Hard Gainers and Relaxin levels

Are you a hard gainer? Then maybe your Relaxin levels are responsible?

Check this out -

http://www.samy ue.com/relaxinh … enttTherapy.htm

Also did you know that Papaverine enhances tissue expansion? - I believe the future of PE is the combination of controlled mechanical stress, such as; traction, routines as well exemplified by thundersplace but in conjunction with topical chemical assistance.

An issue appears to be that certain tissues are receptive to relaxin while others aren’t. Shiver did some work with relaxin about a year ago. Try searching and see what you can find.

Shiver is provoking all the right chemical arguments.

But my particular take on this, is that latent flexibility differs in many people. Current Relaxin research is highlighting the particluar importance of this hormone in men. It seems that certain men with flexibility problems have also shown low relaxin levels. By bringing these levels to normal they have demonstrated an improvement in their flexibility (tendons and ligaments).

So maybe a percentage of hard gainers are not getting the benefits of normal Relaxin levels and this is reflected in the lack of tissue flexibility/ response?

Research is suggesting that Relaxin levels in men and it’s importance is being underestimated.

Papaverine by the way has been shown to accelerate tissue growth.

Shiver has some excellent arguments going there and current research underpins his arguments, no matter how terrifying it may seem, chemical aids are on their way.

Some men report more flexibility in their tunicas than others. Some have even reported measuring 3/8” longer after a workout than before. I have never been able to achieve this, and, yes, I do consider myself to be a hard gainer. I wonder whether relaxin levels (or some other chemical/physiological mechanism) might be at the heart of this.

As an aside, I’ve often wondered whether this “stretchiness” of the tunica is an important factor in separating the easy and hard gainers—the basic idea being, if you can stretch it, you can grow it.

Problems with pharmacological treatments are mainly concerned with systemic responses. Relaxin is responsible for many sports injuries among menstruating females (ACL weakens on certain days of the month). Because of these kinds of effects, I don’t think I would want to raise my system’s overall relaxin levels. Topical application is a problem as well, since anything applied to the skin is readily absorbed into the blood stream and carried away from its target area.

Here is an interesting read about an MD who has had some success injecting relaxin and other “potentiators” directly into the CCs to induce growth.

Fundamentally, it is all to do with chemical/ physiological reasons - that is the difference between different PE’ers responses and results.

The predisposition to flexibility is chemically driven. Relaxin plays an important part here. For safety, I think it would be OK to re-balance your Relaxin levels, if a blood assay proved you were on the downside. To increase above Normal, is asking for trouble, as you correctly say about increased risk to injuries in pregnant woman. Also the Heart has been shown to be Relaxin receptive.

The “stretchiness theory” is my own marker at the moment in my routine. I, like you, feel I am a hard gainer. However, I am into my 4th week of using my Jes Extender, with daily hours now verging on 12 hrs. I can say I am experiencing a change in the way my penis is stretching, particularily at the final point of resistance when you are up against the resistance of all things, tunica, ligs etc. Is this a pre-condition to a gain? It makes sense when you delve into all the physiological arguments of tissue remodelling. The other marker is after stretching, my penis is hot, as though there is a cellular response going on, perhaps an increase in cellular metabolism in response to stress. If I get a gain, I will feel more convinced that these markers are valid criteria to look out for.

Dermal delivery systems are getting cleverer. Lack of skin irritation for one. Tissue receptiveness is another. However, a tissue under a controlled stress, is going to operate at a higher metabolic rate, thus is more receptive to chemical uptake. Anything left over will only be taken up by the ability of other sites to be receptive to those chemicals, otherwise it will be metabolised by the liver. Here is where the science is; controlled stress through traction, controlled endemic chemical delivery at concentrations in tune with the induced chemical uptake of the tissue. Granted an art, but this is already being done in medical circles, so why not the penis.

Back to your link, he has well covered his ass in this patent application. Kind of “in the event of all eventualities science”. He has definitely created the right arguments, no question - “Essentially, blast your dick with a chemical soup when it’s under stress”. He knows he is sitting on something in this patent application, but it’s messy.

Let’s concentrate on subtle mechanical stress to raise the matabolic rate and thus enabling a subtle chemical uptake environment. Papaverine has been shown to accelerate tissue growth but the tissue was under stress, stress creates receptiveness!

LabMan I’m not 100% sure what you are trying to say. Are you saying that you are using Papaverine with positive effects or promoting the idea of all-day-stretching?

I am very inflexible and I’m a hard gainer. Your theory makes sense but maybe there is no connection between body flexibility and penis flexibility. What would make sense is to great a poll, contrasting flexibility in the body and ability to gain penis size.

Even assuming you could find an agent for remodeling the penis (this would be tantamount to the cure for AIDS), you would then encounter structural problems for the penis to accomplish its mission. This is real “Star Wars” thinking.

Also the theory of LOT contradicts yours. It says that the less flexible the ligaments in your penis, the easier it is to stretch them. This theory also makes sense because if you have something highly elastic, stretching it further will have no permanent results; compared to something inelastic, stretching it further might be harder but will remain stretched. I believe that there is a fine line between hard gainers and easier gainers and it has something to do with these two theories.

I don’t know much about the human body, so figuring out which one of these theories applies to the penis through medical evidence is something I can’t do. One thing that can be done is experimentation, here we call them polls. Create a poll comparing LOT theory, Labman’s theory with gaining ability.

soon10x7

Your poll idea would be interesting.

What I am saying with repsect to Papaverine, is simply, it has accelerated tissue growth in medical trials, in fact, soft tissue under controlled stress. So could this assist Penis Growth under controlled stress, such as applied through EXTENDERS? I have not used Papaverine, but I do believe in that tissue stress creates the right environment for chemical receptiveness. This could apply to a number of chemicals - see Shiver’s posts.

Shilow

We are not looking at a magic chemical bullet. We are looking at chemical assitance to the environment of tissue stress.

It does? As far as I know, LOT Theory is about the geometrical arrangement of body parts. It has nothing to say about the flexibility of tissues.

I forgot to say in the example of Papaverine. These results were obtained by a Topical delivery system.

Here is a link that gives you a taste of the trials, there are others -

http://www.ncbi .nlm.nih.gov/en … 9&dopt=Citation

The objective of that study appears to have been to grow skin. Do you have any links to studies in which internal structures are grown with the help of Papaverine?

While this isn’t exactly what you’re looking for, it’s somewhat related.

Correlation Between Overall Flexibility and Starting Length?

No I have not searched that far. However, Papaverine has everything going for it in other tissue scenarios, given it’s wider medical application.

In this trial, I would imagine that the expander was situated sub-dermally, so this would be more than just superficial skin growth.

Modesto: If I understood correctly BIB said that it was positioning that determined your LOT which determined the elasticity of the ligaments in your hero.

MX: It’s an interesting poll but it doesn’t tell us anything especially because of the results.