My (Gary Constanza) Petition: Consumer Reports Should Examine the Horror of Circumcision

An Open Letter To Consumer Reports

I sent this heads-up letter to Consumer Reports to inform them of this issue and inquire whether this is on their radar:

“As a courtesy I am sending this email to inquire about whether Consumer Reports has ever researched or have plans to research the efficacy, safety, and morality of the routine circumcision of baby boys.

I and many others opposed to circumcision are urging consumer advocates such as you to decide if the practice of circumcision is legal and moral, and we will soon prepare a formal petition and public invitation for you to consider and make your views known on the matter.

Briefly, no medical organization in the world recommends the involuntary circumcision of baby boys, and the U.S. among others are the only countries in the world that do so. Circumcision violates the right to bodily integrity of the unconsenting baby for a medically unnecessary procedure that is harmful and dangerous: it is estimated that approximately 100 babies die per year due to complications of circumcision.

Your regard for public safety is well-known: your spotlight on PFAS dangers, unnecessary and potentially harmful medical testing, striving for safer food, and It goes without saying – as evidenced by your campaigns to remedy dangerous TV and furniture tip-overs and defective baby sleepers – that you strive to protect children most of all. Frankly, the routine amputation of healthy tissue from children for no medical reason makes the former issues pale in comparison. “His body, his choice” should be the overriding factor when considering permanent and involuntary surgery such as this. Would you not confront the ignorant practice of bloodletting if currently practiced? Lobotomies?

We anti-circumcision activists agree with most of the world that involuntary neo-natal circumcision is unnecessary and we seek to stop this barbaric practice. Whether or not you are aware of the intactivist movement, please acknowledge there is such a movement and do some of your own unbiased research.

Just so you know, circumcision was originally embraced and promoted to lessen sexual pleasure and deter masturbation for both boys and girls.

Our hope is that you consider the question of circumcision and duly research the topic to educate the public, right or wrong, and we have no expectation that you or anyone else can end the practice, when at present only parents themselves can do that. Give parents the power to make an informed decision.

Our baby boys are unprotected and are literally screaming out for help. If not, then who?

Will you be on the right side of history on this?”

“Building A Better World, Together,”

Gary Costanza, Anti Male-Genital-Mutilation Director, AVoiceForMen.com”

What is the Issue?

We want Consumer Reports to examine objectively the practice of circumcision and whether it is ethical and/or necessary. As one of the premiere consumer and public safety advocates, we think this serious issue demands their attention, so here is our pitch to them:

Consumer Reports:

Have you considered the issue of male genital mutilation, aka circumcision? We know you covered the issue of unneeded medical treatments and procedures, and we think this is the ultimate unneeded medical test or procedure, especially irreversible amputation of healthy tissue from non-consenting infants. We consider this human rights violation, as is female genital mutilation.

Circumcision is elective, cosmetic “surgery,” has no medical purpose, and we estimate at least 100 babies die because of this “surgery” every year. I say “surgery” because surgery has a purpose, yet circumcision cures no disease, fixes no defect, and treats no condition.

Circumcision is a matter of choice or opinion, it is an assault on a child, and it is exactly comparable to FGM. It is worse because major religions endorse it is practice as well as some first world countries, and although FGM was never as widespread, it is done for the same erroneous reasons as MGM.

It is horrifyingly ironic that while we promote a healthy pregnancy and birth by encouraging prenatal vitamins, no alcohol or drugs, natural and stress-free birth, then upon birth we cut, crush, and amputate part of his genitals!

Makes no sense, right?

Likewise, while Consumer Reports tackles tipping furniture and dangerous baby sleepers, an invasive and deadly “procedure” called circumcision is ignored. Long before there was no chance of a TV falling on him, he was forced to have part of his genitals removed for no medical reason!

No longer done exclusively for religious reasons, circumcision is a procedure in search of a purpose and benefit.

[NOTE: Here is an amazing short documentary that has required viewing for Consumer Reports and others unsure of the issue.]

How do we approach the question of circumcision?

Let us look at the issue objectively like any other product or medical procedure. What is the purpose and efficacy of routine circumcision (removal of the foreskin) of healthy newborn baby boys?

First, is it ethical?

Here are some of the principles for public health ethics from the National Institutes of Health:

Non-maleficence

“The principle of non-maleficence – do no harm – asserts that a health care professional should act in such a way that he or she does no harm, even if her or his patient or client requests this … Consideration of the non-maleficence principle shifts – at least – the burden of proof to those exercising potentially harmful behavior that they are justified in doing so.”

