The CDC kept records of reported infant circumcision rates in the USA from 1979 to 2010 [3]. In addition, they kept track of the reported infant circumcision rates for each race from 1979 to 2008 [13]. The reported infant circumcision rate for non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks in 1979 was 65.8% and 57.9% respectively (The percentage is much larger by the time adulthood is reached, where the rate reaches around 90-95% [2]), and in 2008 the rates were 62.9% for non-Hispanic whites and 57.6% for non-Hispanic blacks. The total infant circumcision rate was 3% points higher in 2010 than it was in 2008, so if the increase was distributed evenly across each racial demographic (each race increasing by 3%), the circumcision rate for non-Hispanic whites would have been 65.9% and 60.6% for non-Hispanic blacks, showing a slight overall increase in reported infant circumcision rates for ratesboth non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks from 1979 to 2010. But, because of the increasing Hispanic population (who have a lower circumcision rate) the newborn circumcision rates remand at around 60% from 1979-2010. In addition, a number of males undergo circumcision at a time after the newborn period. By the time adulthood is reached, the circumcision rate for men born after 1950 approaches 95% for non-Hispanic whites and 90% for non-Hispanic blacks [2, 6] ([6] is also referenced in this study [7]. Since the original study is a pay to view study [7] can be used as a reference) and approximately 50% for Hispanics. Older black men are also much less likely to be circumcised then younger black men, and older non-Hispanic white men are somewhat less likely to be circumcised than younger white men. The CDC’s documentation of circumcision rates can be found at [3]. These numbers come before the 2012 American Academia of Pediatrics new statement on circumcision stating the benefits outweigh the risks[4] and the CDC’s 2014 guidelines affirming that the benefits outweigh the risks and the all uncircumcised men should be informed of the benefits of circumcision[1]. It is likely that in light of new information on the benefits of circumcision, the American Academy of Pediatrics affirmation that circumcision is beneficial[4], and the CDC’s affirmation that circumcision is beneficial and instructions for doctors to inform all uncircumcised men of the risks/benefits of circumcision[1] that the rates will be higher. A study in 2011 conducted by the CDC found that after giving parents a brief outline of the risks/benefits of circumcision that over 95% of circumcised men planned on having his son circumcised, and 70% of uncircumcised men planned on having his son circumcised[5] which supports this hypothesis.

Studies in regards to circumcision rates in Canada are much fewer than the United States, but the few studies in Canada have found similar results. The reported newborn circumcision rate for Canada by province as reported by the Canadian Maternity Experience [8]are below:



The estimated 2006 newborn circumcision rates for Ontario was around 45%, which is what the number has been reported at historically. A report from Kingston General Hospital, Ontario from 1962 had that 48% of newborns had undergone circumcision [9], and a study of urinary tract infections among young boys found that 44% of newborns in Ontario males between 1993 and 1994 were reported to have been circumcised [10]. Studies have also found that, like the USA, circumcision rates are much higher in adults than the rates reported for newborns. The reported circumcision rate in Saskatchewan in 2006 was 35%, but a 2013 study at a Saskatchewan involving expecting parents attending a prenatal class found 105 fathers were circumcised and 67 fathers were uncircumcised, giving 61% of fathers being circumcised and that 56.4% ,19.3%, and 24.3% of the parents said they would pursue circumcision for their son, unsure, and would not pursue circumcision for their son (respectively). If half of those unsure of circumcision decided to undergo the procedure for their son, then 66% of males in Saskatchewan would be undergoing circumcision, which is almost twice as much as what the reported newborn circumcision rates were, and would also represent an increase from the previous generation. Given the reported rates for circumcision in other provinces of Canada (like in Ontario, Canada, which being closely related to the USA, one would expect a circumcision rate there close to the circumcision rate among white men in the USA which as previous stated, for men born after 1950 is just below 95%[2] and over twice that of the reported newborn rate of 45%) it is reasonable to assume that the circumcision rate grows to be about twice that of that the reported newborn circumcision rate is. So the circumcision rate throughout Canada for this coming generation is approximately 70%, but varies highly depending on the province. Again, these reported numbers come before updated polices from the American Academy of Pediatrics [4] which take a positive position on circumcision, and recommendations by the World Health Organization [12] for offering circumcision as apart of a comprehensive package to reduce STD’s


[2] Circumcision Rates in the United States.

[3]Trends in In Hospital Newborn Circumcision rates (CDC);United States, 1999–2010</a>


[4]American Academy of Pediatrics: Male Circumcision

[5]Acceptability of Circumcision to Prevent HIV

[6]Prevalence of Circumcision and Herpes Simplex virus 2 Infection of Men in the United States: the National Health and Nutrition  Examination Survey. 1999-2004

[7]Willingness of Men Who Have Sex With Men In the United States to Be Circumcised as Adults to Prevent HIV           

[8] Canadian Maternity Experience (document is archived so it must be downloaded to view)

[9]Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario circumcision rates

[10]Cohort Study on Circumcision of Newborn Boys and Subsequent Risk of Urinary tract Infection

[11]Parent’s Decision Making Regarding Male Circumcision

[12] World Health Organization and UNIADS: New Data on Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Policy and Programme Implications

[13] Circumcision rates USA by race and region.