HIV: KEEPING MDs OUT OF PRISON:  DR. POLAND, AAP AND INFANT
CIRCUMCISION REVISITED

AAP is the American Academy of Pediatrics.

In 1987, I caught Dr. Poland/AAP perpetuating phony "babies can't feel
pain" neurology - perpetuating infant screams - perpetuating obvious
mass child abuse.  See below.

Dr. Poland/AAP should have IMMEDIATELY stopped the infant screams by
reporting the obvious mass child abuse.

But instead, Dr. Poland/AAP further perpetuated the infant screams/mass
child abuse...

In February 1988, AAP came out in favor of anonymity for perpetrators
of child abuse - and convened a "Task Force."  See below.

In March 1988, the California Medical Association/CMA ignored it's own
Scientific Board and adopted a resolution [CMA Res. 305-88, still in
effect] which stated that it had been "confirmed" in Africa that
circumcision prevents transmission of HIV/AIDS.  (The CMA Scientific
Board had squashed a nearly identical resolution just months before.
The CMA likely only resurrected the hoax after I pointed out AAP's
perpetuation of the phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology.)

The CMA's "confirmed" in Africa resolution was an OBVIOUS hoax - but
organized medicine is still pushing it...

Jim Pickett recently reported on the XVI International AIDS Conference
in Toronto:

"[T]he last big 'new' prevention technology that burned up the airwaves
out of Toronto, and caused not a few men to wince, was male
circumcision...Three randomized, controlled clinical trials are
currently in process or have recently been concluded in Africa to
determine whether circumcision of adult males will reduce their risk
for HIV infection."
XVI International AIDS Conference. Super lubes, daily dosing or snip,
snip, snip? New prevention technologies dominate International AIDS
Conference.
Posit Aware. 2006 Nov-Dec;17(6):22-4.
http://www.tpan.com/publications/pa/nov_dec_06/super_lubes.shtml

I'll copy Jim Pickett via t...@tpan.com

As a consequence of ongoing medical promotion of the "confirmed" in
Africa hoax , many ADULTS (in Africa) may have to suffer through the
partial penile amputation - because American MDs stand to go to prison
for their ongoing mass infant penis ripping and slicing...

Kahn et al. are already publicizing the notion that slicing off adult
African penis tips will save money.

See Kahn JG, Marseille E, Auvert B.  Cost-effectiveness of male
circumcision for HIV prevention in a South African setting.PLoS Med.
2006 Dec;3(12):e517.  PubMed abstract.

I'll copy Kahn et al. via jgk...@ucsf.edu.

Desai et al. are investigating "the extent to which...estimated
effectiveness against HIV is mediated by the protective effect of
circumcision against [sexually transmitted infections/STIs]."

See Desai K, Boily MC, Garnett GP, Masse BR, Moses S, Bailey RC. Emerg
Themes Epidemiol. 2006 Dec 22;3:19.   PubMed abstract
The role of sexually transmitted infections in male circumcision
effectiveness against HIV - insights from clinical trial simulation.

I'll copy Desai et al via kamal.de...@ic.ac.uk.

Drain et al. recently issued forth with findings that they say
"strengthen the reported biological link between [male circumcision]
and some sexually transmitted infectious diseases, including HIV and
cervical cancer."

See Drain PK, Halperin DT, Hughes JP, Klausner JD, Bailey RC. Male
circumcision, religion, and infectious diseases: an ecologic analysis
of 118 developing countries.
BMC Infect Dis. 2006 Nov 30;6:172.  PubMed abstract.

I'll copy Drain et al. via pkdr...@u.washington.edu

It's now BILLIONS of dollars' worth of infant screams after I pointed
out the phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology - and the mass infant
penis ripping and slicing continues - with (as noted above) MDs still
promoting the 1987 hoax that it had been "confirmed" in Africa that
circumcision prevents transmission of HIV/AIDS.

Ending the infant screams now would instantly save America hundreds of
MILLIONS of dollars per year while simultaneously PRESERVING the
surgery as a CHOICE American males could make for themselves in
adulthood.