Circumcision harms by removing functioning, healthy tissue for no medical benefit on unconsenting newborn baby boys.

Beneficence

“The obligation to produce benefit, for individual patients or clients, as we have implied above, is intimately connected to non- maleficence. Its apparently self-evident importance marks it out as the other core principle within the Hippocratic tradition: physicians should heal and help their patients, according to the physician’s abilities and judgment.”

Circumcision neither heals nor helps the infant patient, and on the contrary puts the very vulnerable patient at needless risk of infection and possible death.

Efficiency

“There will always be more health need than resources to deal with that need. Literally all public health systems (and health care systems) worldwide lack resources. These two statements prompt the advocacy of a moral duty to use scarce health resources efficiently. This duty exists at least partly because efficient use will enable public health professionals to produce more health benefit for greater numbers of people. So, a moral principle of efficiency would demand, for example, the use of the evidence base and the performance of cost-benefit analyses to decide what should be done and how to do it.”

It is obvious that massive amounts of health care resources are wasted by what is at best forced cosmetic surgery, and at worst assault and child sex abuse with maiming.

Respect for autonomy

Embedding respect for autonomy firmly within public health ethics teaching and learning provides a fundamental reminder that every person has a high value – qua her or his autonomy – and cannot merely be treated as a means to the end of others’ good.”

There is no claimed health benefit for circumcision, so autonomy must be fully respected.

Justice

“It is equally possible to conceive of the principle of justice (sometimes ‘social justice’) as having grounds in the fundamental value of human autonomy. Because as humans we all have (or should have) autonomy, we all have (or should have) equal moral worth. Thus, proposals for the unequal treatment of people again require the burden of proof.”

Boy babies are literally screaming out for justice and their equal moral worth with protected female babies. Transgender activists are now saying what intactivists have been saying for many years that intersex babies and baby boys should have the right to bodily autonomy equal to girls, and justice; has yet to catch on.

Touching video: “Nursing, Circumcision, and War” – “First, they stab your baby with a knife into his penis…”

Second, is circumcision legal?

From the Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics published online by Cambridge University Press:

“Circumcision Is Unethical and Unlawful

The foreskin is a complex structure that protects and moisturizes the head of the penis, and, being the most densely innervated and sensitive portion of the penis, is essential to providing the complete sexual response. Circumcision—the removal of this structure—is non-therapeutic, painful, irreversible surgery that also risks serious physical injury, psychological sequelae, and death. Men rarely volunteer for it, and increasingly circumcised men are expressing their resentment about it.

Circumcision is usually performed for religious, cultural, and personal reasons. Early claims about its medical benefits have been proven false. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control have made many scientifically untenable claims promoting circumcision that run counter to the consensus of Western medical organizations.

Circumcision violates the cardinal principles of medical ethics, respect autonomy (self-determination), to do good, to do no harm, and to be just. Without a clear medical indication, circumcision must be deferred until the child can provide his own fully informed consent.

In 2012, a German court held that circumcision constitutes criminal assault. Under existing United States law and international human rights declarations as well, circumcision already violates boys’ absolute rights to equal protection, bodily integrity, autonomy, and freedom to choose their own religion. A physician has a legal duty to protect children from unnecessary interventions. Physicians who obtain parental permission through spurious claims or omissions or rely on the American Academy of Pediatrics; position, also risk liability for misleading parents about circumcision.”

By all accounts, circumcision fails every measure of medical ethics and human rights. Circumcision most egregiously violates the principles of non-maleficence, beneficence, and respect for autonomy by forcing a harmful and unnecessary procedures on newborn baby boys.

In the absence of medical necessity and informed consent (the patient’s consent), the law and medical ethics demand an end to the practice of forced circumcision of minor children.

If we do this to millions of baby boys, shouldn’t we research the best method to remove the foreskin? And what is best; the safest? How much foreskin should be removed for optimal results? What ARE the desired results; What circumcision tools are best? What anesthesia is used, is any? What is the complication and morbidity rate? What is the efficacy of each method or tool; What is the purpose of circumcision? Cheapest method? And what of the ethical question of selling those babies’ foreskins for profit?

