A theory and new technique

Not much is established on whether or not penis enlargement works by creating plastic deformation of the intracellular tissue or by inducing cellular growth and division, or some combination of both. If it is indeed cellular growth that is occurring, then I would expect there to be a factor of creating physical growth factors from these exercises that makes it work. My theory is that cyclic strain could be one of these growth factors. My reasoning is this. Jelqing apparently works by repeatedly stretching tissue to it’s maximum potential in a semi-erect state, but a full erection provides this force statically and penis growth does not occur from normal erections or masturbation. Masturbation does not create as much cyclic forces in the inner tissues of the penis, yet these tissues are still experiencing high pressure and force that comes with jelqing. Many articles discuss how cyclic strain induces stem cell differentiation and is a growth factor in the growth and maintenance of arteries and veins (hence maybe why veins are more prominent from penis enlargement). I know that clamping and hanging work by creating static forces, but these are done for excessive periods of time where as jelqing can be effective with much less time. Therefore, a hypothesis is that the cyclic nature of the exercises is critical to their growth.

If cyclic forces are more effective to inducing growth than static forces, could techniques be modified to take advantage of this fact? For example, how about a stretching exercise that works by having your penis at about 80% erect, then grabbing it below the head and quickly pumping it forward (stretching) and back down (compressing). This seems like a good exercise, but should be done briskly while not too hard. It can be called “stretch pumping” or something like that. I can’t vouch for it’s effectiveness because I only just thought of it and wanted to share these ideas anyway.

This is the kind of thread that makes PE knowledge to advance! Your theory has potential and what’s more important, it suggests practical means to verify it’s correctness.

There seems to be a few mechanisms to achieve penis growth. Static force is a proven one, but it takes a lot of time and dedication. I’m convinced that there are more efficient alternatives. My own experience is that one could have gains with a short routine if that routine triggers the growing response of the body. My personal opinion is that most of this forum should be used for finding out those trigger mechanisms. Instead, the vast majority of threads are like those “I feel small” which make nothing to solve the PE quest

Theories are fine HD. but at some time they have to be backed up with physicul results. I imagine it has been proven here that cyclic forces do work, but static forces only maintain what has been acheived; either by cyclic force or natural growth.

So your theory needs to be tested, and surely the best person to do that is your self, as you can measure, record and anaylyse what is happening, Then announce your findings for debate.

But before you do that I would suggest you first condition your dick by following the Newbie routine for a month or so. Then carry out your theories practically and then publish your result.

Good luck!

Petit

Did you come to a conclusion about using cyclic strain in PE, humpty_dumpty?

Not really yet; I’m still working on it. I would have to say that hard fast stretches are bad, and cyclic loading that it is gradual and slow, over the course of a few seconds is better. I have gained about 1 cm in length in the last few months doing this occasionally. I don’t PE methodically or consistently so I haven’t been able to put it to practical test.

I’m not the first one to think of this though. Here is an old thread discussing it.

Patience…