In 1997, ten years after I exposed the phony "babies can't feel pain"
neurology, Dr. Poland issued forth with a lame threat to sue me for
pointing out that his failure to report the obvious mass child abuse
was perpetuating the obvious mass child abuse.  See my public response
to Dr. Poland, reproduced below.

First, here is my Oct. 11, 1987 letter to Dr. Poland/AAP...

October 11, 1987

Ronald L. Poland, MD, Chairman, Committee on Fetus and Newborn
Robert J. Roberts, MD, PhD, Chairman, Committee on Drugs
Juan F. Gutierrez-Mazorra, MD, Chairman, Section on Anesthesiology
Eric W. Fonkalsrud, MD, Chairman, Section on Surgery

in care of:

Jerold F. Lucey, MD
Editor
Pediatrics
Mary Fletcher Hospital
Colchester Avenue
Burlington, VT 05401

Doctors:

I understand that up until publication of the September 1987 issue of
Pediatrics, "some practicing physicians" [1] believed that millions of
newborns enduring what has become medicine's second most frequently
performed surgery either weren't feeling pain as they screamed, or if
they were feeling pain, they couldn't remember it.

Two sections and two committees (listed above) of the American Academy
of Pediatrics recently cited the "nerve pathways not sufficiently
myelinated to transmit painful stimuli" argument for withholding
anesthesia from neonates. [1]  They also cited the medical belief that
"neonates do not have sufficiently integrated cortical functions to
recall painful experiences."  Apparently, physician members of these
sections and committees have not sufficiently integrated cortical
function to recall the perhaps painful experience of having learned
basic neurology.

[According to]...1976 5th edition of Guyton's Textbook of Medical
Physiology:

"Over two-thirds of all the nerve fibers in [adult] peripheral nerves
are [unmyelinated] type C fibers (p. 648)...[Irritation of these
fibers] can be excruciating and is the most likely of the pain types to
cause suffering (p. 662)...The slow burning sensation tends to become
more and more painful over a period of time.  It is this sensation that
gives one the intolerable suffering of pain...(p. 685)."

Post-surgically, mothers must endure the crying of newborns whose
unmyelinated type C fibers are now surgically exposed to the constant
irritation of urine and feces retained by the modern diaper.

As of September 1987, "pharmacologic agents now available" to the
millions of newborns who scream through the unscientific [2] procedure
of circumcision are now indicated "according to the usual guidelines
for the administration of anesthesia to high-risk, potentially unstable
patients."

Rather than risk exposing high-risk patients to the hazards of
anesthesia, wouldn't it be more scientific to end the screams by simply
ending the unscientific procedure that causes them?

Please respond - especially if I have my facts wrong.

Todd D. Gastaldo, DC

cc:  NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE (please forward to Dr. Boland)

Notes and references

1. American Academy of Pediatrics (Poland, Roberts, Gutierrez-Mazorra
and Fonkalsrud): Neonatal anesthesia. Pediatrics. 1987;80:446.

2. Boland RP: Ritualistic surgery: Circumcision and Tonsillectomy. N
Eng J Med. 1969:280:591-592.  "In our own civilization, two procedures
are widely performed on a non-scientific basis.  One is
circumcision..."

TEN YEARS LATER...Dr. Poland issued a lame threat to sue me...

I responded publicly...

http://groups.google.com/group/
misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/b102fa0f001349b8

I...sent the Medical Board of California a copy of my Oct. 11, 1987
letter to Poland.  Medical Board consumer services representative J.
Kinnard responded on November 16, 1987:

"Unfortunately your correspondence touches on a religious
issue...Your
best resource [for action] would be the religious groups that utilize
circumcision, not the government agencies."

On the advice of the Medical Board (Ms. Kinnard), I contacted Del Rey
Beach Florida Rabbi Pinchas Aloof (1-800-FOR-BRIT, now disconnected).
Rabbi Aloof told me that it is spiritually wrong for a non-observant
Jew
with an M.D. degree to circumcise Jews.  In other words, Jews have no
need for the circumcision services of most M.D.s (unless most M.D.s are

observant Jews, in which case there may be a "religious" reason for
the
CMA ignoring its own Scientific Board).