Watch “Circumcision is BullSh!T with Dr. Dean Edell + Penn & Teller” a MUST WATCH

There was an effort to research those questions but it was shut down for “ethical” reasons. Presumably, circumcisions then continued under closed doors and unresearched.

European doctors condemn this barbaric and harmful practice: Denmark, Germany and San Francisco have attempted to ban circumcision, giving boys the same protection from genital mutilation as girls enjoy.

The reasons given for male genital mutilation are the same as given for FGM. Here’s Brian D Earp, Research Fellow, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics:

“The truth is: I study childhood genital surgeries. Female, male and intersex genital surgeries, specifically, and I make similar arguments about each one. As a rule, I think that healthy children – whatever their sex or gender – should be free from having parts of their most intimate sexual organs removed before they can understand what is at stake in such a procedure. There are several reasons I have come to hold this view, but in some ways it is simple. Private parts are private. They are personal. Barring some serious disease to treat or physical malfunction to address (for which surgery is the most conservative option), they should probably be left alone.”

Why Consumer Reports?

CR’s mission statement regarding safety:

“We have won important victories for consumers to ensure that the cars, food, and other products we buy are safe, raise the standards for financial services, and improve health and well-being.

Today, we continue this work, standing firmly behind the principle that consumer products and services must be safe, effective, reliable, and fairly priced. We insist that manufacturers, retailers, government agencies, and others be clear and honest. We advocate for truth and transparency wherever information is hidden or unclear. “We want to give you the opportunity to tell us why – or why not – you’ve ignored or are unaware of this scourge to humanity. Common courtesy and human decency require a reasoned and prompt response. We do not expect you to be advocates either way, just do what you do and give us the unbiased truth.

CR has done research on:

• BPA, arsenic, and mercury contamination
• tipping furniture hazards
• internet safety for kids
• unnecessary medical testing
• faulty and dangerous foods, drugs, and products

How could this not be on your radar?

You have done much, but make no mistakes, circumcision will be your biggest success (or failure) if you tackle such an issue. Of all your efforts, NONE involves forced surgeries or procedures on children for cosmetic reasons. BOOM.

As intactivists, we have a huge battle against ignorance, blind tradition, greed, and changing an ignorant mindset. But CR does not need to do any of that, you just need to do what you do: research and inform. You do not need to battle religious groups who practice circumcision, or medical trade groups who have a vested interest in it.

Too bad parents in the US are misled into thinking that circumcision is harmless and beneficial and that newborn baby boys born today do not have the protection that a CR expose would have given them had their parents read it.

Watch “Joe Rogan Rant About Circumcision”…he gets it!

In 1978, your expose “Crying Foul” declared:

“The modern chicken’s life is a prison drama. The agri-business bird lives out its short span in a cramped cage. Its beak is clipped, lest in frustration it cannibalize any kinfolk within reach. New York banned the declawing of cats and California banned foie gras (forced feeding of geese) for inhumane treatment of animals. We must afford that same HUMANe treatment to our very own baby boys.

Denounce or embrace it, but you cannot ignore it. This should go the way of bloodletting, lobotomies, DES, and thalidomide.

While CR mostly rates consumer products, they are also concerned with health claims of various tests and procedures, reporting on whether they are safe, effective, or even needed. Past reasons for circumcision were wildly irresponsible (prevent masturbation, insanity, etc.) while no medical reason presently exist.

What do we want CR to do? Do the research and tell the public and our leaders the truth about circumcision, nothing more, nothing less. Simple, tell the truth, and that is the first step to progress. Will you have the courage and integrity to resist political pressure to avoid this issue? will you do the right thing regardless of special interest groups (religious and trade groups like the AAP) who would have you be blind to this issue.

Riveting video: “Circumcision – A Mother’s Deep Regret” (the doctor said “You’re circumcising, right?)”

Only He Can Decide: 10 out of 10 babies say NO to Circumcision

The limits to a child’s surrogate are what is medically necessary to cure disease, treat a condition, or correct a deformity. That applies to vaccinations, as they have proven medical efficacy to prevent specific and common diseases while maintaining bodily integrity and medical ethics. Do we remove breast buds from baby girls to prevent breast cancer, which is a far greater threat than anything males face from a foreskin? No, and why not? We do not remove normal, functioning tissue unless it is diseased. Routine circumcision unquestionably violates the Hippocratic Oath: “First, Do No Harm.”

