What proof is there that Dr. John Kellogg (that Kellogg) circumcised himself at age 37?

Submitted by dazzlingupstairz t3_10nx5so in history

Edit:

I took the liberty of removing it myself. It was a mobile edit done nearly four years ago. I guess this goes to show why you never rely on Wikipedia. No original research, and a big thing at the top of the page if you rely too much on primary sources...

I don't know how anyone could read Plain Facts For Old And Young and not get it. He literally says there's quacks who exaggerate the effects of masturbation to scare boys and young men, then goes on to write an obviously satirical section in A Chapter for Boys.

In that chapter he literally writes.

>Closing Advice to Boys and Young Men.—One word more and we must close this chapter, which we hope has been read with care by those for whom it is especially written. Let every boy who peruses these pages remember that the facts here stated are true.

And before that wrote.

>What Makes Boys Dwarfs.—How many times have we seen boys who were born with good constitutions, with force and stamina sufficient to develop them into large, vigorous men, become puny dwarfs.

>What Makes Idiots.—Reader, have you ever seen an idiot? If you have, the hideous picture will never be dissipated from your memory. The vacant stare, the drooping, drooling mouth, the unsteady gait, the sensual look, the emptiness of mind,—all these you will well remember. Did you ever stop to think how idiots are made? It is by this very vice that the ranks of these poor daft mortals are being recruited every day.

From wikipedia

>He circumcised himself at age 37. His methods for the "rehabilitation" of masturbation addicts included measures up to the point of cutting off part of the genitals, without anesthetic, on both sexes; he wrote men who did should be circumcised and women that did should have carbolic acid applied to their clitoral glans.[46] In his Plain Facts for Old and Young, he wrote:[46]

The larger piece Plain Facts For Old And Young.

Frankly, it reads like a satire. The section Wikipedia uses to say that he recommended circumcision seems to be a joke when looking at it in context of the whole text.

>A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed.[58]

Evidence that this is a joke.

># ANATOMY OF THE REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS.

> Circumcision.—The fold of integument called the prepuce, which has been previously described, has upon its inner surface a large number of glands which produce a peculiar secretion. Under certain circumstances, and from inattention to personal cleanliness, this secretion may accumulate, and then often becomes the cause of irritation and serious disease. To prevent such disorders, and to insure cleanliness, the Jewish law required the removal of the prepuce, which constituted the rite of circumcision. The same practice is followed by several modern nations dwelling in tropical climates; and it can scarcely be doubted that it is a very salutary one, and has contributed very materially to the maintenance of that proverbial national health for which the Jews are celebrated. Eminent physicians have expressed the opinion that the practice would be a salutary one for all men. The maintenance of scrupulous cleanliness, by daily cleansing, is at least an imperative duty.

> In some countries, females are also circumcised by removal of the nymphæ. The object is the same as that of circumcision in the male. The same evils result from inattention to local cleanliness, and the same measure of prevention, daily cleansing, is necessitated by a similar secretion. Local cleanliness is greatly neglected by both sexes. Daily washing should begin with infancy and continue through life, and will prevent much disease.

...

># CURATIVE TREATMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF SELF-ABUSE.

>Circumcision.—In cases of phimosis, in which irritation is produced by retained secretions, division of the prepuce, or circumcision, is the proper remedy. These cases are not infrequent, but the exciting cause of much of the difficulty is often overlooked. The same remedy is often useful in cases of long prepuce.

>When the glans penis is unusually tender and sensitive, this condition will usually be removed by the daily washing with soap and water necessary for cleanliness. If this does not suffice, or if there are slight excoriations caused by acrid secretions, apply, in addition, a weak solution of tannin in glycerine once a day.

...

>Varicocele.—Patients suffering from this difficulty should wear a proper suspensory bag, as the continued pressure of the distended veins upon the testes, if unsupported, will ultimately cause degenerative changes and atrophy. A surgical operation, consisting of the removal of a portion of the skin of the scrotum, is proper if the patient desires an operation; no other operation is advisable.

>The wearing of a suspensory bag is also advisable for those whose testicles are unusually pendulous.

...

> # Quacks

>Another trap set is called an "Anatomical Museum." The anatomical part of the exhibition consists chiefly of models and figures calculated to excite the passions to the highest pitch. At stated intervals the proprietor, who is always a "doctor," and by preference a German, delivers lectures on the effects of masturbation, in which he resorts to every device to excite the fears and exaggerate the symptoms of his hearers, who are mostly young men and boys. Thus he prepares his victim, and when he once gets him within his clutches, he does not let him go until he has robbed him of his last dollar.

> We might present almost any number of illustrations of the ways in which these human sharks pursue their villainy. If there were a dungeon deep, dark, and dismal enough for the punishment of such rascals, we should feel strongly inclined to petition to have them incarcerated in it. They defy all laws, civil as well as moral, but are cunning enough to keep outside of prison bars; and thus they wax rich by robbery, and thrive by deceit. A terrible recompense awaits them at the final settlement, though they escape so easily now.

