Reply to comment
Built in bias
July 27, 2007
by Anonymous (not verified),
2 years 17 weeks ago
Comment: 24359
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
This study measures sensitivity in the glans. Both circumcised and intact men have a glans. The study does not measure sensitivity in the foreskin, which is removed during circumcision. Since the study completely ignores the sensitivity of the parts removed by circumcision, how can it claim that circumcision doesn't impact sensitivity?
The study is biased since it assumes that the foreskin has no value.