How do you determine what should be banned for safety reasons? Do you weigh its harm versus its benefit? For example, you are not recommending the banning of cars, as their benefits outweigh the necessity and usefulness they provide. You want to ban inclined infant sleepers due to many dozens of dead infants, logically because that item is not uniquely necessary. Apply your approach to circumcision, a much more invasive and harmful procedure for which there is NO necessity.

Why the secrecy? How many dead? How many botched? Efficacy? Evidence shows we seem to care about babies…do we? The people who should be protecting babies and children from unnecessary harm are failing to do that.

They are hiding something so terrible, so revolting, so indecent, and shocking that the wall of silence and shame prevents the light of truth and justice to shine.

For a civilized society or medical professional to subject newborn babies to actual surgery there must be an actual medical need to prevent or cure a disease or condition, none of which is present in a healthy baby boy. Or girl.

The foreskin has a purpose: it is a complex organ providing multiple protective and sexual functions. Circumcision amputates this most erogenous part of a man’s penis.

Hospitals frequently sell neonatal foreskins to biotech companies for stem cell research and skin-care development. While this is legally classified as the disposal of medical waste, it raises significant ethical questions regarding informed consent and the commercialization of human tissue for luxury products, such as the growth-factor creams famously endorsed by Oprah.

Men and women, the world over are happy with the genitals they were born with, the result of evolution that has made us mammals what we are today. Dogs have foreskins and they seem fine, and nobody has thought to cut them.

Watch “Mother Apologizes to Son for Circumcision”

Bloodletting, witch trials, slavery, lynching, contraception laws, lobotomy, tonsillectomy, appendectomy, circumcision?

Read this man’s story: https://www.yourwholebaby.org/blog/this-is-genital-mutilation

John Harvey Kellogg (yes, that Kellogg) pushed circumcision to reduce sexual pleasure and masturbation and promoted FGM, and wires embedded in penises and bland cereal (flakes) to curb masturbation and sexual pleasure.

You have to have a reason, an overwhelming reason or purpose and proven efficacy, not multiple non-reasons, or excuses. This is medicine, not witchcraft, yes?

We ask that Consumer Reports take action to research circumcision to protect children from unneeded and deadly surgery, not just falling TVs and dressers.

One of CRs missions is to research the practice of safe and effective medicine, including needed or unneeded medical testing and exposing risky and unnecessary medical procedures [“Medical Tests You Do – and Don’t – Need” January 2019].

In the article you tell “A Cautionary Tale” about a man who had an elevated PSA and got a biopsy that nearly killed him due to infection. You quoted the USPSTF as saying it does not recommend the PSA test for men ages 70 and older “because the risks, such as infection, outweigh the potential benefits.” The article was about how some screenings may save lives, but others can be a waste of time and money – “and pose risks of their own.”

Watch Excerpts from the Classic “Circumcision, an Elephant in the Hospital,” Amazing!

At your website under “About Us” you state your advocacy division seeks to “improve health and well-being” of consumers and that “consumer products and services must be safe, effective, reliable, and fairly priced.” You advocate for “truth and transparency,” and work for “strong consumer protection laws.” You state “consumers help us identify the biggest problems and challenges in the marketplace so that we can put our experts on the case” and that you “advocate for the rights of all consumers” to build “a better world.”

Well, here we are letting Consumer Reports know that circumcision is most certainly NOT NEEDED and FORCED ON THE PATIENT! This is “surgery” looking for a purpose. It cures no disease, treats no condition, and fixes no abnormality.

These tiny consumer cannot advocate for themselves, cannot sue, or even defend themselves. If they could this would not be an issue – they would say “no,” fight back, or sue, or get CU to take up their cause. But they cannot so they are at the mercy of adults who strap them down and have their way with them.

You talk about unnecessary testing, advocate for public safety, truth, transparency, and a better world. How about surgery without testing, screening, benefit, or informed consent? Do baby boys count as “consumers” worthy of equal protection from unwanted testing or surgery? Wouldn’t all babies consider it a “better world” if they are left alone to decide for themselves about risky and irreversible surgery?

Circumcision – The surgical removal of the foreskin of the penis.

WHY IT’S DONE: This “one size fits all” surgery dispenses with screening to test for ethical medical necessity, bypasses informed consent by the patient, and runs roughshod over all ordinary human rights protections. Usually, screening or testing precedes surgical intervention. What other surgery is done routinely to all who are wheeled in, no medical need, consent, or questions asked? There is no medical reason for it. Some defenders think it reduces HIV or STD; not true, plus, babies do not have sex. Prevents UTIs: there’s medicine for that. Cosmetic: wouldn’t the patient decide that? Religious: we do not allow FGM, or other religious surgical interventions, even on animals (animal sacrifice).