To me, this reads like a lampoon on the whole idea of masturbation causing disease, with allusions to the problems of VD in a time before antibiotics. It sounds like he's talking about how ridiculous it would be to circumcise someone to prevent a disease induced by masturbation. For example, with a varicocele, he offers the idea of a surgery to fix it, but then offers a suspensory bag as a soluton. Likewise, with phimosis and long foreskin, he he offers the idea of circumcision, then says washing daily is fine. He then goes on to state that there are quacks that deliver lectures exaggerating the effects of masturbation so that they can sell some sort of cure.

What do you think? I can't find the evidence he circumcised himself.

45

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

CaveatRumptor t1_j6cykbu wrote

The effort to promote circumcision was probably much larger than Kellog himself and doesn't seem to have accounted for the fact that the poverty in which many people were forced to live in Kellog's time was the cause of bad hygenie, not necessarily the moral character of the menthemselves. Even in the Sixties its medical value was being misrepresented by doctors to mothers..

16

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6ip75j wrote

Dr. Lewis Sayre's wiki page says this—In 1870, he introduced circumcision in the United States as a purported cure for several cases of young boys presenting with paralysis and other significant gross motor problems. He thought the procedure ameliorated such problems based on the then prominent "reflex neurosis" theory of disease, with the understanding that a tight foreskin inflamed the nerves and caused systemic problems.

The source however says nothing about him "introducing" it in 1870 specifically. And he couldn't have "introduced cirumcision in the United States" as there had been Jewish communities in the US since colonial times.

Circumcision was "popularized" in the late 1800s with the support of the creator of JAMA. Based on extremely dubious reasoning and probably with a humoral understanding of medicine. Bloodletting was still popular into the 1830s, don't forget.

The Remondino source makes it clear that most Christian Americans were still not circumcising their children as the standard in the 1890s.

Here's the source wikipedia cites.

># 1101

>THE ORTHOPEDIC ORIGIN OF POPULAR MALE CIRCUMCISION IN AMERICA Barbara Chubak*, Bronx, NY

>INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Prophylactic male circumcision, in the absence of any existing urologic pathology, has been and continues to be controversial, as evidenced by the recently and frequently updated American Academy of Pediatrics’ policy statement on that surgery. This paper investigates the origins of popular circumcision in America, to determine the foundation of the current controversy.

>METHODS: Review of the relevant primary and secondary source literature, including the LA Sayre archival collection at the New York Academy of Medicine.

>RESULTS: Male circumcision was first popularized in late 19th century America by Lewis Sayre, a renowned orthopedic surgeon, public-health activist, and creator of the Journal of the American Medical Association. On the basis of a few orthopedic case reports, Sayre used his influence to promote male circumcision, by redefining it as a systemic therapy, rather than a local anatomic alteration. This redefinition was consonant with the contemporary reflex neurosis theory of disease, as well as the historic humoral-mechanical understanding of the human body.

>CONCLUSIONS: Sayre successfully redefined male circumcision as a systemic therapy, positioning it for continued popularity as a sanitary intervention into the 20th century. Since then, research into the benefits of this surgery has most productively focused on the ways in which it might prevent systemic diseases, such as HIV. However, the dubious evidentiary origins of Sayre’s influential work are a caution against too uncritically accepting as true even the most exciting and promising research.

>Source of Funding: None

The Remondino source says this.

> In the early part of this book, in speaking of female circumcision, it was mentioned that when the medical part of the volume should be reached some medical reasons for its necessity would be given. Dr. Price, in his paper, gives some information on this subject, which is of the greatest interest. In the course of the paper he says as follows: “Nor do I think these reflex neuroses from adherent prepuce wholly confined to the male sex. The preputium-clitoridis may be adherent and produce in the female similar reflexes. During the session of the American Medical Association, held in Chicago in 1874, I think, I attended one afternoon a clinical lecture by Dr. Sayre. A little girl, fourteen years of age, but about the size of a seven-year-old child, was brought in, who had never walked nor spoken, but with quite an intelligent countenance, who was in constant motion, and who presented very many nervous symptoms. Dr. Sayre examined her, and found the prepuce adherent the whole extent of the clitoris. He gave it as his opinion that here was the primary and sole cause of the symptoms, and that appropriate treatment shortly after birth would have prevented all the serious consequences so painfully apparent, and which was then too late to remedy.

3

RelentlessChicken t1_j6fegte wrote

My friends were just telling me a story about Kellogg last night. He founded the university they went to, so they knew a bit about his history.

Dude was a WHACKjob.

7

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6idhag wrote

Reading his writings, he does not seem that much out of the ordinary for a liberal heterodox Christian of his time period.

1

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6bdtdz wrote

I made this same post on /r/AskHistorians, but figured I'd put it here too.

I've probably seen this guy posted a dozen times on reddit as the guy who "popularized circumcision as masturbation prevention in America".

It doesn't seem to be the case, at all. Honestly, this is a fascinating read. It was published in 1877.