Later in 1987, based on my conversation with Rabbi Aloof, I began
writing to various governmental authorities suggesting a religious
exemption for Jews.

Then I discovered that there was indeed a "religious issue":  rabbis
have their own primal commandment wrong.  As alluded to above, rabbis
are telling Jews to ask ritual circumcisers to amputate far more infant

foreskin than God originally/allegedly intended. [For references to
early circumcisers leaving most of the foreskin on the penis see
Wallerstein. Humanistic Judaism 1983;11(4):46; and see The New Standard

Jewish Encyclopedia 1970, New York: Doubleday, p. 442; and see
Bertschinger J. Circumcision choices. Midwifery Today No. 17,
1991:22-3.]

Long-obscured by medical negligence (noted above), mutilating
infants for religious purposes has always been illegal - but tolerated:

"[C]onstitutional rights...including freedom of religion, are
inadequate
to prevent the states from using their authority to treat circumcision
as child abuse...The most obvious way to proceed with enforcement...is
through criminal prosecution under existing state laws." [Brigman WE:
Circumcision as child abuse: the legal and Constitutional issues.
Journal of Family Law, 1984;23(3):337-57]

"[Routine infant circumcision] constitutes child abuse...an
acknowledged
hazard to health." [Katz M. Circumcision. AJDC 1980;134:1098]

When the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Oregon
Employment v. Smith (1990), the American Jewish Congress co-sponsored
the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, fearing that states would invoke

the Smith decision and child protection statutes - to end ritual
circumcision. [Greenhouse L. NY Times 5/11/90:A10].

But the American Jewish Congress needn't have bothered.  As I just
noted, the ritual mutilation of infants was illegal (but tolerated)
before the Smith decision - and (most significantly) it is STILL
illegal
(but tolerated).

Significantly, Jewish authorities (vigorously contested by other Jewish

authorities) offer Jewish parents an ideological basis not to
circumcise:

1) "[Circumcision] is not a sacrament which inducts the infant into
Judaism: his birth does that" [Rabbi MN Kertner. What is a Jew? New
York: Macmillan, 1973,1993]  (Note:  Adult Jews who wish to remain
uncircumcised are accepted under Israel's Law of Return - and are
allowed to remain uncircumcised.  This suggests that "religious"
circumcision is a CHOICE which may legitimately be postponed until
adulthood and beyond.  It makes sense for adults to be able to choose
which religion to embrace, and to choose whether or not to surgically
alter their bodies for religious reasons.)

2) Modern rabbis are advocating the amputation of FAR MORE infant
foreskin than God originally/allegedly intended.  Quoting Wallerstein
(cited above),  "Originally, the surgery involved only cutting the tip
of the foreskin.  This was changed in the Hellenic Period to prevent
[Jews from] elongat[ing] the foreskin stump in order to appear
uncircumcised." [Wallerstein E. Humanistic
Judaism 1983;11(4):46.  (Wallerstein, a Jew, had previously won the
American Medical Writers Award for his 1980 book, "Circumcision: An
American Health Fallacy.)

3) "The infliction of unnecessary pain is precisely what Judaism is
designed to fight against, so it makes little sense for us to be the
perpetrators on our children." [Rabbi Michael Lerner. Jewish Renewal
NY:
G.P. Putnam's Sons 1994:387])

4)  Some religions do not allow members to be circumcised.  Therefore,
a
baby who is circumcised is denied the choice of some religions.  A baby

who is left intact, however, has true religious freedom, as he can
choose to be circumcised or intact when he is old enough to choose.

[In late 1987, I petitioned Congress for a religious exemption from the
child abuse statutes for the ancient Jewish ritual that leaves most of
the foreskin on the penis.]

In the January 1988 issue of Pediatrics, the AAP leaned on the Jews and

declared war on all religious exemptions to the child abuse statutes.
AAP members were to "vigorously oppose in the legislatures," all
present
and proposed religious exemptions; and they were to "defend the rights
of all children to the protection and benefits of the law...".
(Translation: a religious circumcision exemption from the child abuse
laws means medical circumcision is indeed child abuse; therefore we
M.D.s must now restate our long-standing opposition to religious
exemptions.  If we are prosecuted, the rabbis and mohelim are going
down
with us.)