RECOMMENDED FOR: Any baby boy healthy enough to survive it and whose parents request it, which may include undiagnosed special needs boys…truly cruel and irresponsible. Ironically, boys too sick for this “benefit” are spared this trauma, luckily for them. This shows that it is risky. FGM is illegal, yet we have boys daily subjected to MGM…why the double standard? No medical organization recommends routine circumcision, and many condemn the practice. However, many doctors and hospitals profit from it and sell the foreskin for even greater profit.

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES: Death, bleeding, infection, penile amputation, adhesions, sexual problems, increased pain sensitivity, other outcomes unknown due to lack of research and record keeping.

DEFINITE OUTCOMES: loss of normal sexual function and pleasure, scarring, pain and trauma, loss of bodily integrity, other outcomes unknown due to lack of research and record keeping.

CR, this is the elephant in YOUR room, the room where you discuss excessive testing in a hospital while in some dark corner of that hospital an infant is strapped down and his genitals are cut for no medical reason, with no testing or research, with no risk assessment and without that person’s informed consent! Yes, a baby IS a person with basic human rights and the right to bodily integrity and protection from unwanted sexual touching, abuse, or surgery.

I will continue to inform you of this medically unnecessary surgery performed on unconsenting minors who cannot make an informed decision for themselves. You must also consider precious and limited health care dollars, so this is low hanging fruit on that front. If you ignore this blatant failure on your part to protect the most vulnerable of patients, I will continue to publicize your silence on this matter.

This eventually will end in the U.S. as we join the rest of the world that does not practice this. Will you be on the right side of this issue and lead, or will you ignore it and garner the resulting backlash and embarrassment?

Why the rush to circumcise? We do not spay or neuter newborn cats and dogs (procedures that have an actual medical purpose). Is it because infants can’ fight back or sue? I want an answer – and do not parrot the nonsensical “it’ll hurt worse later in life.”

Activists the world over will continue this fight against infant genital mutilation of both boys and girls by informing the public, and pressuring consumer advocates such as you, governments, and the medical community. Anyone ignoring and/or allowing circumcision, as many do, should have solid reasons for the practice, considering the risk, the permanence, and the invasive nature of it.

A Must Watch: “Recovering Circumciser Condemns Circumcision”

We need fresh unbiased eyes to look at what we are currently doing to baby boys that we deem repugnant when done to baby girls. Just because “it’s always done” there is no reason to assume it is safe, ethical, or even necessary. There we have the problem: it is so ingrained in our “tradition” that it provides doctors and hospitals a cash cow for the procedure (and the foreskin that is then sold for more profit) and is invisible (hidden?) in plain sight to respected advocates and human rights groups such as you.

From Consumer Reports President: “[On Medical Tests, the Results Are In]”

“As parents, as loved ones, and as patients ourselves, we are never more vulnerable as decision makers in a marketplace than we are when faced with health challenges and the consequences they carry. While modern medicine has brought us a once unimaginable range of scans, screens, and tests designed to pre-empt problems, sharpen diagnoses, and even save our lives, the volume and complexity of these options have made it more confusing to figure out the best course of action.

In fact, the ready availability of these options can sometimes make it feel as though forgoing tests is an irresponsible or risky choice—and, indeed, too few Americans are getting the preventive screenings that they should. But given the potential for unnecessary costs, procedural risks, and muddled or misleading results, the reality is that getting these decisions right can be more complicated than it may seem at first blush.”

Consumer Reports (CR) protects children by conducting rigorous, independent safety testing on products like car seats, strollers, and toys, and by advocating for stronger safety regulations on harmful items. As a nonprofit, CR influences companies to improve safety standards—such as on Consumer Reports Toxic-Free Kids Food Campaign—and investigates potential dangers like lead in baby food and unstable furniture.

From CR’s “Child Safety Guide:”

“We report on dangerous children’s products, such as inclined baby sleepers and defective strollers; and safety issues, such as furniture tip-overs and child car seats, to offer expert advice on keeping your kids safe and healthy.”

