Weirdest hamster I've ever seen

[Wrath]

I went to one one of the evil corporate petstores the other day and came across what first disgusted me, and then fascinated me. Hairless hamsters!!! The more I looked at them the less gross and more cute they became. They look like little pigs, the way their skin bunches up near their little limbs. Crazy!

:- > Anyone else ever seen hamsters like that?

[snakehunter]

They remind me of those egyptian harless cats UGH a waste of genetic engineering if you ask me.............

[Darren179]

Never seen them.

[daiyoukai]

http://www.hamsterific.com/HamsterUniversity/images/hairlessHamster3.jpg

they alright.

would make great feeders, see every puncher wound and just a all around great way to watch the system of eating in the snake. No furr to cover everything

[RepTylE]

Holy! that is odd looking

[Darren179]

ugh.

[Manitoban Herps]

If you never told me that was a hamster, I would of though of it as a different species. I think it looks very neat.

[Derrick]

hehe ya they're like Skinny Pigs

http://cuddlycavies.homestead.com/files/babytwosideb.jpg

[zero&stich]

I've seen hairless rats...Does this count?

[Asian Jon]

It looks like it took a bath in Nair.

[chas*e]

HaHahHHahahhahhhahhhaaaaa...I love it....it looks like..someones private parts
I would call it ....Richard Face
So that's what they do with the skin piece they cut off.....make hamsters

[t-dot]

http://www.petwebsite.com/hairless.htm check this out i was just surfing the net and went to check it out kinda cool for this little guy's

[Wrath]

Yeah, I didnt want to say anything, but they do remind me of little uncircumsized pps. :)

[paulsreef]

There's nothing wrong with being uncircumsized; in Canada it's going to be banned because some babies had actually suffered heart attacks from the pain. Plus you probably gain about a 1/4 inch by not being circumsized.
Paul.

[BoidKeeper]

I keep a group of tame hairless rats. They're pretty neat.
Cheers,
Trevor

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by paulsreef
in Canada it's going to be banned because some babies had actually suffered heart attacks from the pain.
Any information to backup your asinine claims?

[Katt]

Cool!! They look a lot better without the hair!

I love all the hairless rodents/cats/dogs. They look neat to me!

They're all natural mutations, not the result of genetic engineering by some evil corporation.

[paulsreef]

Is circumcision painful?
The often repeated statement that babies can't feel pain is not true. It is documented in the medical literature that babies are as sensitive to pain as anyone else, and perhaps more so. [13,14]

Most circumcisions are performed without anaesthetic, because there are risks involved with using anaesthetics on babies. Sometimes local injections are used, but this does not eliminate pain. Most babies will show signs of pain during the procedure and in the week or ten days following circumcision. Recent studies have shown that the pain is remembered long beyond the time of the procedure itself. [23]

While pain may help parents decide against circumcision, parents should look at the long term effects of their decision first, not only during infanthood, but all the way to adulthood. Your decision will affect your son for the duration of his life.

It used to be covered by OHIP, but once it was proven that there are no medical reasons to back it up, only religious or cultural reasons; It no longer is covered by OHIP. If it wasn't painful they wouldn't have to strap the baby to a board.
Paul.

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by paulsreef
There's nothing wrong with being uncircumsized; ...

Sure there is. The ladies prefer it cut :D

And we all know they own that part of us anyway.

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by t-dot
http://www.petwebsite.com/hairless.htm

I didn't understand this quote in the article:

Wide and irresponsible distribution of these haired hamsters could cause an "outbreak" of hairless hamsters to appear in the future.

Is it irresponsible because the hairless hamsters can't produce milk and would starve? Then how could they be widespread if they keep dying?

[nita]

Originally posted by RMBolton
Any information to backup your asinine claims?