In the February 1988 issue of Pediatrics, the AAP recommended anonymity

for perpetrators of child abuse:  "The American Academy of Pediatrics
recommends that all states adopt laws forbidding public disclosure...of

information that identifies victims of child abuse, their families, AND

PERPETRATORS [emphasis added]."

In a February 1988 letter to JAMA [(Feb3)1988;261:701-2], Howard Stang,

M.D. told AAP Circumcision Task Force chairman, Edgar Schoen, M.D., in
effect, the bald lie that local anesthetic injections given under
general anesthesia (for post-operative circumcision pain relief) are
equivalent to local anesthetic injections for the performance of
circumcision itself - without general anesthesia.  (!)

For some reason, neither Schoen nor any other JAMA reader caught
Stang's
bald lie. (At least I saw no protest published in JAMA.)  Schoen is
reportedly pedaling a circumcision training videotape in which it
appears that the infant is asleep.

IMPORTANT NOTE:  Some Jewish persons swear they have watched babies
sleep through their circumcisions.  This may well be.  Robert
Lowensohn,
MD, Chief of Obstetrics at Oregon Health Sciences University says he
injects babies with local anesthetic 15-20 minutes before the Jewish
ceremony starts:  "I do circumcisions both in and out of the hospital
(at religious ceremonies), and have been using local injections for at
least 5 years. I agree that it takes about 5 minutes to set up, but
what
I do is (in the hospital) inject a dorsal nerve block before
transferring the baby out of the bassinette, setting up, etc, using a
small pledgette of antiseptic on the skin. That way most of the 5
minutes is used up without my caring. At the home ceremonies I inject
before the ceremony starts, and that gives 15-20 minutes lead time."
Robert Lowensohn, M.D.
Chief of Obstetrics, OHSU
http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ob-gyn-l/OBGYNL.9701/0708.html

On March 8, 1988, the CMA ignored its own Scientific Board and
proclaimed
routine infant circumcision "an effective public health measure."
Two
days later, the AMA issued a press release stating that it would be
"more
humane" if babies were punctured twice with local anesthetic prior to

circumcision.

A week or so later, the Jerusalem Post of March 19, 1988 quoted the
Chief Circumciser of Israel stating in effect that the local anesthetic

punctures were OK under Jewish law.  He noted in effect that Jews never

said babies can't feel pain and noted also that a baby urinating into

his circumcision wound cries because he feels pain.

A week after the CMA and AMA proclamations, the AAP held the first
meeting of its Task Force on Circumcision, chaired by Edgar Schoen, MD
with Dr. Poland as a member.

One year later, Schoen and his AAP still hadn't found any medical
indications for routine infant circumcision.

Three years later, Newsweek reporter Debra Rosenberg interviewed
Schoen.
She began her article on the subject by stating that the AAP "twice
discounted the procedure [in the 70s]," and she closed by stating,
"though [AAP Task Force chairman] Schoen believes the pendulum will
swing
back toward circumcision, the AAP has not changed its formal position
denouncing the procedure." [Rosenberg D. Circumcision circumspection.
Technology Review (Jul)1992;95(5):17.  Debra Rosenberg, c/o Newsweek,
31
St. James Ave., Boston MA 02116, (617) 350-0300])

AAP Circumcision Task Force Schoen's 1992 discussion with Ms. Rosenberg

perhaps explains why the AAP's 1988-9 media propaganda was so thick
that
when the AAP finally reported in Pediatrics that there STILL weren't
any
medical indications for the mutilations, the Medical Tribune was moved
to
inform physicians that the AAP actually (again) found NO medical
indications:

MEDICAL TRIBUNE 30:16 (8 June 1989)

         FORGET THOSE HEADLINES ABOUT CIRCUMCISION

            AAP IS AGAINST ROUTINE CIRCUMCISION
http://www.cirp.org/CIRP/news/1989.06.08%3aMedicalTribune

In 1995, Circumcisionist Edgar Schoen, MD told Australian physician
Terry
Russell,

"We are now at a point that newborn circumcision is analogous to
immunisation." [Russell T. Letter. Medical Observer (20Jan)1995, Level
2, 100 Bay Road, Waverton, NSW 2060 AUSTRALIA]

Dr. Russell then embellished Schoen's vaccination/circumcision
comparison by inferring that circumcision prevents "HIV seroconversion
and AIDS."

