canada

Rate of neonatal circumcision by province according to data from the Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) in 2006-2007.[17]

Circumcision in Canada followed the pattern that existed in other English speaking countries, picking up the practice during the 1900s to prevent masturbation and other perceived issues of the time, and then had its rate of circumcision decline due to new policy statements passed and due to coverage for the procedure being dropped, with a pattern of declining incidence of circumcision occurring from 1970 to 1979 after a new policy statement was released In 1975.[18] The Canadian Paediatric Society offered an estimate of 48 percent for the prevalence of male circumcision in Canada in 1970 prior to this fall in prevalence.[19] However, when conducting new studies to determine is prevalence in 1977-1978 There was a wide variation in the incidence of circumcision between different provinces and territories. For Example, Yukon reported a rate of 74.8 percent in while Newfoundland reported an incidence of 1.9 to 2.4 percent in 1977-78.[20] The rate continued to drop, with the newborn circumcision rate in Ontario In 1994-95 dropping to 29.9%.[21]

A survey of Canadian maternity practices conducted in 2006/2007 and published in 2009 by the national public health agency found a newborn circumcision rate of 31.9%.[17] Rates varied markedly across the country, from close to zero in Newfoundland and Labrador to 44.3% in Alberta. In 2015, the Canadian Paediatric Society used those statistics in determining their national circumcision rate, with that being the one which is currently used.[17][22]

Percentage of mothers reporting having their male baby circumcised, by province and territory, Canada, 2006/2007
Newfoundland and Labrador *
Prince Edward Island 39.2
Nova Scotia 6.8
New Brunswick 18.0
Quebec 12.3
Ontario 43.7
Manitoba 31.6
Saskatchewan 35.6
Alberta 44.3
British Columbia 30.2
Yukon *
Northwest Territories 9.7
Nunavut *
Canada 31.9
* Numerator too small for rate calculation
Source:  Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey[17]

United States

The Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses two data sources to track circumcision rates. The first is the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), which records circumcisions performed at any time at any location. The second is the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), which does not record circumcisions performed outside the hospital setting or those performed at any age following discharge from the birth hospitalization.[23]

Based off NHANES data, the CDC estimated that 80.5% of American males aged 14 to 59 years old from 2005 to 2010 were circumcised. Among racial breakdown, 90.8% of non-Hispanic whites males, 75.7% of non-Hispanic black, and 44% of Mexican Americans males from that same age group and time span were circumcised.[23]

Based off NHDS data, the CDC reported a national decline in circumcision rates of newborns, from 64.5% to 58.3%, during the 32-year period from 1972 to 2010. Trends varied regionally, with the Midwest mirroring the national trend; in the Northeast there was no discernible trend in the 32-year period; the South experienced an increase in circumcision rates from 1979 until 1998 and then a decline until 2010; finally, the West saw a decrease of 37% during the period in question, with the biggest drop happening in the 1980's, continuing with a slower decrease until 2010.[24] The decline is in large part due to the growing Hispanic population.[23]

In 2009, the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) reported its findings regarding newborn circumcisions based on U.S. region and income bracket. Its data came from several states' hospital associations and health departments. The Western Region reported a rate of 24.6%, the North Central Region reported a rate of 76.2%, the Northeast Region reported a rate of 67%, and the Southern Region reported a rate of 55.7%. The combined newborn circumcision rate of all regions was 54.5%, which is similar but slightly lower than the NHDS data from 2010. There was also significant variation between rural and urban areas. Rural areas reported a rate of 66.9%, while urban areas reported a rate of 41.2%. The lowest income bracket reported a rate of 51.5%, while the highest income bracket reported a rate of 60.4%[25]

Rate of neonatal circumcision in the United States by region in 2009. Based on data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project.[25]

Medicaid funding for infant circumcision used to be available in every state, but starting with California in 1982, eighteen states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington) had eliminated Medicaid coverage of routine (non-therapeutic) circumcision by July 2011.[26] One study in the Midwest of the U.S. found that this had no effect on the newborn circumcision rate but it did affect the demand for circumcision at a later time.[27] Another study, published in early 2009, found a difference in the neonatal male circumcision rate of 24% between states with and without Medicaid coverage. The study was controlled for other factors such as the percentage of Hispanic patients.[28]

