‘’The studies have been conducted in association with Johns Hopkins University (JHU),’’ NARI director RS Paranjape said. NARI deputy director (senior grade) SM Mehendale was one of the authors of the joint studies undertaken by Robert C Bollinger, Steven Reynolds and others at JHU.

While the paper authored by Bollinger and Mehendale was published in 2004 in The Lancet, another recent study was published as a research letter in the prestigious journal on Friday. Mehendale said the studies were being conducted since 1993. “We examined over 2,000 patients visiting Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD) clinics in Pune. A total of 191 men had already been circumcised. The entire group was enrolled for the study and a consistent follow-up was done for several years.’’

All these studies, which have followed men who are HIV-negative over a period of years, have shown that the effect of circumcision is significant. Researchers believe that cells in the foreskin may be particularly susceptible to infection and hence, circumcision helps in the prevention of HIV transmission. Mehendale, however, pointed out that circumcision did not really prevent the risk of transmission of sexually transmitted diseases like gonorrhea, herpes and syphilis.

‘’The study has also found that uncircumcised men have a high risk of acquiring genetic ulcers and has advised rigorous procedure for treatment at STD clinics as genetic ulcer disease can also act as a co-factor for acquiring HIV,’’ Mehendale said.

In a statement, the president of the International AIDS Society, Dr Pedro Cahn, has said that when performed safely, adult male circumcision represents a powerful tool in a comprehensive strategy to prevent new HIV infections. Studies provide conclusive evidence of the effectiveness of male circumcision, particularly for men in countries with high HIV prevalence. But there is a word of caution — while male circumcision represents the most significant new prevention tool, it is no panacea.