The following year (1996), in Scientific American, Australian authors
John and Pat Caldwell claimed that the African studies indicating that
circumcision prevents AIDS are sound; they just weren't discussed by
the
medical profession in the late 1980s because "many did not wish to
revive...[the notion]...that circumcision was a meaningless
mutilation."
 [Caldwell JC, Caldwell P. The African AIDS Epidemic. Scientific
American
(Mar)1996;274(3):62-8]

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/b102fa0f001349b8

Mass VAGINA slicing by MDs...

There is also no medical indication for most adult vagina slicing by
MDs ("routine episiotomy").

The mass adult vagina slicing is American medicine's most frequent
surgical behavior toward females.

MDs perform it for free but actually make money from it because it
increases trauma to the perineum and sends women back to the hospital
after their births, as in,

"The most common diagnosis for hospitalization among all women is
trauma to
perineum due to childbirth."
http://www.ahcpr.gov/data/hcup/factbk3/factbk3.htm

ALSO NOTEWORTHY...

MD-obstetricians are senselessly closing birth canals up to 30% -
senselessly KEEPING birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30% - then
slicing vaginas - surgically/fraudulently indicating they are doing
everything possible to open the birth canal - even as they keep it
closed the "extra" up to 30%.

MD-obstetrician experts are lying to cover-up.

For the Four OB Cover-up Lies (they are whoppers) - and for discussion
of yet another rather obvious MD crime...

See Dents in babies' skulls"
http://groups.google.com/group/
misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/08abfc7ff242150e

Alternate URL:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3897

MAYBE HIV HAS RENDERED THE FORESKIN A MISTAKE OF NATURE?

Maybe there is now evidence that HIV has rendered the human foreskin is
a mistake of nature?

Perhaps - but until the evidence is solid  - every study purporting to
demonstrate that the penis slicing prevents transmission of HIV/AIDS
should mention the great potential for BIAS.

FINK'S IDEA...

Auvert et al. note:

"The first paper suggesting a protective effect of [male circumcision]
against HIV infection
was published in 1986 [citing Fink AJ (1986) A possible explanation for

heterosexual male infection with AIDS. N Engl J Med 315: 1167].")

REMEMBER 1988:  In 1988, the California Medical Association/CMA ignored
its own Scientific Board to proclaim that Fink's idea had been
"confirmed" in Africa - soon after I began pointing out that American
MDs stand to go to prison for their ongoing mass infant penis ripping
and slicing.

Kirkup noted that same year:

"...[C]ircumcision...continues...often during a
state of mass hysteria." [Kirkup. In Mann RD (ed.): The History of the
Management of Pain. Parthenon Publishing Group. 1988:17]

Also that same year (1988)...

"It has never been proved that a neonate undergoing surgery experiences

pain." [Gerald M. Weiss. JAMA 1988;260:637]

Rabbi SAMUEL Weiss knew the score three years before:

"If it was painful, then doctors wouldn't do it." [Rabbi Samuel Weiss
quoted in Mitric JM: Merits of circumcision a subject of dispute.
Washington Post Health, Oct. 23, 1985, p. 9]

In 1997, Colonel Thomas E. Wiswell, MD indicated that most infant
circumcisions are "barbaric"...

"[S]till all too often barbaric...[M.D.s]...would never allow older
children
or adults to be subjected to such practices, nor would they submit to
it
themselves..." [Veteran circumcision cheerleader Colonel Thomas E.
Wiswell,
MD in article in the April 24, 1997 New England Journal of
Medicine]

The American Academy of Pediatrics had written in 1995:

"[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist
independent of parental desires...A[n infant's screaming writhing and
bleeding obviously constitutes the - TDG] patient's reluctance or
refusal to assent [and - TDG] should...carry considerable weight when
the proposed intervention is not essential to his or her welfare and/or
can be deferred without substantial risk... [T]hose who care for
children need to provide for measures to solicit assent and to attend
to possible abuses of 'raw' power over children when ethical conflicts
occur."
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Informed Consent, Parental Permission, and Assent in Pediatric
Practice(RE9510)
Pediatrics Volume 95, Number 2 February, 1995, p. 314-317
http://www.aap.org/policy/00662.html

