Results of the new study, 's8220;The Cost to Circumcise Africa,'s8221; published this month in the International Journal of Men's8217;s Health, that compares the cost of male circumcision to the cost of lifetime distribution of free condoms in sub-Saharan Africa, found that condom distribution is 95 times more cost-effective in preventing the same number of infections.
's8220;Some might call circumcision an 's8216;HIV vaccine,'s8217; but its moderate, supposed-effectiveness, along with its very high cost and practical dangers, makes it a questionable
and risky preventative,'s8221; said co-author Ryan McAllister, PhD, Biophysics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. 's8220;Condoms succeed 99% of the time, while circumcision, at best,
fails about half the time.'s8221;
's8220;Male circumcision is too costly to justify in the HIV battle. Even if circumcision does offer some protection against heterosexually transmitted HIV, condoms clearly provide much
more protection, at a much lower cost,'s8221; said study co-author and Wellness Associates founder, John Travis, MD, MPH. 's8220;It just doesn's8217;t make sense to perform mass surgeries
in a region of the world struggling to meet the most basic healthcare needs, especially when there are more cost-effective plans for achieving the same results.'s8221;
The study's8217;s findings suggest that behavior change programs are more efficient and cost-effective than surgical procedures. In addition, condom usage provides protection for women as
well as men. This is significant in an area where almost 61% of adults living with AIDS are women.