structural:scholar_edition
Prophylactic usage in developed countries

Major medical organizations hold varying positions on the prophylactic efficacy of the elective circumcision of minors in the context of developed countries. Literature on the matter is polarized, with the cost-benefit analysis being highly dependent on the kinds and frequencies of health problems in the population under discussion and how circumcision affects them.

The World Health Organization (WHO), UNAIDS, and American medical organizations take the position that it carries prophylactic health benefits which outweigh the risks, while European medical organizations generally hold the belief that in these situations its medical benefits are not counterbalanced by risk. Advocates of circumcision consider it to have a net health benefit, and therefore feel that increasing the circumcision rate is "imperative". They recommend performing it during the neonatal period when it is less expensive and has a lower risk of complications. The American Academy of Pediatrics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that the potential benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks.

The World Health Organization in 2010 stated:

There are significant benefits in performing male circumcision in early infancy, and programmes that promote early infant male circumcision are likely to have lower morbidity rates and lower costs than programmes targeting adolescent boys and men.