circumcision can cause Peyronies Disease??

[swimmer_90]

hello all,i'm new to the forum...recently i had a circucision done...my penis always curved a bit to the right and up when erected...after the surgery and for some days now is swollen to the left and has taken an angle to the right but this time when relaxed!i'm pretty sure it was straight before...i hadnt the chance to see it in an erection yet because the stitches are still on...but i'm worried that those injecions i had before the surgery have injured my penis...is that possible?i mean can a curve turn into Peyronies Disease because of a circumcision?also can some1 tell me when should i be worried about Peyronies Disease??how does the penis look at that condition?the angle is big?erections are painfull??thnx in advance...

[tmwstw]

Technically speaking, No. Circumcision make changes in the skin, not the erectile bodies. The curve might have been always there, but was masked by your foreskin, plus now you can see the glans when relaxed, things might look different than what you used to see before, plus the surgical swelling. If that's the case, you should see improvements soon before you know it. I dont think you developed Peyronie after your circumcision.

[crashbandit]

I've been wondering the same thing lately. I was circumcised was I was 15 and when I look at the scar I think maybe the doctor maybe have sewed the skin tighter on one side making it pull more towards that side. This wouldn't cause Peyronies Disease but may cause more stress to one side then the other and ultimitely cause pain. I only have pain plus the little bit of curve expecially when I'm erect.

Anyone know of a circumcision that can cause pain because the sew job was more tight on one side?

[fubar]

I must say absolutely silly stuff going on here.Your penis is made for adverse situations. Loosing some skin is one of them.I was jig sawed by a nail at five sliding down a tree! Saw my tunica and that is what is prescious to our condition.Skin will always stretch scared or not.But the tunica and other membranes in our penis will not once damaged. That is the foundation of this forum.Once damaged forever the longing to unravel the mystery.Having stitches in my penis many times did not effect my erections or cause Peyronie's.

Fubar!

[ComeBacKid]

Swimmer,

Circumcision could cause peyronies in my opinion, but it may not be technically peyronies, because your bend could be from a "high and tight" circumcision which means there is no skin left at all and the doc cut it as tight as he can go.   This can cause a bend, but is different from peyronies in a way since it isn't direct damage to the penile tissues, which is what most of us here have in one form or another.  Once your penis heals you could try restoring enough foreskin to give you a little slack and see if your penis can grow full in the erect state without the bend.  If you are cut "high and tight" now, then it will be harder to start restoring foreskin.  I should note most doctors in the USA don't do "high and tight" infant circumcisions but purposely leave excess skin in place so the male can "grow" and have some slack skin.  Whether or not your circumcision caused all this or not is only speculation but if you didn't have it before all this it probably caused it.  You can't really change the surgery at this point so I wouldn't dwell on it.  Let it heal before you start doing any pulling, stretching, VED, or anything.  You might try pentox to, but that is a blood thinner, so you wouldn't want to get on that until your penis is fully healed.

Comebackid

[LWillisjr]

but i'm worried that those injecions i had before the surgery have injured my penis...is that possible?

What type of injections did you have before circumcision. If it was the day of surgery then I can only assume this was a local anesthetic. These are generally done with small needles and should not cause any Peyronies Disease.

i mean can a curve turn into Peyronies Disease because of a circumcision?

I don't think so. Given the fact that most men in the U.S. since the mid 50's have been circumcised would mean a much higher incidence of Peyronies Disease in the U.S. I just don't see the correlation.

[restore]

There may be a higher incidence of peyronies in circumcised men.  But that begs the question.  How much of that is because most men in the US are circumcised?  And how much is due to circumcised men thrusting harder and being rougher during sex than intact men and thereby causing more penile injuries or trauma?  I've been wondering this lately.  I'm active on the foreskin restoration forums also and it got me wondering.

[james1947]

There may be a higher incidence of peyronies in circumcised men.

Should be a question, not a remark.
I also don't see to many man from the Muslim world on the forum, they are all circumcised, 1.5 billion or so.
Maybe they don't know English and don't have access to Internet.

James

[restore]

Good point, hadn't thought of that.  This forum is on the World Wide Web, so it's presumptuous and incorrect of me to limit the question to circumcised men in United States.  