Further credit to you for your quest to protect public health: in “The Trouble With Stem Cell Therapy,” you said this:

“Clinics and doctors need to be prevented from selling dangerous untested medicine before they harm people, not after,” says Lisa McGiffert, director of the Safe Patient Project at Consumers Union.

From another CR expert:

“There’s an important difference between the stem cell treatments emerging from slow and careful study and the ones being sold for thousands of dollars without any evidence of safety or efficacy,” says Orly Avitzur, M.D., Consumer Reports medical director. “But that difference is not being made clear to consumers.”

Like stem cell therapy, circumcision is an unproven practice that is not supported by scientific evidence, and estimates are that at least 100 baby boys die each year in the U.S. due to complications.

You conclude with “How to Protect Yourself,” asking us to “Beware of the Hype, Ask Questions,” and “Read the Fine Print.” Apart from the fact that circumcision is usually done without any meaningful informed consent, a newborn infant has no way of “protecting himself.” Remember, he is the patient!

Surgery as preventative medicine? Perhaps for a woman with the breast cancer gene as a consenting adult, but for a healthy baby with no hint of disease? The foreskin is erogenous tissue that surrounds and is fused to the penis, not a “flap of skin.”

Again, it cannot be mentioned enough, how if this disgusting practice and the beyond ridiculous reasons for it still being exercised today were performed on infant girls the moral outcry would be deafening – and rightly so. Yet it remains perfectly legal and acceptable to mutilate the genitals of baby boys. I can only imagine the world’s reaction if infant female genital mutilation was practiced here in the western world because adult men insisted on altering the genitals of infant girls to make them more “aesthetically appealing” when they became adult women.

This is a health care crisis that kills dozens of babies every year and demands your immediate attention. We demand you take this bold step for the safety of our children and protecting the human and civil rights of Americans of all ages.

Babies are literally screaming out for your help!

Please share this petition with my listed Decision Makers from Consumer Reports listed above, and with friends and family. Peace Begins at Birth!

Gary Costanza, Anti-MGM Director, A Voice For Men

Not convinced? Check out these extraordinary videos and articles:

Article: “Evidence and Ethics on: Circumcision”

Watch “Anatomy of the Penis: Penile and Foreskin Neurology”

Watch “Man Confronts Circumciser”

Further research: “Ethical Questions,” “Circumcision, Ethics and Medicine,” and “Circumcision Permanently Alters the Brain”

Watch the award-winning documentary “American Circumcision” here.

Video interview, “LEGAL EXPERT: Infant Circumcision is Child Abuse” Peter Adler, author “Circumcision is a Fraud.”

Only in the circumcision of boys do we allow almost anyone to do this “surgery” almost anywhere: you can even cut your own son at home with a kit! Really? Infant Circumcision Trainer, White

Rabbis giving baby boys herpes and causing their death –  “Baby Dies of Herpes in Ritual Circumcision By Orthodox Jews”

Documentarian Brendon Marotta writes: “Medical Groups’ Circumcision Argument Undermines Their Vaccine Campaign”

Never heard a Man Complain about Circumcision? Well, watch this.

Words of wisdom from an intactivist mom (video): Shelley Wright – On the Boardwalk

From video “Make People Stop and Think:”  “weird that people want you to cut their sexual preference into your son’ genitals.”

Direct Emails of the Decision Makers at Consumer Reports:

• ronholm@consumer.org
• lecky@consumer.org
• dargeniowaller@consumer.org
• adcock@consumer.org
• roberts@consumer.org
• loria@consumer.org
• calvo@consumer.org
• shecter@consumer.org
• radford@consumer.org
• friedman@consumer.org

Important Intactivist Groups, Individuals, Websites, and YouTube channels, Please Share:

Doctors Opposing Circumcision

Bloodstained Men.com Founded by the Legendary Brother K

Inaction: Anthony Losquadro

Intact America: Georganne Chapin, Marilyn Milos

Your Whole Baby

NOCIRC

Attorneys for the Rights of the Child: Steven Svoboda, Esq.

Circumcision Resource Center

Bonobo3D: James Loewen’s amazing YouTube Channel

Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund

Intact Global: Eric Clopper

Published with permission of Gary Constanza

NCFM Member Petition: Consumer Reports Should Examine the Horror of Circumcision

Tags: circumcision, circumcision harm awareness, circumcision risks and complications, Consumer Reports circumcision investigation, genital integrety, men’s health and bodily autonomy, NCFM petition on circumcision