Can you trust the Internet more than two doctors?
That's a very valid point - the Internet as a whole, as a source of information, is anything but
However, can two separate doctors, chosen as it were at random, both
Well, of course, very
easily! If you took two doctors in America, and in respect of the matter of foreskins and circumcision, you could almost bet on both being wrong as you can guess with some certainty that both would themselves be circumcised and have a psychological investment in believing that to be the "desirable" state.
In Europe, we presume that (barring the possibility such as I describe below) neither
doctor would himself be circumcised, but on the other hand, problems such as "phimosis" are relatively uncommon and therefore considered "bad luck" and circumcision to be an unfortunate but appropriate remedy. Despite the general openness in regard to sexual expression, doctors can still regard it as an inconsequential problem, and not take a sufficient interest in it to develop expertise in treatments focussing on maximising sexual function.
, neither doctor had any awareness of the use of the "ultra-potent" steroid to facilitate stretching. I suspect neither even suggested or appeared to understand stretching as a solution to the problem in the first place, and so "fobbed you off" with a steroid familiar to them, but entirely inappropriate. I cannot actually locate a product named "Kentokort"at all on the Internet, and of course, Elocon® has
effectively replaced betamethasone for routine use in simple eczema so that the latter may not
be so readily available (and doctors may nowadays be reluctant to use medications that are reputed to have even infrequent risk of "adverse side effects").
What can you do? Well, if you have picked up the reference to "polymorph" and implemented it, you presumably must
have been reading here for some time (or is there some other site on which it is publicised? If so, where?). You should therefore be reasonably aware of all our suggestions.
Jim wonders whether you might have a yeast problem. Probably not
, unless there is irritation or cracking. I mention this because your problem has always been present and was probably not due to yeast in the first place (though one might wonder if there is
a common factor in foreskins that fail to stretch in childhood). In advising, I would
like to know full detail of the problem - degree, exactly how you feel it is limiting your sexual function currently and what your experiences were back at age 15 - as I tend to challenge the supposition that phimosis of itself is necessarily a limitation - I always observe that it generally does not
inhibit masturbation and indeed, just the reverse.
And we get back to the observation - the (correct) steroid is useful
stretching, but the stretching is fundamental. If you have implemented the stretcher
, you should be in the very best position for success. So if it is not working, I really have to focus on why
it is not, and your comment that it becomes uncomfortable after a couple of hours is where I see the problem. I have tried to explain before that the original design illustrated here is not entirely suitable for the purpose and should be modified so that the "fork" between the "shoes" folds back behind the shoes so that it lies beside
the penis when worn in clothing, because you need
it to be worn for extended periods - preferably all day, perhaps night as well if you get the design right
. And wearing it for a much longer duration is a desirable trade-off for more force exerted.
Secondly, the "shoes" should be wider, and curved so as not to impinge on the glans, more like the blades of a typical
eye speculum of less traumatic design (note that the hinge on this illustration is necessarily to the side
as dictated by the original purpose).
Of course, the very advantage of "polymorph" is that you can make
these adaptations easily, so I would anticipate that you should examine just what is causing discomfort, and make a version that you can
And I would caution that even an appropriate
surgical procedure - being a multiple
plasty around the periphery of the foreskin opening, does not relieve you of the need to stretch after the operation to achieve and maintain the desired diameter, but almost certainly would
make the stretching more painful. Whilst not a certainty, we have certainly seen people come here having gone through this procedure and been disappointed - we do reasonably suspect that many surgeons offer this with no commitment to success, except their own success in demonstrating that it was "not going to work anyway" and "selling" eventual circumcision.
Now as rants go and the likely motivations of doctors, I may describe a political problem in Australia, where a group of purported "medical experts" representing organisations dealing with HIV/ AIDS, together with known circumcision zealots, are getting publicity by suggesting that infant circumcision be promoted.
I was at a loss to imagine why what I would have presumed to be otherwise worthy and ethical people, would demonstrate such a shocking lack of consideration for contemporary ethics as to support mutilation of unconsenting infants, until my wife pointed out the blindingly obvious. These "leading experts" just happen to be noteworthy members of the Jewish community! In America and Australia, there is a representation of Jewish doctors vastly
in excess of their proportion in the population as a whole, and their need to justify their particular religious observances is of course, entirely understandable.