Circumcision was the second-most common procedure performed on patients under one year of age.[29] There are various explanations for why the infant circumcision rate in the United States is different from comparable countries. Many parents’ decisions about circumcision are preconceived, which may contribute to the high rate of elective circumcision.[30] Brown & Brown (1987) reported the most important factor is whether the father is circumcised.[31]

Asia

Less than 20%

Bhutan, Burma, China,[32] Cambodia, India, Japan, Laos, Mongolia, Nepal, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam.[11]

The overall prevalence of circumcision in Cambodia is reported to be 3.5%.[15]

Between 60% and 80%

Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan and South Korea.[33]

South Korea

Circumcision is largely a modern-day phenomenon in South Korea. While the rate in the twentieth century has been nearing 80%, virtually no circumcision was performed just a century ago, as it was against Korea's long and strong tradition of preserving the body as a gift from parents.[33] A 2001 study of 20-year-old South Korean men found that 78% were circumcised.[34] At the time, the authors commented that "South Korea has possibly the largest absolute number of teenage or adult circumcisions anywhere in the world. Because circumcision started through contact with the American military during the Korean War, South Korea has an unusual history of circumcision." According to a 2002 study, 86.3% of South Korean males aged 14–29 were circumcised.[35] In 2012, it's the case of 75.8% of the same age group. Only after 1999 has some information against circumcision become available (at the time of the 2012 study, only 3% of Korean internet sites, using the most popular Korean search engine Naver, are against indiscriminate circumcision and 97% are for).[33] The authors of the study speculate "that the very existence of information about the history of Korean circumcision, its contrary nature relative to a longstanding tradition, its introduction by the US military, etc., has been extremely influential on the decision-making process regarding circumcision."[33]

More than 80%

Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Israel,[36] Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, the Philippines,[15] Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.[11]

The overall prevalence of circumcision (tuli) in the Philippines is reported to be 92.5%. Most circumcisions in the Philippines are performed between the ages of 11 to 13.[37][38]

Europe

Less than 20%

Armenia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,[39] Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine,[11] and the United Kingdom.[40]

A national survey on sexual attitudes in 2000 found that 15.8% of men or boys in the United Kingdom (ages 16–44) were circumcised by their parents' choosing. 11.7% of 16- to 19-year-olds, and 19.6% of 40- to 44-year-olds said they had been circumcised. Apart from black Caribbeans, men born overseas were more likely to be circumcised.[40] Rickwood et al. reported that the proportion of English boys circumcised for medical reasons had fallen from 35% in the early 1930s to 6.5% by the mid-1980s. An estimated 3.8% of male children in the UK in 2000 were being circumcised by the age of 15.[41] The researchers stated that too many boys, especially under the age of 5, were still being circumcised because of a misdiagnosis of phimosis. They called for a target to reduce the percentage to 2%.

In Finland, the overall prevalence of circumcision is 2%, according to a recent publication by the Finnish Health Ministry.[42]

In Germany, the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents found that 10.9% of boys aged 0–17 had been circumcised.[39]

In France, according to a telephone survey (TNS Sofres Institute, 2008), 14% of men are circumcised.[43]

The overall prevalence of circumcision in Spain is reported to be 1.8%.[15]

In 1986, 511 out of approximately 478,000 Danish boys aged 0–14 years were circumcised. This corresponds to a cumulative national circumcision rate of around 1.6% by the age of 15 years.[44]

In Slovenia, a 1999-2001 national probability sample of the general population aged 18–49 years found that overall, 4.5% of Slovenian male citizens reported being circumcised. Prevalence strongly varied across religious groups, with 92.4% of Muslims being circumcised, 1.7% of Roman Catholics, 0% of other religious affiliations (Evangelic, Serbian Orthodox, other), and 7.1% of those with no religious affiliation.[45]

Between 20% and 80%

Albania, Kosovo, Republic of Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.[11]

In Albania during the years 2008-09 the percentage of men age 15-49 who reported having been circumcised was 47.7%.[46]

Unknown

Andorra, Croatia and Luxembourg are listed as unknown on the WHO prevalence map. Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City are unclear from the map.[11]

Oceania

Australia

Circumcision reached its peak in Australia in the 1950s with a rate of more than 80%, but has steadily fallen to an estimated 26% in 2012.[47]

