Reasons for no scientific proof...

Discussion in 'Penis Enlargement' started by savage, Oct 20, 2009.

  1. savage

    savage New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    "No scientific research supports the use of any nonsurgical method to enlarge the penis, and no reputable medical society endorses penis-enlargement surgery performed for purely cosmetic reasons." -wiki

    ...You'd think they'd (scientists) be looking for nonsurgical methods. Maybe they are?

    Does anyone know of any studies on nonsurgical PE?
     
  2. cdarro

    cdarro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Southern Alberta, Canada
    There was an Italian study published recently that gave some credence to the usage of traction devices. I read it but can't remember where or how I came across it. Try fastsize.com, they sell the things, and I'm sure they'll have a link.
     
  3. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    British Journal of Sexual Health way back in 1975 found statistically significant evidence that jelqing or, as they referred to it then, "the Chartham method," did work.
     
  4. Snakebyte

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    7,318
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    449
    Verified:
    Photo
    In German TV they did a study which also showed that manual PE and traction devices do work.
     
  5. FuzzyKen

    FuzzyKen New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,116
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    There definitely is research going on into non surgical PE from and in many places. One can guarantee that as one small example Upjohn Pharmaceuticals who gave us Rogaine is spending some dollars on chemical PE.

    The profit margin on a magic pill by a major pharmaceutical company has the potential to make more money than every other drug they sell combined and do it within a year.

    No legitimate drug company will release information on this simply because of corporate espionage, the one there first gets the patents and the one with the patents gets the most money and gets it first.

    Now, on a smaller scale research is going on using some chemical combinations and or taking advantage of knowledge of several disease processes to accomplish a form of PE. This would be a short term but maybe more effective and safer system than the surgeries which have proved to be inconsistent.

    I am aware of research taking place in California, Ontario Canada, and in Albuquerque, New Mexico by independent physicians. From what I know of at this time their findings are hopeful, but there is not enough testing as of yet to be dead certain on findings in large numbers. That will take place over time and we may see a couple of methods that have some real benefit within 5 years.

    As far as "no scientific proof" the best analogy I can give is when Melinda Dillon was portraying a Mother in "E.T." We have an alien in a pile of childrens stuffed toys in a closet and she looks right at it multiple times and simply denies it's existence.

    The rule with the big guys is: Always deny that accomplishments on the part of everyone else ever take place. That way when you have something behind which you can place a great deal of advertising, it does not matter if your product or his is better. Deny the existence of the competition and flood the market with misinformation in order to confuse everybody.

    Anyone doubting this needs to look at all the Patent Litigation between Lee DeForest and Edwin Howard Armstrong and then the fights between Edwin Armstrong and David Sarnoff over the developments in FM radio. Because Sarnoff had money and the power of RCA behind him, he successfully prevented full development and usage of FM (Frequency Modulation) in radio for decades. In truth Armstrong had developed this in the 1930's. Stereo broadcasting and other broadcasting advances would have taken place far earlier if it had not been for the dirty deeds of RCA against the research work of Armstrong.

    P.E. is in much the same boat. The best way to get rid of competition is to discredit anything and everything until such time as you the major corporation can do something with it. The largest problem we will be guaranteed to see with chemical PE done on a small scale is when something is actually found that works well. The FDA will with little doubt shut it down as quickly as they can because major parmaceutical corporations want the buck. They will use and lobby the FDA to take it away from the little guy and give it to the big guy. It has happened before.
     
  6. Big Al

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central FL
    Studies do exist. Check out this link to read more: http://www.lpsg.org/101710-non-believers-on-pe-forum.html
     
  7. DeepCurve

    DeepCurve Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    136
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Colorado, US
    Non-surgical, non-chemical PE methods such as exercises cannot be patented. The day someone comes up with a patentable drug or medical device which enlarges the penis is the day that the medical establishment will admit that any such thing is possible. Not before. Of course whatever drug they come up with will have a list of horrifying side-effects way longer than any penis could ever be.
     
  8. Rikter8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    4,488
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    51
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    MI
    Exactly Al.

    Secondly...He's quoting Wiki - which isn't exactly Accurate.

    So innacurate that most universities will not accept it as a credible source of information.
     
    #8 Rikter8, Nov 8, 2009
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2009
Draft saved Draft deleted