Your sarcasm belies your lack of understanding. Heather is right: amputating healthy functional tissue in no way improves hygeine. If it did then why not circumcise girls too? And why are we only cutting off parts of the genitalia for hygeine? Smells fishy to me (pun intended). If Americans were really interested in improving hygeine then surely they would stop poisoning themselves with drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, and the most disgusting products posing as food. They would stop poisoning their air and water ways with toxic chemicals. And they would exercise regularly. These things would contribute alot more towards health and hygeine than genital mutilation. But then Americans have a very prudish history so they all know that sex is "dirty".
I would not necessarily trust the CDC at all. Why are studies even being performed on male circumcision? Why not female circumcision? Who is performing the studies, and why? Do you think the scientific method is incorruptible by fallible humans? Do you think big organisations and corporations are beyond being influenced by hidden agendas and biases? The only cultures you find doing studies on circumcision are those already practicing it and looking to justify it, just as you are perhaps looking in your own way to justify your circumcised state.
Routine circumcision is an insidious meme because it is the involuntary surgical alteration of the penis. It affects the deepest level of the male psyche which relates to power and pleasure, sex and violence, identity and masculinity. Like all destructive traditions, and perhaps even more than most, it takes great awareness, great courage, great compassion, and great determination to break the cycle of abuse.
There are different kinds of FGM just as there are different kinds of MGM. One reason FGM is performed is to lessen the enjoyment of sex. This reason has also been given for male circumcision. In fact this is precisely why it began in the USA during the 1800s. In societies where virginity upon marriage is prized the girls are infibulated.
Anyone who thinks that the evidence is inconclusive that circumcision improves hygeine is themselves circumcised and has no understanding of or experience with intact genitalia. Amputation of healthy functional tissue does not improve hygeine and not one culture that practiced circumcision prior to the 20th Century has ever given physical cleanliness as a reason.
Circumcision is a euphamism for genital mutilation, genital cutting, genital amputation, or however you wish to put it. It is an anti-sexual act and if perpetrated on an infant it is a heinou sex crime. It is hard for circumcised men to admit this to themselves because this is such a deeply psychological issue.
Mutilating the penis is cutting away parts off it, it is mutilation. Its not really a medical procedure, its cosmetic. Its akin to scarification, horn implants, and other more extreme body modifications, except this one is done on a human being that did not and can not consent. It doesn't matter what possible benefits it might have, its wrong. Removal of all sexual organs all together will remove nearly all the risk of catching an STD for example, that doesn't mean it should be done.