Reply #91: Since there are virtually no cultures that practice female circumcision

[pnwmom]

without also practicing male circumcision, any result that seems to show reduced AIDS transmission with female circumcision may actually be showing the effect of male circumcision in that population.

The reverse is not true, i.e., there are significant populations that practice male circumcision and not female.

Edit to add:

But I did find more info about the Stallings study you mentioned, and the results are the OPPOSITE of the article you posted.

http://www.scidev.net/News/index.cfm?fuseaction=readnews&itemid=2261&language=1

"Also at the IAS conference, Rebecca Stallings, of the US Macro International Research Corporation Company, presented a study of female circumcision.

The trial involved 7,154 HIV positive women in Tanzania. According to Stallings, female circumcision appears to increase the risk of women being infected with HIV.

She says this is because the surgery itself increases the vulnerability of the genital skin.

In addition, says Stallings, circumcised women are more likely to have anal intercourse, which also increases the chances of infection."

Isn't that interesting that her results are being misreported?