In modern times, there is controversy regarding whether the foreskin is a vital or vestigial structure. In 1949, British physician Douglas Gairdner noted that the foreskin plays an important protective role in newborns. He wrote, “It is often stated that the prepuce is a vestigial structure devoid of function... However, it seems to be no accident that during the years when the child is incontinent the glans is completely clothed by the prepuce, for, deprived of this protection, the glans becomes susceptible to injury from contact with sodden clothes or napkin.” During the physical act of sex, the foreskin reduces friction, which can reduce the need for additional sources of lubrication. "Some medical researchers, however, claim circumcised men enjoy sex just fine and that, in view of recent research on HIV transmission, the foreskin causes more trouble than it’s worth." The area of the outer forskin measures between 7–100 cm2, and the inner foreskin measures between 18–68 cm2, which is a wide range. Regarding vestigial structures, Charles Darwin wrote, “An organ, when rendered useless, may well be variable, for its variations cannot be checked by natural selection.” In the March 2017 publication of the Global Health Journal: Science and Practice, Morris and Krieger wrote, "The variability in foreskin size is consistent with the foreskin being a vestigial structure." It has been found that larger foreskins place uncircumcised men at an increased risk for HIV infection most likely due to the larger surface area of inner foreskin and the high concentration of .