The new article is about a study by Johns Hopkins that " if circumcision rates were to decline to the 10 percent level currently seen in Western Europe, it could add up to $505 million annually in direct health care costs." Why? Because circumcision apparently reduces the rate of STIs, some cancers, and other medical issues.
How did the HPers respond to this study? The way they usually respond to Israel-related articles, long on outrage, short on factual arguments:
La, la, la! We know better than doctors at Johns Hopkins!!