Your personal experience is worthless because you're drawing conclusions from a sample of one and assuming that it has any relationship to the norm. It's an invalid assumption. There's nothing between the lines to read. You don't know how far from the norm you and your friend lie.
> Have you talked to many medical professionals when it comes to cosmetically and cleanliness when it comes to uncut penises?
There's data on the subject available. Where do you think medical professionals get their information? Not many of them are in the lab, running experiments. How about if you do some research before falling back on your personal experience?
If you insist on relying on personal experience though, there are a lot of uncircumcised people who post, and who contradict your difficult-to-clean conclusion.
> Because something is being studied does not make it fact. They are/have done studies on sensitivity being hereditary.. does that make that a fact too?
We could just say that it's an unanswerable question. Or we can go with the accumulated experiences of people who were circumcised as teens or adults. Or we can go with the biological evidence (what nerves and nerve endings are where, and what happens when the nerves are severed, etc. In the end it's all pretty subjective. It's not like weighing rocks.
Here's an example. Suppose it was the convention that everyone wore sunglasses. Even so, there would be some people who are so sensitive to light that bright lights would bother them even though they were wearing sunglasses. One of those sensitive people might then say how silly it would be for people not to wear sunglasses. Does that make sense?