The Australian Longitudinal Study of Health and Relationships is a computer assisted telephone interview of males aged 16–64 that uses a nationally representative population sample.[48] In 2005 the interview found that the prevalence of circumcision in Australia was roughly 58%. Circumcision status was more common with males over 30 than males under 30, and more common with males who were born in Australia. 66% of males born in Australia were circumcised and less than 1/3 of males under 30 were circumcised.[49] There has been a decline in the rate of infant circumcision in Australia.[3][50] The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) estimated in 2010 that 10 to 20 percent of newborn boys are being circumcised,[51] but the prevalence of male circumcision is much higher due to the presence of older circumcised males remaining in the population.[52] Medicare Australia records show the number of males younger than six months that underwent circumcision dropped from 19,663 in 2007/08 to 6309 (4%) in 2016/17.[53]

New Zealand

According to the World Health Organisation, fewer than 20% of males are circumcised in New Zealand in 2007.[3] In New Zealand routine circumcision for which there is no medical indication is uncommon and no longer publicly funded within the public hospital system.[54] In a study of men born in 1972–1973 in Dunedin, 40.2% were circumcised.[55] In a study of men born in 1977 in Christchurch, 26.1% were circumcised.[56] A 1991 survey conducted in Waikato found that 7% of male infants were circumcised.[57]

Pacific Islands

Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in Pacific Island countries.[54]

