Penis Creep & Its Scientific Implications

Discussion in 'Penis Enlargement' started by Big Al, May 19, 2011.

  1. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    Written by Saiyan22
    Edited by Calixto

    This is the first installment of one of the Pro PEers; Saiyan22, and his thoughts on how to make REAL PE GAINS! The idea is is that of “penis creep” and this article discusses how to induce penis creep, and the importance of the role penis creep plays when it comes to making permanent penis enlargement gains. This article parallels closely our newest article by Dr. Richard Howard II, entitled “Penis Collagen”.

    Full article continued HERE (As per the forum rules)
     
  2. bigdex

    bigdex Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    134
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    ireland
    I was trying to increase penis size by limiting fibrosis through the use of supplements. It didn't really work. I do think that limiting the deposition of type I collagen is key to PE but I don't think anyone has really discovered how to do it. Here's a link to what I was trying
    http://www.lpsg.org/224514-preventing-fibrosis.html
     
  3. ignatius4446z

    ignatius4446z Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    415
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In the dreams of a mischievous demon
    I read the article before on PEGym. It's interesting, and it seems plausible to me, but then again, I am not a doctor.

    And here's the rub. Neither, I think, is Saiyan. And that exemplifies a problem, a MAJOR problem with the PE world. Here we have Saiyan, who, from reading his posts on PE Gym, seems to work in a regular 9 - 5 office job. He doesn't appear to have any medical qualifications or background. This is also going to sound horribly elitist, but from reading his posts (not the article, which has been heavily sub-edited), with all their spelling mistakes and poor grammar, it also seems that he may not be all that well educated. Yet here he is putting forward a medico-scientific theory.

    I am not saying he is wrong in what he is saying. He seems to have made great gains by applying his reasoning to his PE. However, his PE may be successful, but not for the reasons given in the article, or his conclusion may be correct, but the reasoning on which it is based is flawed. Unless theories are tested experimentally, and findings are peer reviewed by specialist scientists, then any claims to such knowledge should be treated with extreme caution. In summary, I think articles like these should come with a huge warning and a statement from the author setting out their qualifications and experience.

    As they say, "A little learning is a dangerous thing"
     
  4. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    The problem with your theory is that if fibrosis were a common side effect of PE then performance would decrease in time due to the build up of scar tissue.

    The penis can get injured from severe trauma, but this typically manifests itself in "Peyronie's".

    About your post, the theory that cell numbers are increased would indicate hyperplasia. I think a more likely scenario would be one of "passive" hypertrophy- where the cells expand in size because of the expansion of the fascia/tunica.

    I'd highly recommend checking out Dr. Howard's articles on PEgym as well- some of his latest go into great detail on what happens at the cellular level.
     
  5. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    I can understand where you're coming from, and I concur 100% that nothing that you read on any of the forums should be accepted at face value. Before any kind of physical training you should do plenty of your own research and check with your own medical professional(s) to see if this is something that would be good for you to engage in. Even then, much of what is believed to occur with PE on the cellular level is based on theory.

    That being said- do you have any specific refutations to his article besides Saiyan22 not being a doctor (neither am I) or the spelling/grammatical errors that he makes on forums (something that the best of us are "guilty" of)?

    As for "experimenting", that's what PE is :) Testing stressor loads and other stimuli (variations in temperature, supplementation, etc.) and observing the reactions is, in a sense, experimentation.

    What makes much of this a moot point is that the science behind Saiyan22's article isn't novel- he's merely applying already known soft tissue principles to the penis.

    In my time I've conferred with many urologists that didn't have the slightest idea about things like "Davis' Law" and how mechanical and biological creep can affect the tissues of the penis. Funny enough, plastic surgeons (not necessarily those that do phalloplasties) that routinely work with large implants or that deal with massive reconstruction projects would be the ones to talk to regarding "PE theory". You'd be hard pressed trying to get them involved in PE though.

    I've been reading Saiyan22's posts for years, and it's apparent that he's put many cumulative hours of study into his PE research and typically presents it in an intelligent but clear fashion. It's truly because of men like him that the concept of "non-surgical PE" even exists today. I wouldn't have posted his article on this forum if I didn't think otherwise.
     