As for me, I do know that I have lost sensitivity in my glans over the years (now 51), which I attribute to my being circumcised.  Results in me being more aggressive and forceful in lovemaking to make up for it.  My injury happend with vigorous thrusting, and "missing" and hitting my wife's pelvic bone.      

[jan.schaller1958]

Absolutely not. Circumcision is due to plaque formation deep below the skin level. Circumcision has nothing to do with this. This is undisputed, except maybe by a few nut cases who know nothing about circumcision or Peyroines.  

[TonySa]

I know of no studies correlating circumcision w peyronies, however it may be possible as sex w a foreskin places less stress on the penis than when circumcised (this usually need for additional lubrication).  What are you soooo upset w talk of the damage circumcision can cause to ones sex life?  At least you don't support it being done to infants who cannot consent!

[jan.schaller1958]

I know of no studies correlating circumcision w peyronies, however it may be possible as sex w a foreskin places less stress on the penis than when circumcised (this usually need for additional lubrication).  What are you soooo upset w talk of the damage circumcision can cause to ones sex life?  At least you don't support it being done to infants who cannot consent!

And just as many uncircumcised men suffer from Peyroines as circumcised men. Explain that. I am interested in facts

Yeah, I oppose infant circ and wish it were banned. If adults want it, I don't care any more than I'd care if they wanted a sex change operation, but I don't think any guy with a normal penis would ask a doctor to take a knife to it to make it look prettier in their eyes. All I have to say is an infant and older child has a right to all the skin on his penis he was born with (and all foreskins vary widely in size) until he decides at 18 to have a circ himself after giving informed consent, like with any other surgery (which rarely happens absent a medical reason). Easy. It's just a moral human rights argument. You don't need all the other false claims to win the argument.  

[TonySa]

Well, most men w circumcised penis need to add lube even to just jerk off...not needed w a foreskin.  If one doesn't, yes it's putting undue stress on the penis and could cause microtrauma resulting in peyronies.  
All this said, I'm not aware of the individuals you are referencing and no one should be body shaming anyone-including those who have been circumcised.

[jan.schaller1958]

Well, most men w circumcised penis need to add lube even to just jerk off...not needed w a foreskin.  If one doesn't, yes it's putting undue stress on the penis and could cause microtrauma resulting in peyronies.  
All this said, I'm not aware of the individuals you are referencing and no one should be body shaming anyone-including those who have been circumcised.

Well, Tony, you seem like a reasonable guy and I agree. We can agree to disagree on this one, about the lubrication and others harm claims of circumcision. I just don't believe it is harmful. Unnecessary and worthless, yes. And it should never be done on a normal penis (I suppose If you are a consenting adult, who cares?)  

[jan.schaller1958]

Swimmer,

Circumcision could cause peyronies in my opinion, but it may not be technically peyronies, because your bend could be from a "high and tight" circumcision which means there is no skin left at all and the doc cut it as tight as he can go.   This can cause a bend, but is different from peyronies in a way since it isn't direct damage to the penile tissues, which is what most of us here have in one form or another.  Once your penis heals you could try restoring enough foreskin to give you a little slack and see if your penis can grow full in the erect state without the bend.  If you are cut "high and tight" now, then it will be harder to start restoring foreskin.  I should note most doctors in the USA don't do "high and tight" infant circumcisions but purposely leave excess skin in place so the male can "grow" and have some slack skin.  Whether or not your circumcision caused all this or not is only speculation but if you didn't have it before all this it probably caused it.  You can't really change the surgery at this point so I wouldn't dwell on it.  Let it heal before you start doing any pulling, stretching, VED, or anything.  You might try pentox to, but that is a blood thinner, so you wouldn't want to get on that until your penis is fully healed.

Comebackid

Well, I'm quite convinced circumcision causes global warming too. Just have to figure out some novel theory how. Wait a minute, I got it. The US has a high proportion of circumcised adult men, like 70-80%. And the US is a big contributor to global warming. There you go, proof positive. What's the next thing we can blame circumcision? Hum. Oh, got it. World hunger, and poverty?  Definitely a link there.