See also

References

  1. ^ "Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2007.
  2. ^ https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/circumcision-faqs
  3. ^ a b c d e "Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2007. Retrieved 4 March 2009.
  4. ^ "Neonatal and child male circumcision: a global review" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2010. Retrieved 12 April 2015.
  5. ^ Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA (1 March 2016). "Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision". Population Health Metrics. 14 (1): 4. doi:10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5. PMC 4772313. PMID 26933388.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  6. ^ https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-6407-1_20
  7. ^ Drain PK, Halperin DT, Hughes JP, Klausner JD, Bailey RC (November 2006). "Male circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis of 118 developing countries". BMC Infectious Diseases. 6 (1): 172. doi:10.1186/1471-2334-6-172. PMC 1764746. PMID 17137513.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  8. ^ Wise J (July 2006). "Demand for male circumcision rises in a bid to prevent HIV" (PDF). Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 84 (7): 509–11. PMC 2627386. PMID 16878217. As a result, there are already indications of increasing demand for male circumcision in traditionally non-circumcising societies in Southern Africa.
  9. ^ "Questions and answers: NIAID-sponsored adult male circumcision trials in Kenya and Uganda". National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. December 2006. Archived from the original on 9 March 2010. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  10. ^ a b Williams BG, Lloyd-Smith JO, Gouws E, Hankins C, Getz WM, Hargrove J, de Zoysa I, Dye C, Auvert B (July 2006). "The potential impact of male circumcision on HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa". PLoS Medicine. 3 (7): e262. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0030262. PMC 1489185. PMID 16822094.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  11. ^ a b c d e f g h i "Information package on male circumcision and HIV prevention: insert 2" (PDF). World Health Organisation. p. 2.
  12. ^ a b c d Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA (1 March 2016). "Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision". Population Health Metrics. 14 (1): 4. doi:10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5. PMID 26933388.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  13. ^ a b c d Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB, Tobian AA, Klausner JD, Banerjee J, Hankins CA (4 April 2016). "Erratum to: Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision". Population Health Metrics. 14 (1): 11. doi:10.1186/s12963-016-0080-6. PMID 27051352.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  14. ^ Peltzer K, Onoya D, Makonko E, Simbayi L (2014). "Prevalence and acceptability of male circumcision in South Africa". African Journal of Traditional, Complementary, and Alternative Medicines. 11 (4): 126–30. doi:10.4314/ajtcam.v11i4.19. PMC 4202407. PMID 25392591.
  15. ^ a b c d Castellsagué X, Peeling RW, Franceschi S, de Sanjosé S, Smith JS, Albero G, Díaz M, Herrero R, Muñoz N, Bosch FX (November 2005). "Chlamydia trachomatis infection in female partners of circumcised and uncircumcised adult men". American Journal of Epidemiology. 162 (9): 907–16. doi:10.1093/aje/kwi284. PMID 16177149.
  16. ^ Van Howe RS, Cold CJ, Lajous M, Lazcano-Ponce E, Mueller N (February 2006). "Human papillomavirus link to circumcision is misleading". Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 15 (2): 405, author reply 405-6. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0818. PMID 16492939. Circumcision is not usually performed by public sector health care providers in Mexico and we estimate the prevalence to be 10% to 31%, depending on the population.
  17. ^ a b c d "Data Tables — The Maternity Experiences Survey (MES) 2006–2007 Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey" (PDF). Public Health Agency of Canada. p. 267.
  18. ^ http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/
  19. ^ "Neonatal circumcision revisited. Fetus and Newborn Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society". Cmaj. 154 (6): 769–80. March 1996. PMC 1487803. PMID 8634956. Archived from the original on 23 October 2007. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  20. ^ Wirth JL (November 1980). "Current circumcision practices: Canada". Pediatrics. 66 (5): 705–8. PMID 7432876.
  21. ^ Goel, V. (ed.) (May 1996). Patterns of Health Care in Ontario, 2nd edition (PDF). Canadian Medical Association. p. 295. ISBN 0-920169-79-1. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)
  22. ^ Sorakan ST, Finlay JC, Jefferies AL (2015). "Newborn male circumcision". Paediatr Child Health. 20 (6): 311–5. PMC 4578472. PMID 26435672.
  23. ^ a b c Morris BJ, Bailis SA, Wiswell TE (May 2014). "Circumcision rates in the United States: rising or falling? What effect might the new affirmative pediatric policy statement have?". Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 89 (5): 677–86. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001. PMID 24702735.
  24. ^ The Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Health Care Statistics. "Trends in Circumcision for Male Newborns in U.S. Hospitals: 1979-2010" (pdf). {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  25. ^ a b Maeda, J. (Thomson Reuters), Chari, R. (RAND), and Elixhauser, A. (AHRQ). Circumcisions in U.S. Community Hospitals, 2009. HCUP Statistical Brief #126. February 2012. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available at http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb126.pdf
  26. ^ Adler PW (December 2011). "Is it lawful to use Medicaid to pay for circumcision?". Journal of Law and Medicine. 19 (2): 335–53. PMID 22320007.
  27. ^ Quayle SS, Coplen DE, Austin PF (October 2003). "The effect of health care coverage on circumcision rates among newborns". The Journal of Urology. 170 (4 Pt 2): 1533–6, discussion 1536. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000091215.99513.0f. PMID 14501653.