I hadn't heard of heart attacks but I've seen the operations done to clean things up when circs get screwed up. Personally I would never remove a natural part of my childs body for cosmetic or religous reasons. Here is a link not for the faint of heart but it is one of many I found while pregnant not to mention many other resources provided by my doctor on the cons of circs and there were no pros!!

http://www.infocirc.org/fourn.htm

[nita]

Originally posted by spidergecko
Sure there is. The ladies prefer it cut :D

And we all know they own that part of us anyway.


LMAO, WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!!


Guess that is my preference though!!! Hehehehe

[Removed_2815]

I find it quite humourous that this thread has turned into the ethics of circumcision, but I'll continue with it....

Paulsreef, what are you referencing?
The claim of heart attack is all that is being questioned, not whether or not there is pain - so why would you reply with this? You claimed that babies are having heart attacks from circumcision and that Canada is banning the practice, which is simply not true - the debate ends here. Who would question the aspect of pain (although I don't remember feeling anything, though I don't remember much of anything around that time)?
And, yes, it is a health issue. A few years ago when I was working in a hospital we would have more than a few cases where adult males were having circumcisions performed because of health complications.
All I wanted was for you to show us all where you got your information that babies are having heart attacks and Canada is banning circumcision.... Sounds suspiciously like classic hearsay tripe.
Ryan

*edit: all you have to do is show us the medical report linking the cause of death (myocardial infarction) to circumcision and Canada's proposed legislation to ban circumcision in males.

[peterm15]

as far as i knew skinny pigs were genitacly altered.. so ppl with alergies could own one... thats just what i heard

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by nita
I hadn't heard of heart attacks but I've seen the operations done to clean things up when circs get screwed up. Personally I would never remove a natural part of my childs body for cosmetic or religous reasons. Here is a link not for the faint of heart but it is one of many I found while pregnant not to mention many other resources provided by my doctor on the cons of circs and there were no pros!!

http://www.infocirc.org/fourn.htm

Again, Nita, thanks for the link but it is the claim that babies have heart attacks and that Canada is banning the practice that is in question, nothing else.
Ryan

[Wrath]

If the guy is not nasty, I like uncircumcized. The thing that bothers me about circumcizion is that people have it done to them before they have the choice. Some people need to have it done for medical reasons and others prefer it cut. On the other hand, it is much more painful to have it done to an adult, so I dont know which is best.

[spidergecko]

Ever hear about those guys who get the skin caught in their zipper (RIP) and need to have the procedure done in adulthood? Ouch!

Anyway, I don't know of many men who have regretting their parents choice to do the procedure (but then again, I don't sit around with the guys discussing penises).

[urd]

this may sound stupid but i never realized circumcision was so common in America, here in England circumcision is not nearly as common, i think i only know one person who is circumcised.

[Shad0w]

How the heck did a thread about hamsters get into human circumcision? LOL

[paulsreef]

Several doctors have given estimates of the number of deaths that occur each year. Douglas Gairdner reported 16-19 actual deaths a year in England and Wales from neonatal circumcisions in the 1940s.8 Sydney Gellis believed that "there are more deaths from complications of circumcision than from cancer of the *****.9 There are various figures for the number of deaths from penile cancer ranging from 200 to 480 deaths per year. Robert Baker estimated 229 deaths per year from circumcision in the United States.10

[Wrath]

I think more are cut than not in the U.S., but that's my <i>personal</i> opinion. Most of the guys that I know who arent cut are latinos or guys who were born in another country.

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by Wrath
I think more are cut than not in the U.S., but that's my <i>personal</i> opinion. Most of the guys that I know who arent cut are latinos or guys who were born in another country.

About 80% in USA and about 7-10% in Europe. I can't find the link I got that from.

[Removed_2815]

Paulsreef, let's try this again, I will be forever in your debt if you could please show us the data that made you claim that "some babies had actually suffered heart attacks from the pain," that's all I'm asking. I have no doubt that babies have died in the 40's from sepsis or other non-heart attack related complications that may have been directly related to circumcision. Infection is a real threat with any operation. You stated that babies are having heart attacks from the pain and that Canada is banning the practice because of this. Are we going around in circles here? All I wanted is some information to back up your original claim, nothing more, nothing less... I've never heard of such a thing is all.
Ryan

[paulsreef]

Ryan, I'm working on it. My info comes from a friend that works in a Toronto hospital. Once I get the info I'll post it. In the meantime, be kind to your snake.
Paul.

