THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIMOSIS STATISTICS
My interpretation of Øster compared to all the other source statistics (presented first on NewsGroups and on this site in 1997 and then linked in the Wikipedia) has now been presented in a Medical Journal in 2003 by Guy Cox
His point is simpler than mine: you cant just rely on one set of statistics and ignore all the others.
Infact simultaneously in 2003 there were two studies published in Australian medical magazines - both referring to Schöberlein, Oster and the other studies collected here ...
Herr Papke, the medical librarian responsible for
DIMDI searches performed a search in November 1997 (Key word: phimo*).
I researched the CUMULATIVE INDEX MEDICUS between 1920 and 1967 and
checked MEDLINE in Feb 2001 and Jan 2006.
I am interested to collect any record of representative
statistics - there must be recorded frequencies among army conscripts,
boarding schools etc. which have never been published . - (records
of hospital admissions only represent the number of referals for phimosis
or the amount of circumcision operations in relation to other operations,
all of which do not reflect general frequencies).
Checks this file contains all the essential basic information
with further links to other files:
Jacob Øster reported
on a group of almost two thousand boys aged between 6 and 10 yrs. old.
He studied them for a period of 7 to 8 years till they were between
13 and 17 years old. He wrote "phimosis was found in 4% of all
observations, but with a diminishing incidence throughout the years,
from 8% in 6-7 year-olds, to 1% in 16-17 year-olds." In addition
his calculations show an incidence of 1.4% for tight foreskin among
the 16-17 year-olds.
Schöberlein - (Schöberlein`s
original German) measured a 8.8% incidence of phimosis among
3,000 young men, all over 17 years of age, mostly between 18 and
22 years old.
Saitmacher (30) studied 229 boys
(aged between 14 and 19). He reported 8.7% where "the foreskin
could be retracted only with difficulty or with pain,". Saitmacher
noted: "It was completely unknown to some of the examined boys
that the foreskin could be retracted."
Osmond (86) reports 14% of
718 uncircumcised British soldiers had foreskins which could not
be retracted. He writes "The ignorance of these young soldiers
is remarkable; many of them expressed surprise at the condition
revealed when they retracted their foreskins : some of them had
apparently never done so in their lives."
Parkash S, et.al.: "Human subpreputial collection:
its nature and formation." J Urol 110(2), 211-212 (1973) (88) Gives an indication
of frequencies among Indian men: " ... 1,000 male subjects seen
as out patients and of 98 patients treated surgically for phimosis
...", "The high incidence of phimosis - 21 per cent in those treated
for carcimona and 12 per cent in the over-all outpatient population
- can definitely be ascribed to a lack of personal hygiene", "Since
most patients were unaware that the prepuce was retractable, the
history of phimosis often appeared to be from birth."
Bokström, Ludvigsson offer the only traceable or otherwise referred to statistics among
adolescents in the medical literature. Bokström measured an incidence
of 4.1% among 20,361 army conscripts. (Please - help is needed - translating
Finnish or Swedish). From what I can read; Ludvigsson "examined
405 19 yr. olds" and Tabel 1 says "Normala 94,3% Fimosis 5,0%" - it appears that 2% already treated 2% healthy phimosis, 1%
Gairdner (1949) (4) reports "Of 200 uncircumcised boys aged 5-13 years from three
different schools, 6% had a non-retractable prepuce; in a further
14% the prepuce could be only partially retracted."
on boys (when added together these studies cover a sample of
at most 167 boys over the age of 11 yrs).
from general school checks
A Criticism of Shankar
and Rickwood (incidence of BXO)
(Encyclopedia Judaica, Boon)
at least 13 Modern studies using quotes only
A personal appraisal of Realistic
The frequency of these conditions are generally underestimated. The
statistics for frenulum breve have never been collected (except
among animals). - The frequency of phimosis is inevitably too low
due to the fact that medical checks are conducted in the flaccid state:
phimosis is by nature less elastic, and expands relatively less than
the rest of the foreskin, therefore any difficulty with retraction
when flaccid, is magnified when erect. See Realistic