PROCIRCORG at Yahoo! Groups

Re: Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never los

L F — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 10:52:36 GMT

Jake, I have come across your "responses" relating to the circumcision debate on the net and am familiar with your collaborated efforts with Professor Brian

Re: Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never los

John Public — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:44:18 GMT

Hi everybody! Jake excellent message. Very clearly stated. Thanks. Now that we have the FULL story on the study, I agree with you Jake that this it

Re: Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never los

Harold — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:18:46 GMT

Hi Jake and Ty, I am partly responsible for inciting Ty, because the conditions of the study as you have presented were not known to me initially. So do allow

Re: Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never los

Jake Waskett — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:24:55 GMT

Hello Ty, I'm afraid it is a little difficult to follow your comments, but I'll try to respond as best I can. Firstly, I do not believe that it was immoral to

Re: Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never los

John Public — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:22:16 GMT

Ty, Jake thoroughly understands the study results so why are you questioning him on that? Is there something you don't understand? The rest of your message

Re: The headline for this study: Circumcision in HIV-infected men an

John Public — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:20:11 GMT

Ty, you pick and choose what you want. We're all in agreement that these studies of infected men with uninfected women should never have been done. If you

Re: The headline for this study: Circumcision in HIV-infected men an

John Public — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:18:26 GMT

Ty, nothing in your first message indicated you were saying anything more than the press ignored (because of bias) saying that circumcision doesn't prevent HIV

The headline for this study: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and it

L F — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:35:39 GMT

John, You asked for the headline. I dedicate it to you. This HEADLINE should be right up your biased alley: VICTIMIZING WOMEN FOR A NOBLE CAUSE IS MORAL!

Regardless of what side of an issue we take, we should never lose si

L F — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:34:28 GMT

Jake, You have been fair with me in the past. However, what are you not understanding about this studies results? My point about "receiving so little

Re: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmiss

John Public — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:02:29 GMT

Ty, if only it were possible to figure out what you were trying to say in your first message we might actually agree. You said "Studies cut short for whose

Re: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmiss

L F — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:18:35 GMT

John, Have you any semblance of a conscience, after you attacked me (Fri, January 22, 2010 6:55:29 PM) for defending the women in this study because in

Re: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmiss

shiva — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:15:46 GMT

thanks for the info on the study (prayer for peace and prosperity) ... From: Jake Waskett Subject: [PROCIRCORG] Re: Circumcision in

Re: Raised bumps still after 10 months

Harold — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:18:47 GMT

Hi Jacabo, Thank you for your interest in what we do. Regretfully there are many subtleties in technique which cause these bumps not to form, and the time to

Re: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmiss

Harold — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:08:15 GMT

Good morning Jake, Thank you for your erudite analysis of the statistics and your many contributions to our procircorg group. Harold

Re: Circumcision in HIV-infected men and its effect on HIV transmiss

Jake Waskett — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:45:24 GMT

Ty, There's insufficient evidence that circumcision of their partners caused women to become HIV positive; the association was not statistically significant.