See Fink's fraud: The African HIV/penis study and Journalist Stephen
Strauss
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.circumcision/msg/46e7d701e48b1755

See also:  Is Jesus really God? (also: NO CIRC = MAYBE CIRC)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/4074

In 2004, American pediatricians published
the false notion that the American medical religion's TOTAL infant
foreskin ritual is the same as the ancient Jewish ritual that leaves
most of the foreskin on the penis.

See Pediatrician 'ethics' (Attn: Gesundheit et al.)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2908

NOTE:  the California Supreme Court (in LONDON) decided the
mass infant penis
ripping and slicing was legal - but the Court never heard that MDs had
been
using phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology to obtain "informed
consent"
to perform the American medicine's (still) NO MEDICAL INDICATIONS most
frequent surgical behavior toward males.

See 'The Heckler's veto' (also: Barrett v. Rosenthal: The Court's shaky

factual bkgrnd)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.seduction.fast/msg/d25edd9405684253

BOTTOMLINE...

THE PROBLEM...

Law enforcement is looking the other way.

Steve Harris, MD arrogantly boasts:

"Without enforcement, there is no law. Without law, there is no crime.
These are elementary principles. Get an adult to explain them to you."
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/28866f3384801ae9

Incidentally, Dr. Harris' arrogant boast was his reply to my point that
most vaccination (vaccination without obtaining true informed consent)
is obvious crime.

So there is truth to Circumcisionist Edgar Schoen, MD's 1995 above
quoted remark to Australian physician Terry
Russell:

"We are now at a point that newborn circumcision is analogous to
immunisation." [Russell T. Letter. Medical Observer (20Jan)1995, Level
2, 100 Bay Road, Waverton, NSW 2060 AUSTRALIA]

Vaccination is only ATTEMPTED immunization.

MDs are promoting their needle vaccinations and FAILING to tell the
world that breastfeedings are immunizations - that mothers scan for
pathogens and manufacture specific immunizations which they inject with
their breasts.

What woman - informed that she can IMMUNIZE her baby - and reportedly
make MD-needle vaccinations work better - is going to fail to attempt
to breastfeed?

MDs are missing a golden opportunity to make both the immunization
(breastfeeding) and vaccination rates skyrocket.

For further details about this latter obvious MD crime (mass
IMMUNOLOGIC child abuse)...

See The F Crime: Arkansas State Board of Health President Karen
Konarski-Hart, DC
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/4352

The F Crime, just mentioned, is "fluoridation" - mass forced-medication
with the poisons
FSA/fluoride, arsenic and lead - ostensibly to prevent cavities.  The
mass
water poisoning may be causing LIMB AMPUTATIONS in some boys.  See
www.fluoridealert.org.

PREGNANT?  The American Dental Association has now been forced to
concede
that formula-fed infants should not have their formula reconstituted
with
"fluoridated" (poisoned) water.  See www.fluoridealert.org.

Eventually dentists will concede the Elusive Obvious White Elephant
fact
that common law indicates it is a CRIME to force-medicate with the
poison
fluoride even if it is ever determined that the forced-medication is
"good
medicine." NOTE: ADA now concedes that the poison works primarily
TOPICALLY.
This means it does not need to be in drinking water - people who want
to
subject
their children (or themselves) to the poison can do so with poisoned
toothpaste.
("Fluoridated" toothpaste is indeed poisoned; there is a poison warning
on
every tube of the stuff.)

The most commonly prescribed medication (the poison fluoride) is being
ILLEGALLY prescribed - just like the most commonly performed surgeries
on males and females are being illegally performed.

It's time to stop all the medical crime - and save the billions per
year that we are wasting.

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon
USA
t...@chiromotion.com

This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet
archive.  Search http://groups.google.com for "HIV: Keeping MDs out of
prison: Dr. Poland, AAP and infant circumcision revisited"