[Removed_2815]

LOL! I always am.
I look forward to learning what you find out.
Best,
Ryan
P.S. I sent an e-mail to a friend, a pathologist at York Central Hospital, and he says that there is no documentation of myocardial infarction caused by circumcision that he is aware of, in any of the literature. And as far as Canada banning the procedure, nope, there's no truth in that either - but people like to talk and rumours get spread.

[Vengeance]

I had to be circumcised when I was 12 due to health reasons, NOT FUN! I would have preferred it done when I was young, although that one link is slightly disturbing.

[JAdkins2451]

I personally dont think there is anything wrong with not being uncircumsized. And I know when my sister haad her baby not to long ago she was contimplaiting getting it done she went to 2 diffrent doctors and both reccomend that she didnt get it. They would still do it but basically talked her out of it. And I remember seeing a TV program and the main reason for circumssion is that they belived if you cut it of it would be cleaner ie from diseases etc. Im not proffesional just my 2cents

[Siretsap]

Circumcision was mainly practiced back in the days cause mothers tought it would prevent the child from masturbating s often... Then came the reasons from the doctors that it made it cleaner and all...

Basically, today's reasons for circumcision is for religion and health reasons. There will always be a few who get it done cause they prefer it that way.

Anyhow, it is not true that it is less painfull when you are a child. It is just as painful, babies just don't have the facial expressions developped and the worsd to tell you it really f****** hurts. ;-)

[nita]

Personally would never do it to my child lets go about removing any other area of the body that is prone to cancer, stupid in my books. A lot of women I spoke to said it looked cuter that is why they were doing yeah, have you seen those poor babies the first few weeks after, definately not cute and I would never give a child "cosmetic" surgery. My sis had her son done cause daddy was done and he didn't want to explain why daddy looks different when trying to potty train. She couldn't change her sons diaper for 2 weeks with out crying when seeing what had been done to him, she couldnt' believe she had caused her son to go through that for what!!

PS..... Female circumcision is called inhumane also done for religeous reasons, but it is perfectly fine to cut out part of a males genitals Hmmmmmm. Doesn't make sense to me.

[Wrath]

So far, I'm opting to not do it to my kids. *shrugs* My best friend isnt cut and he sings praises about his pp. Hey did the word ***** get censored on another post?

*update* Oh my god it did! Haha. Geez.

I believe that circumcision used to be useful in preventing diseases back when running water and good personal hygiene were difficult to come by. And I agree with the post before this, it is genital mutilation and is an archaic concept.

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by nita
Female circumcision is called inhumane also done for religeous reasons, but it is perfectly fine to cut out part of a males genitals Hmmmmmm. Doesn't make sense to me.
Bad comparison. Female circumcision, AKA clitoridectomy, AKA excision of the clitoris, is completely different as it is the surgical removal of the female sexual organ in its entirety. Since the clitoris is homologous to the pen1s, this comparison is only relevant if we were talking about the removal of the pen1s - which we're not... just the prepuce.
Ryan

edit: please excuse the use of "pen1s" but the correct, non-offensive anatomical term is being censored out.

[marisa]

"but the correct, non-offensive anatomical term is being censored out."

That's because people who ARE offensive have like to use it in a totally different context in the past ;)

This topic has become um interesting. :|

Marisa

[chas*e]

Curcumcision is more of a useless semi-religious medical procedure....it was widespread in the past 200 years in the Judeo-Christian West .. Also people where told ..wrongly..that being un-cut was a cause of bladder and kidney infections ...It has become less popular now due to the greater education/knowledge of the general public in useless medical procedures....
PS Chicks like it anyway, as long as the best part wasn't thrown away when the operation took place..lol
As for the initial post and Pic...I love the little hairless bastards

Just to mention--- I am cut and I am sure they must have a cut too much off...not fair

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by chas*e
Also people where told ..wrongly..that being un-cut was a cause of bladder and kidney infections ...It has become less popular now due to the greater education/knowledge of the general public in useless medical procedures....

