Having a chat with a mate down the pub. He came up with the idea (and before anybody gets all uppity, this is not racist or anything like that, and this is serious) that as a race of people are american guys and jews less able to tolerate pain ?
The reason being that we all know that jewish guys get circumcised very early in life, and am i right in saying that the vast majority of you yanks have the snip?
Well does the forum think that because of having to go through this truma at such a young age, that if you are unfortunate enough to be circumcised without any anesthesia, this would imprint on your brain in such a way that you become highly sensitive to pain? I know that the brain is not fully developed at this early age, but one thing that is developed is the pain stimuli.

Unlikely that pain leads to sensitivation. In fact, usually applied pain usually rather leads to habituation.

But does a trauma such as this, at such an early age, predispose one to a lower pain threshold than somebody who never had the "chop"? Its not a question of habituation, its about the level of pain that could be tolerated. Mind you , would it make you able to stand more pain than the average?

Hmmm.....
You might want to take a look at this slotty.

Genetic basis for individual variations in pain perception and the development of a chronic pain condition. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15537663)

There are are cultural aspects to consider but I think your argument re circumsision is a cut too far :D

Dee Cee

I was'nt thinking of a genetic reason DC. I was thinking more of a conditioning reflex to pain, instilled in the brain at a very early age. Do you think it could be possible?

There are probably so many other factors that determine pain thresholds, that the ultimate effect of a childhood/infancy trauma would be impossible to determine.

My man went through a windshield and had his face peeled off in youth (um, no anaesthetic) and had his body broken, and the guy whines over a paper cut. Dentists tell me I have some sort of network of "extra nerves" (oh great) -- some rare thing -- and so I'm more subject to pain signals... But then (I feel) I can endure an awful lot of pain. A former co-worker used to cut her arms and said she felt nothing; she had been cut as a child. My point being, so many variables -- how could we ever know?

meh, when me and my friends are bored we will grab out our knives ond cut pictures into ur arms, we have done it for years now so we dont really notice the pain anymore

Deecee:
Genetic basis for individual variations in pain perception and the development of a chronic pain condition.

This article says nothing other than that they wanted to show you that they knew how to say haplotypes, catecholamine-O-methyltransferase, and fancy acronyms for chemicals.

Something the Fetus would write- its not even legible.

Slotty:
I was'nt thinking of a genetic reason DC. I was thinking more of a conditioning reflex to pain, instilled in the brain at a very early age. Do you think it could be possible?
Very much so.

Hunic babies were 'baptized' by getting their heads flattened with boards.
And Huns are known for their......non-politiness.

Bring babies up in harsh climates, and you've got the worlds strongest armies.

And lets not forget the spartans...


I myself was circumsized, and have a very high tolerance for pain. Pain tolerance has nothing to do with 'psychological trauma' and everything to do with hormones/environment.

This article says nothing other than that they wanted to show you that they knew how to say haplotypes, catecholamine-O-methyltransferase, and fancy acronyms for chemicals.

It's only the abstract, as you well know Mrs Gendanken
If you want to inflict the full article upon the world then you can bloody well pay for it. It's over here (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15537663)

"access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 24 hours for US$35.00."!

Only from the full article can the true tendency of scientists to verbally whack off in public be known.

its not even legible.

It's science. If it was legible then anybody could do it. :rolleyes:
Dee Cee

It's only the abstract, as you well know Mrs Gendanken

Gendanken got married?

Anyway. Abstracts suck. Science should be free. I can understand paying for publications, but it should be freely available on the internet.

Gendanken got married?

Well she should, I'm sure she would make some young man very happy.
Mrs just seemed appropriate. Miss lacks any significant gravitas while Ms smacks of an unhappy compromise.

Science should be free. I can understand paying for publications, but it should be freely available on the internet.

Couldn't agree more invert.
Dee Cee

Xerxes:
I myself was circumsized, and have a very high tolerance for pain. Pain tolerance has nothing to do with 'psychological trauma' and everything to do with hormones/environment.
But that's just it.

You were likely cut in a modern hospital with a local anesthetic (rare).
There were pretty nurses and warm blankets aftwerwards and in a month or two you were already mothered into a spoiled, Western brat.
I can name about a dozen mothers who'd rush to an emergency room for a papercut.

I feel you have a high tolerance for pain now because somewhere in your teens pain became thrilling.
Which only means it was lacking.

Deecee:
If you want to inflict the full article upon the world then you can bloody well pay for it. It's over here
That's allright.
I need the money for cocaine.

Slotty:

But does a trauma such as this, at such an early age, predispose one to a lower pain threshold than somebody who never had the "chop"?

All you woud have to do would find people in professions where they are hurt a lot and ask them if they're circumcised. Since the question here is whether circumcision causes pussiness (not coddling), one would expect to see a greater proportion of uncircumcised men in painful professions when compared to the national average of circumcised men.

You were likely cut in a modern hospital with a local anesthetic (rare).
There were pretty nurses and warm blankets aftwerwards and in a month or two you were already mothered into a spoiled, Western brat.
I can name about a dozen mothers who'd rush to an emergency room for a papercut.

I feel you have a high tolerance for pain now because somewhere in your teens pain became thrilling.
Which only means it was lacking.

No. I was cut in the dining room, w/o anasthetic. And there was a crowd of onlookers eating gefilte fish while watching it get done to me.

I've always been pretty tough, but like I said, I attribute it more to my endocrine system than psychology.

