We present a controversy study on the association between male circumcision (MC) and HIV. Our general goal is to shed light on the issue, unravelling and comparing different conceptions of scientific evidence and their respective world views. We seek to reconstruct, based on an analysis of the literature on the topic, key moments in the history of the controversy about the association between MC and HIV prevention, analysing more closely three recent randomised studies, given their relevance to the argumentative strategy employed by those who defend circumcision as a prevention method. Following this, we present a synthesis of the main arguments against the three referred studies. In conclusion, it seems that reasonable arguments for a more cautious approach are not being adequately considered.

No abstract

The technical consultation in Montreux, organised by World Health Organization and UNAIDS in 2007, recommended male circumcision as a method for preventing HIV transmission. This consultation came out of a long process of releasing reports and holding international and regional conferences, a process steered by an informal network. This network's relations with other parties is analysed along with its way of working and the exchanges during the technical consultation that led up to the formal adoption of a recommendation. Conducted in relation to the concepts of a 'hybrid forum' and 'network', this article shows that the decision was based on the formation and consolidation of a network of persons. They were active in all phases of this process, ranging from studies of the recommendation's efficacy, feasibility and acceptability to its adoption and implementation. In this sense, this consultation cannot be described as the constitution of a 'hybrid forum', which is characterised by its openness to a debate as well as a plurality of issues formulated by the actors and of resources used by them. On the contrary, little room was allowed for contradictory discussions, as if the decision had already been made before the Montreux consultation.

Por ser uma espécie de manifesto, não há resumo.