Lack of funding stalls circumcision programme


THE United Nations Programme on HIV and Aids (UNAids) says lack of funding and medical personnel has stalled expansion of the Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision (VMMC) programme to rural areas.


This was disclosed in a 2013 UNAids report titled Matching Supply with Demand: Scaling Up Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision in Tanzania and Zimbabwe.

The report said the shortage of doctors had caused the programme to miss its targets to circumcise some 1,3 million males aged between 13-29 years by 2015.

The national male circumcision policy for HIV prevention was first launched by the Ministry of Health and Child Care in 2009 and currently has 20 fixed sites, multiple outreach sites and mobile teams across the country’s 10 provinces.

“The VMMC programme still needs to expand its coverage, especially in rural areas because due to limitations in funding, services are concentrated around urban areas and penetration into more rural settings through mobile service delivery has been limited,” the report read.

“Human resource shortages impact the programme’s ability to go to scale as Zimbabwe does not have the required number of doctors and, due to a lack of task shifting, nurses are unable to share the workload.”

The UN body also recommended intensive awareness campaigns to dispel existing misconceptions about the benefits of circumcision.

“Zimbabwe is a non-circumcising country and local norms around VMMC, such as a strong preference for VMMC during pre-adolescence, are not a hindrance to reaching the target population. Over 76% of the VMMCs in Zimbabwe are performed on males aged 15 to 49 years.

“Zimbabwe plans to dispel myths about circumcision through scaling up demand creation activities, particularly best practices such as partnerships with public figures and community organisations and leaders and through engaging women as both partners and mothers.”


  1. ᴍʏ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅ’s sᴛᴇᴘ-sɪsᴛᴇʀ ᴍᴀᴋᴇs $82 ʜᴏᴜʀʟʏ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜᴛᴇʀ . Sʜᴇ ʜᴀs ʙᴇᴇɴ ᴡɪᴛʜᴏᴜᴛ ᴡᴏʀᴋ ғᴏʀ 7 ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ʙᴜᴛ ʟᴀsᴛ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜ ʜᴇʀ ᴘᴀʏ ᴡᴀs $14747 ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴡᴏʀᴋɪɴɢ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜᴛᴇʀ ғᴏʀ ᴀ ғᴇᴡ ʜᴏᴜʀs. ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ʜᴇʀᴇ……….


  2. Circumcision is a waste of money!

    “What does the frequently cited “60% relative reduction” in HIV infections actually mean?
    Across all three female-to-male trials, of the 5,411 men subjected to male circumcision,
    64 (1.18%) became HIV-positive. Among the 5,497 controls, 137 (2.49%) became
    HIV-positive”, so the absolute decrease in HIV infection was only 1.31%, which is not
    statistically significant.” (Boyle GJ, Hill G. Sub-Saharan African randomised clinical
    trials into male circumcision and HIV transmission: Methodological, ethical and legal
    concerns. J Law Med 2011; 19:316-34.) See:

    When asked if the RCTs (randomized controlled trials) would be repeated in the U.S., at
    the 2009 National HIV Prevention Conference in Atlanta, Dr. Katrina Kretsinger of the CDC
    replied that they would not, because it would be unethical to do so! If these studies
    would be unethical to do in the U.S., then how were they ethical to do on black men in
    Africa? See:

    Denied, withheld, and uncollected evidence and unethical research cloud what really
    happened during three key trials of circumcision to protect men – by David Gisselquist,
    economist and anthropologist who has authored nearly 60 scholarly publications.

    HIV infection rate higher on circumcised men
    Sunday, 08 July 2012 09:40 peter nyoni
    “According to the latest Zimbabwe Health Demographic Survey (ZHDS 2010/2011), the
    prevalence rate among the circumcised is 14 percent while that of the uncircumcised is 12
    percent.” See:

    EVIDENCE FROM NATIONAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS”- Findings from the 18 countries with data
    present a mixed picture of the association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence
    (Table 9.3) . . . In 10 of the countries—Cameroon, Guinea, Haiti, Lesotho, Malawi, Niger,
    Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe — HIV prevalence is higher among circumcised
    men.” (page 109) See:

    The one randomized controlled trial into male-to-female transmission showed a 61% higher
    rate among females in the group where the men had been circumcised. See:

    HIV in the Circumcised U.S. Up to 500% Higher than Intact Nations

    Where Circumcision Doesn’t Prevent HIV – Part I

    Where Circumcision Doesn’t Prevent HIV – Part II

    Lack of Open Debate in Circumcision Policy – Resources Wasted and Harms Ignored

    How the circumcision solution in Africa will increase HIV infections
    Robert S. Van Howe, Michelle R. Storms DOI: 10.4081/jphia.2011.e4 | Published: 2011-02-11

    “Langerin is a natural barrier to HIV-1 transmission by Langerhans cells” (Nature
    Medicine- 4 March 2007). This study states, “Langerhans cells (LCs) specifically express
    Langerin . . . LCs reside in the epidermis of the skin and in most mucosal epithelia,
    such as the ectocervix, vagina and foreskin . . . ” Removal of the foreskin (male
    circumcision) removes the langerhans cells that express langerin, the natural barrier to
    HIV-1 transmission. See:

    A study in the March, 2007 issue of the “Annals of Epidemiology” found that circumcision
    is “likely to spread” HIV. See:

    A study published on June 20, 2007 found that male circumcision is overstated as a
    prevention tool against AIDS. This study found that the key to understanding the global
    spread of AIDS is the size of the infected prostitute community around the world. See:

    “HIV infection and circumcision: cutting through the hyperbole” THE JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL
    SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF HEALTH, Volume 125, Number 6: Pages 259-265, November 2005

    Why Most Published Research Findings are False – John Ioannidis
    Published online 2005 August 30

    Why Is HIV So Prevalent In Africa? – Michael Fumento

    Danish Study- Male circumcision leads to a bad sex life
    November 14, 2011

    “Circumcised men have more difficulties reaching orgasm, and their female partners
    experience more vaginal pains and an inferior sex life, a new study shows.”

    BJU Int. 2013 Feb 4. Male circumcision decreases penile sensitivity as measured in a
    large cohort.

    What is Lost to Circumcision

    “How Male Circumcision May be Affecting Your Love Life”
    by Christiane Northrup MD

    One man in Africa appears to have more common sense than many of those promoting
    circumcision. “Jackson Dlamini, 25, a strapping man taking a break from weight training
    at a local gym, told IRIN he was considering circumcision as a way to protect himself
    from HIV/AIDS. When told that counsellors at Mbabane Government Hospital would advise him
    to carry on using condoms even after the operation, Dlamini said, “It is painful to get
    circumcised. If I have to wear a condom anyway, what is the point?””

  3. Having all of ones penis is better than having innervated parts cut off. For the male, the long term harm is huge with nerve damage and harm to the sensory system. A whole range of sensation and sexual and protective function are lost. The lips, nipples and fingertips have similar touch sense.

    Cutting off penis parts (aka male circ) =

    4.5 times as likely to get erectile dysfunction;
    ED will set in earlier
    lose a huge source of sexual pleasure for vaginal sex and masturbation
    lose functional aspects of a natural penis (everting action and skin to fill out your erection).
    lose protection of the glans (tem, abrasion…..)
    INCREASE the possibility of premature ejaculation problems (cut men have this more, with the scar sending wrong signals to the brain)
    lose some orgasm timing control

    Much more likely to take (need) VIAGRA (the cut men of the wold consume almost all of the VIAGRA).

    These are just a few of the many issues

  4. In 10 out of 18 countries for which USAID has figures, more of the circumcised men have HIV than the non-circumcised. Zimbabwe is of those countries, and they did the survey twice, once before the circumcision campaign began and once after, with the same result both times. A study in Uganda started to show that circumcising men INCREASES the risk to women, but it was cut short before that could be confirmed. Since men have to use condoms even if they’re circumcised, what protection can circumcision add?

    The studies claiming benefit from circumcision were done on paid adult volunteers (who knew what the researchers wanted to find). More of them dropped out, their HIV status unknown, than were found to have HIV.

    Circumcision is a “cure” looking for a disease. “Demand creation” is a euphemism for propaganda and brainwashing.

Comments are closed.