From medicinenet.com:

What is the relationship between circumcision and urinary tract infections?

The incidence of urinary tract infections in male infants appears to be lower when circumcision is done in the newborn period. It was first reported in 1982 that males predominate among infants with urinary tract infections (whereas females predominate later in life) and that about 95% of the infected infant boys had not been circumcised. Studies in US Army hospitals involving more than 200,000 infant boys confirmed greater than a tenfold increase in urinary tract infections in uncircumcised male infants compared to those who had been circumcised.

What might this relationship between circumcision and urinary tract infections mean?

Circumcision prevents the growth of bacteria under the foreskin and this, in turn, protects male infants against urinary tract infection. The high incidence of urinary tract infections in uncircumcised boys has also been found to be accompanied by an increased incidence of other significant infections such as bacteremia (bacterial infection of the bloodstream) and meningitis (infection of the covering of the brain). The protective effect of circumcision may thus extend to a number of infectious diseases.

What is the relationship between circumcision and sexually transmitted diseases?

There is a higher risk of gonorrhea and inflammation of the urethra (the tube that carries the urine from the bladder outside) in uncircumcised men. It has also been reported that other sexually transmitted diseases (such as chancroid, syphilis, human papillomavirus, and herpes simplex virus type 2 infection) are more frequent in uncircumcised men.

What might this connection between circumcision and sexually transmitted diseases mean?

Circumcision prevents the growth under the foreskin of the agents that cause sexually transmitted diseases. Removal of the foreskin may provide some measure of protection from these diseases to males and their mates.

What is the correlation between sexually transmitted diseases and cancer of the cervix?

There is a strong connection between sexually transmitted diseases and cancer of the cervix. Human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 are strongly associated with cancer of the cervix. Herpes simplex virus type 2 has also been associated with cervical cancer.

The strongest predisposing factors in cervical cancer are a history of intercourse at an early age and multiple sexual partners. Cervical cancer is virtually unknown in nuns and virgins.

What might this relationship between lack of circumcision and cervical cancer mean?

Circumcision protects the mate from cancer of the cervix by removing the foreskin which harbors sexually transmitted viruses that promote this common form of female cancer.

What is the relationship between circumcision and cancer of the *****?

The predicted lifetime risk of cancer of the ***** in an uncircumcised man is 1 in 600 in the US. Cancer of the ***** carries a mortality rate as high as 25%. This cancer occurs almost exclusively in uncircumcised men. In five major research studies, no man who had been circumcised as a newborn developed cancer of the *****. Human papillomavirus types 16 and 18, which are sexually transmitted, are involved in cancer of the *****.

Link (http://www.medicinenet.com/circumcision_the_medical_pros_and_cons/article.htm)

[chas*e]

To beat this into the ground.........All things being equal there is no higher incidence of infection, sexual or otherwise if proper hygene is involved, ie..."clean the thing" .....

[Removed_2815]

That's just it chas*e, and therein lies the problem.... Keep it clean all you want, but poor hygiene is rarely to blame in most of the listed medical ailments (they clean it as often as the circumcised men). The fact is it is a bacteria breeding ground, and unless you're cleaning it 10+ times a day you may as well not be doing it at all.
Even though the American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (ACOG) have said that "there is no absolute medical indication for routine circumcision of the newborn," there is still a significant health risk. For example, an absolute medical indication of not having a ruptured appendix removed is sepsis and subsequent death (potentially), therefore there exists an absolute medical indication for an appendectomy if the appendix is ruptured.
Now, being uncircumcised does not guarantee that one will get a urinary tract infection, penile cancer, an STD, or cause his partner to develop cervical cancer; however, it is shown that these risks are increased in uncircumcised males - there is no absolute medical indication, but there are inherent medical risks.
There is no religious reason for why circumcision is prevalent in my family and many other non-religious folks, however, as I come from a family of medical-field related professionals, I will continue the act with my children and hopefully decrease the aforementioned medical risks.