I'll add another source below.

P. C. Remondino, M.D., 1891

>In the United States, France, and in England, there is a class which also observe circumcision as a hygienic precaution, where, from my personal observation, I have found that circumcision is thoroughly practiced in every male member of many of the families of the class,—this being the physician class. In general conversation with physicians on this subject, it has really been surprising to see the large number who have had themselves circumcised, either through the advice of some college professor while attending lectures or as a result of their [iv]own subsequent convictions when engaged in actual practice and daily coming in contact both with the benefits that are to be derived in the way of a better physical, mental, and moral health, as well as with the many dangers and disadvantages that follow the uncircumcised,—the latter being probably the most frequent incentive and determinator,—as in many of these latter examples the operation of circumcision, with its pains, annoyances, and possible and probable dangers, sink into the most trifling insignificance in comparison to some of the results that are daily observed as the tribute that is paid by the unlucky and unhappy wearer of a prepuce for the privilege of possessing such an appendage.

It was not uncontroversial at the time, either.

>By many surgeons the idea of circumcision, unless connected with an immediate demand for interference,—such as a phimosis unmanageable by any other means, an induced phimosis from gonorrhœa or other irritation, syphilis in its initiatory sore, cancer or some such cause,—is looked upon as an unwarrantable operation, a procedure not only barbarous, painful, and dangerous, but one that directly interferes with the intentions of nature. The prepuce is by many looked upon as a physiological necessity to health and the enjoyment of life, which, if removed, is liable to induce masturbation, excessive venereal desire, and a train of other evils.

It seems to me, circumcision in America arose mainly out of a belief that that there is a hygiene benefit to it. This belief spread among physicians, and became recommended for newborns. It was also used as a treatment for all sorts of diseases.

>Agnew believes in circumcision in the treatment of reflex troubles. He relates a case, in the second volume of his “Surgery,” of eczema extending over the abdomen, of over a year’s standing, cured in a child by circumcision; he operates by incision on the dorsum, in which he leaves nature to make away with the flaps, or he circumcises by the Bumstead method.

The thesis that the widespread adoption of circumcision in America was due to prude Christian influence to get their their offspring to stop masturbating doesn't seem to hold up when you look at the sources.

>There is one thing that must be admitted concerning circumcision: this being that, among medical men or men of ordinary intelligence who have had the operation performed, instead of being dissatisfied, they have extended the advantages they have themselves received, by having those in their charge likewise operated upon. The practice is now much more prevalent than is supposed, as there are many Christian families where males are regularly circumcised soon after birth, who simply do so as a hygienic measure.

1

ArkyBeagle t1_j6drsth wrote

Kellogg ( the Kellogg Brothers really ) invented corn flakes. One reason was because they thought that this food would reduce ... self abuse compared to traditional breakfasts of meat.

Kellogg also stood as a mentor/influence over the popular historian Will Durant.

4

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6iia4s wrote

Look at the sources used as evidence that the Kellogg Brothers developed Kellog's Cereal to reduce "self-abuse" i.e masturbation. Look at what they cite. Try and find any proof of this that isn't making strange and specious connections.

1

GSilky t1_j6etper wrote

Circumcision in America got it's big boost from WWII when the armed forces were concerned about what might develop under the foreskin in the tropical conditions of the South Pacific. Before then it was generally something for Jews.

2

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6iu1px wrote

Seems to be the case that it was popularized in the 1940s and 1950s. Not sure about the tropical conditions of the South Pacific thing, it's not like adults were going out and having it done.

Dr. Spock wrote in 1989

> What I recommended to parents about circumcision in early editions of Baby and Child Care is quite different from what I recommend now. In the 1940s, I favored circumcision performed within a few days of birth for a couple of reasons. First, there was, at the time, a commonly held belief in medical circles that women married to uncircumcised men were more likely to develop cancer of the cervix. The second reason I favored routine circumcision was that if the operation were performed on a newborn, there would be no chance of a physician scaring the bejeebers out of a boy by performing the operation when he was older.

...

>In the 1940s and 1950s circumcision became quite common. By the 1960s, 90 percent of all male newborns in the United States were being circumcised as routine procedure. Ten years later, however, opinion among doctors swung away from the belief that certain groups of women developed cancer of the cervix because their husbands were uncircumcised.It was concluded that the cause was actually lack of good male hygiene - which is not as much of a problem in this country as it is in some other parts of the world. Also, by the early 1970s, more physicians - though not all - were aware of the psychological harm that could come from circumcision after infancy, and circumcision of an older child was not suggested as frequently as in the past.

1

Acceptable_Wall4085 t1_j6fl9i9 wrote

I read somewhere that he invented graham crackers to stop kids jerking off.

1

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_j6iinrj wrote

I read some of the stuff by Sylvester Graham. That claim seems to have the same issue as the Kellogg's Cereal claim.

2

Mitzvahgolem_613 t1_j6jr5x2 wrote

Kellogg was kinda bizarre and into eugenics I understand . Correct me if I am wrong.

1