  28. ^ Leibowitz AA, Desmond K, Belin T (January 2009). "Determinants and policy implications of male circumcision in the United States". American Journal of Public Health. 99 (1): 138–45. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.134403. PMC 2636604. PMID 19008503. The mean mewborn male circumcision rate was 55.9%. When we controlled for other factors, hospitals in states in which Medicaid covers routine male circumcision had circumcision rates that were 24 percentage points higher than did hospitals in states without such coverage (P < .001).
  29. ^ Pfuntner A., Wier L.M., Stocks C. Most Frequent Procedures Performed in U.S. Hospitals, 2011. HCUP Statistical Brief #165. October 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. [1].
  30. ^ "Report 10 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (I-99):Neonatal Circumcision". 1999 AMA Interim Meeting: Summaries and Recommendations of Council on Scientific Affairs Reports. American Medical Association. December 1999. p. 17. Archived from the original on 5 July 2007. Retrieved 13 June 2006. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  31. ^ Brown MS, Brown CA (1987). "Circumcision decision: prominence of social concerns". Pediatrics. 60 (2): 215–9. PMID 3615091.
  32. ^ http://smj.sma.org.sg/2302/2302smj6.pdf
  33. ^ a b c d Kim D, Koo SA, Pang MG (December 2012). "Decline in male circumcision in South Korea". BMC Public Health. 12: 1067. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-1067. PMID 23227923.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  34. ^ Ku JH, Kim ME, Lee NK, Park YH (February 2003). "Circumcision practice patterns in South Korea: community based survey". Sexually Transmitted Infections. 79 (1): 65–7. doi:10.1136/sti.79.1.65. PMC 1744613. PMID 12576619.
  35. ^ Pang MG, Kim DS (January 2002). "Extraordinarily high rates of male circumcision in South Korea: history and underlying causes". BJU International. 89 (1): 48–54. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.2002.02545.x. PMID 11849160.
  36. ^ "Israel teaches WHO about circumcision". ynet news. November 2006.
  37. ^ Darby R (August 2011). "Routine peripubertal circumcision?". Cmaj. 183 (11). National Institutes of Health: 1283–4. doi:10.1503/cmaj.111-2060. PMC 3153524. PMID 21825054.
  38. ^ Ong, Christine (29 May 2008). "Philippine doctors question medical benefits of circumcision". Channel News Asia. MediaCorp. Retrieved 27 August 2012.
  39. ^ a b Kamtsiuris P, Bergmann E, Rattay P, Schlaud M (2007). "[Use of medical services. Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS)]" [Use of medical services. Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS)]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz (in German). 50 (5–6): 836–50. doi:10.1007/s00103-007-0247-1. PMID 17514470.
  40. ^ a b Dave SS, Fenton KA, Mercer CH, Erens B, Wellings K, Johnson AM (December 2003). "Male circumcision in Britain: findings from a national probability sample survey". Sexually Transmitted Infections. 79 (6): 499–500. doi:10.1136/sti.79.6.499. PMC 1744763. PMID 14663134.
  41. ^ Rickwood AM, Kenny SE, Donnell SC (September 2000). "Towards evidence based circumcision of English boys: survey of trends in practice". BMJ. 321 (7264): 792–3. doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7264.792. PMC 27490. PMID 11009516.
  42. ^ Maija, Kolehmainen; Taskinen, Seppo. "Esinahan kirurgia" (PDF). Retrieved 20 October 2015. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |name-list-format= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  43. ^ Telephone survey of the TNS Sofres Institute (commissioned by Manix), 2008 Archived 8 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  44. ^ Frisch M, Friis S, Kjaer SK, Melbye M (December 1995). "Falling incidence of penis cancer in an uncircumcised population (Denmark 1943-90)". BMJ. 311 (7018): 1471. doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7018.1471. PMC 2543732. PMID 8520335.
  45. ^ Klavs I, Hamers FF (February 2008). "Male circumcision in Slovenia: results from a national probability sample survey". Sexually Transmitted Infections. 84 (1): 49–50. doi:10.1136/sti.2007.027524. PMID 17881413.
  46. ^ https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR230/FR230.pdf WHO page 236
  47. ^ "Incidence and prevalence of circumcision in Australia". Circumcision Information Australia. January 2013. Retrieved 26 June 2018.
  48. ^ Smith AM, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, Richters J, Ferris J (July 2007). "The Australian longitudinal study of health and relationships". BMC Public Health. 7: 139. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-7-139. PMC 1931435. PMID 17608953.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  49. ^ Ferris JA, Richters J, Pitts MK, Shelley JM, Simpson JM, Ryall R, Smith AM (April 2010). "Circumcision in Australia: further evidence on its effects on sexual health and wellbeing". Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 34 (2): 160–4. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00501.x. PMID 23331360.
  50. ^ Richters J, Smith AM, de Visser RO, Grulich AE, Rissel CE (August 2006). "Circumcision in Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health". International Journal of STD & AIDS. 17 (8): 547–54. doi:10.1258/095646206778145730. PMID 16925903.
  51. ^ "Circumcision of Male Infants". Royal Australasian College of Physicians. 2010.
  52. ^ The incidence of circumcision in Australia was very high until 1971 when it started a steep decline. Consequently, circumcised males tend to be older.
  53. ^ Rashida Yosufzai (19 February 2018). "Why is the number of male circumcisions declining in Australia?". SBS News. Retrieved 26 June 2018.
  54. ^ a b Afsari M, Beasley SW, Maoate K, Heckert K (March 2002). "Attitudes of Pacific parents to circumcision of boys". Pacific Health Dialog. 9 (1): 29–33. PMID 12737414. Circumcision for cultural reasons is routine in Pacific Island countries.
  55. ^ Dickson N, van Roode T, Paul C (August 2005). "Herpes simplex virus type 2 status at age 26 is not related to early circumcision in a birth cohort". Sexually Transmitted Diseases. 32 (8): 517–9. doi:10.1097/01.olq.0000161296.58095.ab. PMID 16041257.
  56. ^ Fergusson DM, Boden JM, Horwood LJ (November 2006). "Circumcision status and risk of sexually transmitted infection in young adult males: an analysis of a longitudinal birth cohort". Pediatrics. 118 (5): 1971–7. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1175. PMID 17079568.
  57. ^ Lawrenson RA (May 1991). "Current practice of neonatal circumcision in the Waikato". The New Zealand Medical Journal. 104 (911): 184–5. PMID 1898442.

External links