What a bizarre thread, I feel weird....

Ryan

[hhw]

Paulsreef, your claims have no medical basis whatsoever. My father is a urologist, and said your claims were absurd when I discussed it with him. There has been nothing published in medical journals that would even suggest it as a possibility, let alone prove it. It is also his professional opinion (from having performed this operation many times himself) that there is no reason whatsoever to suggest that it might be the case.

And by the way, my father chose to have me circumcised as an infant (although for obvious reasons, by another doctor), using his medical judgement. We are also atheist.

[concept3]

I or my parents are in no way religios, and I am SOOOO happy they decided to get me circumsized. Out of all my freinds olny 2 arent circumsised and they wish they had been/

[Gregg M]

Any type of hairless rodent would make a great feeder for any species of reptile that could have a problem with hair impaction...... They are especially good for reptiles that do not normaly eat hairy rodents in the wild......

Also that claim about babies having heart attacks after being snipped is kind of rediculous...... If some one would come at me with a knife to snip me now, I would have a heart attack but I seriously doubt any baby ever had a heart attack from the quick snip.....

[chas*e]

Yo..RMBolton....Like I said, I have talked to many a doc about it when I was going to cut my son when he was born and, not one, could tell me that non-circumsision was a greater safety issue than circumsision.....so I said why have surgery (on an important part) for no reason.....urban myths are strong, so strong in fact that non-religious people tend to follow them in the first days of parenthood by being overprotective and listening to their fears...but that's OK too... just learn the facts and not the fear.
With all this circumsision talk how can I get one of those hairless hampsters now..how can I hug the little thing without feeling weird...lol

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by chas*e
just learn the facts and not the fear.
Yo, chas*e, like you said, learn the facts and not the fear. I've provided the facts, where are yours? Weren't you the one that said people wrongly believe that being uncircumcised causes UTIs? When, in fact, the significant majority of infant boys with UTIs are uncircumcised. I've read nothing but unsubstantiated hearsay and fear throughout this whole thread. The fact is the pros outweigh the cons of circumcision, but ultimately the choice is yours and I could care less what you do or don't do. I respectfully suggest that you learn the facts and not the fear...
Ryan

edit: For the record, I am neither for nor against circumcision and have not yet had to make the decision, so I have merely chosen a side to debate - I could argue against circumcision just as easily.
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/smt/lowres/smtn27l.jpg

[Matt_K]

Does this look familiar to those of you who are..... 'uncut'.. :D

http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/images/user_profile/3279712.jpg

Ahhhh, good ol' Earthworm Jim

[concept3]

lmao Matt, that is hilarios

[chas*e]

Yo, RMBolton...I made a deal with myself long ago....I WILL NOT ARGUE ABOUT MALE PRIVATE PARTS....LoL...No offence taken I don't have any details besides what I was told by doctors that I asked myself

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by chas*e
I made a deal with myself long ago....I WILL NOT ARGUE ABOUT MALE PRIVATE PARTS....
LOL, that sounds like a good deal to me too! It was a good discussion though...
Merry Christmas,
Ryan

[zero&stich]

Note to self, don't bring up bald animals in the near future.

[susan]

sorry but thats disgusting

[Slipknot]

LMFAO!!!! Don't you think its going a bit too far? :rolleyes:

[sidewinder]

The origin of circumcision(like so much other BS) has it's begining in the book of Gen. God commanded all Jews to have it done on the eigth day of a boy's life. The reason given is" cleanliness"which makes one wonder why god made it that way in the first place, only to have it cut off later?