`  ::ScienceApe, you appear to be focusing only on the AAP Techical Report here, which is just one of the four sources cited.  (As a side note, I'm not sure why you say this article doesn't link to it, as it certainly does link directly to the full report text, click on the words ``Technical Report`` in the citation.)  You copied-and-pasted a lot of the AAP's discussion detailing the primary sources they reviewed in performing their synthesis of the source data to come to their conclusions.  This is what we use secondary sources for:  their conclusions drawn from the primary sources.  In this case, the detail you copied-and-pasted backs up their conclusions, which they (like the other sources we cite) are careful to qualify.  If, after reviewing all the available evidence, they didn't feel like they needed to qualify their conclusions by the timing of the IELT studies, we can't misrepresent the conclusions drawn by this secondary source by putting in a qualifier they apparently didn't think was necessary. ::For the wording itself, the article uses pretty much the same phrasing the sources use.  The sources cited say: :::AAP Tech Report 2012 - PMID 22926175 - ``Male circumcision does not appear to adversely affect penile sexual function/sensitivity or sexual satisfaction.`` :::Sadeghi-Nejad 2010 - PMID 20092446 - ``most recent articles do not show evidence of adverse effects on sexual function`` :::Doyle 2010 - PMID 19913816 - ``Adult male circumcision does not seem to have an adverse impact on sexual function.`` :::Perera 2010 -  PMID 20065281 - ``The evidence suggests that adult circumcision does not affect sexual satisfaction and function.`` ::The article says in the lead: :::Circumcision does not appear to have a negative impact on sexual function. ::and provides further detail in the body: :::Circumcision does not appear to decrease the sensitivity of the penis, harm sexual function or reduce sexual satisfaction. ::It's hard to see how this could be considered ``weasel wording``, at least not in Wikipedia's sense of WP:WEASEL.  Still, if you're interested in seeing this part of the article expanded, you should propose specific new wording.    `