It is not true that "in many countries, more than 40% of neonates are circumcised for nonreligious reasons." The ONLY countries where this is true are the USA and perhaps South Korea. [Fewer than 1/3 of the world circumcises, with those two exceptions, for religion/culture and/or later in childhood.] The rest of the English-speaking world tried it, found it did no good, and has virtually given it up - with no outbreaks of any of the diseases it was supposed to be good for. The rest of the developed world has never done it, and never found sufficient reason to do it. With the medical benefits as you put it, "blurred", it is a human rights affront to cut off a normal, healthy, functional, non-renewing part of the genitals from a non-consenting person, so your pain-releif information (which is faulty) is moot.