  6. ignatius4446z

    ignatius4446z Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    415
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In the dreams of a mischievous demon
    I neither support nor refute the scientific basis for the article, because I am not medically trained. Neither for that matter, is Saiyan; and that is precisely my point. Whether established principles that apply to other bodily tissues also apply to penile structures is a question that can only be answered by a specialist in the field who backs up their reasoning with experimental proof of concept.

    An article which seeks to cross-apply these principles, but which is written by someone with no medical background and which is based on no properly conducted experiments or studies is not "theory", it is guesswork and conjecture.

    It takes years and years for the brightest people to study for and then train in general medicine, and then many more years for them to specialise in a chosen field. There is a reason for that. That reason is that they need a grounding in the knowledge and skills across all areas. Moreover, study and training teaches them skills that the untrained, self-taught "expert" never acquires; chief amongst those skills are the ability to critically assess evidence and theory, to research effectively and, possibly most importantly, to recognise when there are gaps in their knowledge base.

    I work in a profession which tends to attract self-taught "dabblers", and the one thing all these "dabblers" have in common is that they think they have a grasp of a particular knowledge area or skill, without understanding the general theories, themes and principles that underpin it. Above all, because they don't have the background of training from first principles upwards, they simply do not realise how much knowledge they are missing.

    Put simply; superficially, Saiyan's article sounds convincing, but, quite literally, he does not know what he is talking about. I don't mean that in an insulting sense - I am simply stating a fact. He may be right, but if he is right, then it will be no more than inspired guesswork on his part.

    As Socrates said "Wisest is he who knows he does not know"
     
  7. smoothryan

    smoothryan New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    midwest
    11huge u here
     
  8. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    and

    By you claiming that you aren't able to judge whether or not Saiyan22 knows what he's saying, your argument is essentially moot.

    Please critique the article and not the author. This isn't the place for an Ad Hominem review.

    I will state that I'm familiar with the article vetting process that goes on at PEGym, and it would be a mistake to assume that an article would make it to their "Articles" section without being properly reviewed first.

    Here's an article by a doctor (who's also on the PEGym staff) that's along the same vein: http://pegym.com/expert-blogs/penis-collagen

    “If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings” -Leonardo da Vinci
     
    #8 Big Al, May 30, 2011
    Last edited: May 30, 2011
  9. ignatius4446z

    ignatius4446z Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    415
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In the dreams of a mischievous demon
    Big Al. There are so many holes in your argument that I really don't know where to start.

    1. I cannot critique the article because I am not qualified to do so. Unlike Saiyan, I recognise the limits of my knowledge and I recognise that for me to attempt a meaningful critique of a scientific theory would be presumptuous and highly arrogant. However, I can state categorically that Saiyan is not qualified to write a medical article. He is, from what I have seen of his posts at PE Gym, a 9 - 5 office worker, with no scientific or medical background, and from the way he writes his posts in the main forum, I would guess that his education ceased at High School level. If however, you can contradict me by showing that he is a doctor of bio-mechanics or something similar, or it is acceptable practice these days in the scientific field for high school educated office workers to write medical articles then I will withdraw the point.

    2. You may well be familiar with the the article reviewing process of PE Gym, but in what way are you qualified to judge that process and who are the people doing the reviewing? It could well be the blind leading the blind. Perhaps you could state both yours and the reviewers' medical qualifications, specialisms, membership of professional bodies, surgical experience and bibliography of peer-reviewed published works. That's how articles are reviewed in medical journals, and the reviewers are happy to provide such information.

    3. The doctor who wrote the other article is a specialist in an utterly unrelated field (public health and perhaps also opthalmics). If you want some advice on vaccination programs, or you want to know how to get your corneal graft to heal, then he's your man.

    4. Your wiki-quote from Leonardo De Vinci sounds superficially impressive, but it is completely off beam. I am not suggesting that any particular authority is unquestionably true. I am merely stating the startlingly obvious point that a medical article should be written by someone with a medical background and it should be backed up with a properly conducted study and then be peer reviewed by eminent specialists in that field. I am sure LdV himself would have agreed with that. TBH, the point is so utterly trite that I am surprised I even need to explain it.

