Author: Halperin, Daniel T ; Weiss, Helen A ; Setswe, Geoffrey ; Cash, Richard ; Jackson, Helen ; Ncala, Johanna ; Mabuza, Khanya ; Heywood, Mark ; Diallo, Mamadou Otto ; Agot, Kawango ; Betukumesu, Bilonda ; Wamai, Richard G ; Bongaarts, John ; Sewankambo, Nelson ; Simelane, Dudu ; Kintaudi, Leon ; Makhubele, Mzamani Benjamin ; Ntaganira, Innocent ; Klausner, Jeffrey D ; Otolorin, Emmanuel Oladipo ; Kapiga, Saidi ; Wilson, David ; Venter, François ; Sanchez, Jorge ; Woelk, Godfrey ; de Moya, Antonio ; Rees, Helen ; Leclerc-Madlala, Suzanne ; Micheni, Kenneth ; Karim, Quarraisha Abdool ; Sawires, Sharif ; Dludlu, Sibongile ; Seloilwe, Esther Salang ; Phiri, Mannasseh ; Pape, Jean William ; Bailey, Robert C ; Bowa, Kasonde ; Hankins, Catherine ; Kebaabetswe, Poloko ; Ruiz, Monica ; Nyamucherera, Obrian F ; Serwadda, David M ; Kayembe, Patrick Kalambayi ; Cates, Ward ; Zungu, Nompumelelo ; Shisana, Olive ; Morris, Brian J ; Geffen, Nathan
The authors respond to a recent article “Male circumcision is not the ‘vaccine’ we have been waiting for!” Green et al. claim that the incorporation of male circumcision (MC) as an additional HIV prevention strategy is based on ‘incomplete evidence and is premature and ill-advised’.