The South African Medical Journal has published a new analysis of a subset of 3025 men. Circumcision did not appear to be associated with HIV status.
One third of men (35.3%) were circumcised. Being over 50, African, living in rural areas and speaking SePedi (71.2%), IsiXhosa (64.3%) were strongly associated with circumcision. The median age was significantly older for Africans (18 yr) compared to other racial groups (3.5 yr), p < 0.001. Among Africans, circumcisions were mainly conducted outside hospital setting. In 40.5%, circumcision took place after sexual debut; Two thirds of men were circumcised after their 17th birthday were already sexually active. HIV and circumcision were not associated (12.3% vs 12%). HIV was, however, significantly lower in men circumcised before 12 yrs (6.8%) compared to over 12 yrs of age (13.5%), p = 0.02. When restricted to sexually active men, the difference that remained did not reach statistical significance (8.9% vs 13.6%, p = 0.08.).
The difference between those circumcised at a younger age and those circumcised at a later age likely has something to do with socio-economic factors. This is essentially a demographic study. As in previous studies of circumcision viz STDs and other conditions, this study contradicts other studies, which in turn contradict this study, embodying the very definition of "irreproducible."
Edit: And in case it requires spelling it out, irreproducible means no meaningful association between the two variables under study.