    However, I doubt I will convince you, as this attitude is typical of internet forum experts, who for some reason frequently eschew the need for formal qualifications and experience.

    I should perhaps explain that I am not taking issue with the efficacy of non-surgical PE. I think there is enough evidence out there to prove that it works. Advice on matters such as techniques, exercise routines, what works and what doesn't etc can usefully be given by experienced amateurs (such as Saiyan) and self-appointed experts (such as yourself). However, why PE works (ie: the physiological processes involved) is a wholly different question, and the answer to that question is beyond the reach of those who are not qualified and experienced in the appropriate medical disciplines; accordingly, their opinions are either worthless, or at very best, should be taken with an absolutely enormous pinch of salt.

    Anyway, must go, as I need to complete the first draft of my article on X-ray emitting quasars. Not that I have a cosmology or physics background you understand. I just find them interesting and I fancy writing an article for "Bumbling Amateur Astronomy Weekly"
     
    #9 ignatius4446z, May 30, 2011
    Last edited: May 30, 2011
  10. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    You are correct in that you and I will not apparently agree on this matter.

    If you're interested in my background, please feel free to research me at least as well as you've done for Dr. Howard and Saiyan22 so that you can draw your own conclusions. Better yet, why not ask the men that I've assisted if I was able to supply them with the information and help they needed.

    You may be surprised to note that a good percentage of these men had first gone to "doctors" for help and received little to nothing for their time and money (and the forums are full of cases like theirs). That's not to say that I "knew" more than they did- only that the approaches I recommended were different.

    Before you do though please note that while my history usually precedes me in most cases, it's usually not enough for those that demand formal credentials above experience and accomplishments- for "male enhancement" purposes anyway :)

    You are incorrect in assuming that I eschew those with formal credentials. In my ~13 years of being involved in this field I've collaborated with many "formal" experts in the field of urology, plastic surgery, sexology, general practice, cancer research, as well as some of the more esoteric fields- to name a few. I simply don't see it as a requirement in order to further the field of knowledge. I also don't necessarily view things in such an either/or fashion.

    What I do eschew is the stance of refusing to even acknowledge the possibility that those with "layman" credentials could contribute anything of value to science simply because they're not part of a particular group. Those making these kinds of critiques employ the exact same tactics that you do in criticizing articles in an oblique manner by targeting the writer instead of discussing the subject. The fact that I'm not a doctor would automatically invalidate me in your eyes. This would probably stand for someone with your apparent viewpoints despite any contributions I've made to this field of knowledge.

    I will state that I have observed where having formal credentials can actually backfire on individuals who rely on their credentials while displaying a shocking lack of knowledge in their chosen fields. Rather than taking someone (or their letters) at face value, I prefer researching what they've done and what their motives are for furthering what they're trying to do.
     
  11. ignatius4446z

    ignatius4446z Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    415
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In the dreams of a mischievous demon
    Big Al.

    I am not questioning your credentials as a coach. Your reputation does indeed precede you, and it seems pretty unimpeachable.

    My point is merely that non-scientists should not attempt to write scientific articles, simply because they don't have the toolkit for the job. I used to be a member of a forum where people went for advice on certain issues that were relevant to my profession. It is a profession which is one of the big 3 (ie: medicine, law and accountancy), and it requires specialist education, training and knowledge to be able to properly understand the intricacies and to apply them in a case-specific scenario. When I was a member of that site, I was continually having to correct advice that was given by lay people which, superficially, looked very convincing, because they had used the correct terminology and referenced texts, precedents and other authorities, but was more often than not, utterly, utterly wrong. However, as a person who practiced in the field, I was able to see through that outwardly convincing facade; in many cases, so- called "articles" written by people who considered themselves to be self-taught "experts" were manifestly little more than meaningless nonsense wrapped up in technical jargon.
     
    #11 ignatius4446z, May 31, 2011
    Last edited: May 31, 2011
Draft saved Draft deleted