I have no tolerance to needles. They hurt me like hell and nothing I can do changes it. My pain threshold is also low, meaning I "hurt more". Recently I needed a blood test and had anaesthetic cream on the arm for about 2 hours before hand, it worked as far as the entry point was concerned but when the needle entered the vein it was torture.

I would base pain threshold to nothing but physiological reasons i.e. endorphins. Some people might have more sensitive neurons releasing this body opiod similar to opiate drugs due to pain receptors. It could work the other way where some just don't have that many pain receptors per sq. in of skin surface or deep tissue. Not everyone has the same phenotypic makeup.

Mmh, from personal experience I can say that I have a pretty high pain tolerance, when visiting the dentist I refrain from taking anaesthetics, even when a whole tooth needs to be filled up (which requires it to be drilled hollow first.)
I also do not flinch when strong alcohol is poured over a wound for desinfection...

And just for information, I was not circumcised as a baby.

EDIT: Damn, I know I should not post when I am half asleep, I have forgotten to give my opinion...

I think that tolerance of pain is firstly a biological thing, but the individual upbringing is also a factor. I suppose that a child that was always protected from harm by their parents is not used to pain or did not have the chance to even develope a tolerance. When grown-up, those persons are too afraid to get hurt, ergo, they do not have a pain tolerance.

Just as a possibility.

Opened this thread for the first time today and this is what jumped out at me. ...as a race of people are american guys and jews less able to tolerate pain ?Not racist? That's hard to believe when your signature is, "...Its hard to be humble when your as fantastic as me!"

I'm American (though American is a "race" only to some sop in an English pub) but I'm not Jewish.

I took a grenade fragment in the side, chased the VC kid down and killed him. I've been shot. I stupidly mowed on a hillside and after taking off the big toe of my left foot, drove myself to the hospital. Oh yes! My parents had me circumcised when I was born in 1938.

I think that young people, especially those born in March, are preoccupied with pain and suffering - mostly their own...and you're not racist slotty?

I think there is experimental evidence to show that babies circumcised without anesthetic remain more fearful, less exploratory, and less tolerant of pain than uncircumcised ones, long after the event. Wait a minute...

Okay, here we go. This group looked at responses to painful vaccinations many months after circumcision. (For full-text articles, see Taddio et al., Lancet 349(9052):599-603
and Taddio et al., Lancet 345(8945):291)

"Circumcised infants showed a stronger pain response to subsequent routine vaccination than uncircumcised infants. Among the circumcised group, preoperative treatment with Emla attenuated the pain response to vaccination."

and

"After HIB, circumcised infants had higher behavioural pain scores (8 vs 6, p = 0.01) and cried longer (53 vs 19 s, p = 0.02). Thus neonatal circumcision may affect pain response several months after the event."

I can't find the reference now, but I'm pretty sure I read of another study that found social effects in even older children (a year or two): those in the circumcised group showed less exploratory behavior in new environments and were generally more cautious and fearful than their uncircumcised peers.

By the way, it's also known that early social experiences in lower mammals have lasting effects on social/personality traits.

A commonly used model is the relation between licking/grooming behavior of mothers and behavior of the pups when they grow up. Pups fostered to low licking/grooming mothers are more cautious and have enhanced stress responses compared to pups fostered to high licking/grooming mothers. Some of the biological underpinnings of this phenomenon have already been teased out quite nicely (see Weaver et al., Nature Neuroscience *7, 847 - 854 for a very beautiful investigation).

I see no reason to believe that humans should be any different from other mammals in this regard.

Opened this thread for the first time today and this is what jumped out at me. Not racist? That's hard to believe when your signature is, "...Its hard to be humble when your as fantastic as me!"

I'm American (though American is a "race" only to some sop in an English pub) but I'm not Jewish.

I took a grenade fragment in the side, chased the VC kid down and killed him. I've been shot. I stupidly mowed on a hillside and after taking off the big toe of my left foot, drove myself to the hospital. Oh yes! My parents had me circumcised when I was born in 1938.

I think that young people, especially those born in March, are preoccupied with pain and suffering - mostly their own...and you're not racist slotty?

Bloody hell mate, thats a a joke- have you not heard of irony? I have friends of all colours and creeds. If you think i'm racist, look through every post i have made on this forum.You will find nothing that has racial predudice. The only thing that makes my shit itch is religous nutters and mental pygmies.

I think there is experimental evidence to show that babies circumcised without anesthetic remain more fearful, less exploratory, and less tolerant of pain than uncircumcised ones, long after the event. Wait a minute...

Okay, here we go. This group looked at responses to painful vaccinations many months after circumcision. (For full-text articles, see Taddio et al., Lancet 349(9052):599-603
and Taddio et al., Lancet 345(8945):291)

"Circumcised infants showed a stronger pain response to subsequent routine vaccination than uncircumcised infants. Among the circumcised group, preoperative treatment with Emla attenuated the pain response to vaccination."

and

"After HIB, circumcised infants had higher behavioural pain scores (8 vs 6, p = 0.01) and cried longer (53 vs 19 s, p = 0.02). Thus neonatal circumcision may affect pain response several months after the event."

I can't find the reference now, but I'm pretty sure I read of another study that found social effects in even older children (a year or two): those in the circumcised group showed less exploratory behavior in new environments and were generally more cautious and fearful than their uncircumcised peers.


Thanks for finding this info! this was what i was getting at. :)

I'm still waiting for the proof that i'm racist marv, or even an apology for your offensive comments?