The draft of PEPFAR’s new guidelines includes a number of bombshells, among them:
- PEPFAR is considering ending their infant circumcision program due to their high botch rate
- PEPFAR used the Mogen clamp, a circumcision devices sued out of business for causing botches
However, their draft contains a new plan that could cause additional harm.
PEPFAR is planning to use the ShangRing for future circumcisions – and testing on African populations to find out what the botch rate is.
From the guidelines:
While confirmation of age can be difficult, VMMC should not be performed in adolescents under age 15 in the absence of Tanner stage 3 of development.54 Programs may propose exceptions to the new age policy for the routine use of only the ShangRing device in adolescents aged 10-14 years/below Tanner stage 4. These must include plans for long-term enhanced safety monitoring in this group with complete followup within 14 days, recognizing that very large volumes may be needed to identify any increased risks. The ShangRing mechanism may protect against risks of glans injury and fistula for immature genitalia, but sufficient volumes have not yet been done in VMMC settings to rule out other injury risks in young adolescents that may be similarly uncommon, especially during the device’s in situ period.
In other words, PEPFAR is proposing testing a medical device on millions of African children to find out if it causes errors.
“Very large volumes may be needed to identify any increased risks” is an INSANE statement.
The way to find out if a medical device is safe is not to experiment on millions of African children.
Ring devices are known to be unsafe. A pediatric urologist in my documentary American Circumcision, who does both circumcision and botch repair, said he regularly sees damage from these types of devices and believes they should not be on the market.
You don’t need to botch millions of children to find out if your medical device known to cause botches will cause botches!
Why would PEPFAR adopt this unsafe device and use African children as human test subjects?
How Circumcision Device Manufacturers Profit
Yale academic Brian Earp has multiple threads exposing how circumcision device creators are writing the medical literature on circumcision:
Would it surprise you to learn that @WHO's Tomlinson applied, in 2005, for a patent on a device he invented for removing "excess foreskin" (i.e., normal, healthy foreskin) from specifically the "neonatal" penis? https://t.co/364ndKctHc – again, no evidence this reduces HIV risk. pic.twitter.com/FlNAfp4W6o
— Brian D. Earp (@briandavidearp) July 12, 2019
I just want to follow up on this shocking conflict of interest case at @WHO, where the inventor of a newborn circumcision device, after applying for a patent, is invited to co-write the @WHO "manual" for performing newborn circumcision, touting his own device for mass use. https://t.co/eQTybNpA4u
— Brian D. Earp (@briandavidearp) July 13, 2019
Circumcision device creators have written policy before, and wouldn’t you know it – the policy they write says you should buy their device.
If you make a circumcision device, which is cheaper?
- Paying for medical trials
- Getting paid to test your device on children
Yes – this is clearly human experimentation.
Even if you are pro-circumcision, you should be able to see that testing medical devices on children to find out if they are safe is not okay.
However, this is PEPFARs plan.
The ShangRing Is More Profitable
The ShangRing is a single use device.
If you buy a Mogen clamp (the previous device used by PEPFAR, which was sued out of business due to it’s high botch rate), you can use one device on thousands of children.
With the ShangRing, you have to buy a new one for each child.
One sale versus millions of sales. Which is more profit?
Is ShangRing Being Tested For China?
The ShangRing manufacturer is the one pushing for circumcision in China:
- Circumcision to be promoted at Beijing universities:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201904/26/WS5cc2af51a3104842260b8983.html
Every company is trying to break into the Chinese market.
Being the preferred circumcision device of PEPFAR and tested on millions of Africans is quite a selling point.
Could this new policy draft be setting up the ShangRing for the Chinese market?
There Is Still Time For Public Comment
PEPFAR guidelines to use the ShangRing are only a draft, and still open for public comment until December 13.
PEPFAR says on their website: “Your comments on the guidance are welcome and encouraged, and it is recommended that you are as specific as possible when submitting feedback.”
Please leave a comment regarding section “6.2.5.1. Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision” saying that PEPFAR should not use the ShangRing, and testing on African children is to discover the botch rate of the ShangRing is a clearly human experimentation and a human rights violation.
You can leave a respectful, well-thought-out comment here:
https://www.state.gov/pepfar-cop-20-plan-guidance-public-comment
Read my previous post on this issue: PEPFAR Plans To End Infant Circumcision Campaign In Africa
