CalcSD

Great buddy Torello!!!

You are among the top of the measures, good work pays off :) :) :)

Cheers :up:

Starting, largest (Feb 24), and two and a half months (Apr 24) after losing un-cemented gains during the February decon.

5-1/2 x 5.25 , 8 x 6.3, and 7-7/8 x 6.2.

Mighty impressive Andy. I envy your progress.

In my opinion, if she can go balls deep and take the base in, then that’s your widest point. It’s not really fair that all the guys with thicker MEGs get to count that but we can’t count our thickest part!

Dang Andy! Nice work! Hold my beer…

Posted.

The irony of achieving my goal but backwards is not lost on me.

Keep in mind those are un-cemented gains; after the last decon I measured 7.25 x 6. Which is still a big step up from where I started. Hopefully I will be able to cement the larger numbers.

I felt quite chuffed about the repeated 8" measurements, at least until I had to stop work due to another vacuum blister. But I’ve gained most of that back, and expect I’ll get back up there soon.

Now, if only Microsoft hadn’t given the number "8" a bad name…

That’s some impressive girth, though!

Do you have a progress thread?

Wow though… an inch and a half of added girth is amazing! Can I ask what your routine is?

I’d be interested to know as well.
If I had to guess I’d say pumping?

I don’t. The cause is not really something that can be replicated.

I think I keep having mini priapic events while I am asleep and each one adds a small amount of size. Kinda like megalophallus but not as extreme. Am talking to a urologist about it but he doesn’t have much by way of useful input to be honest.

I looked into some of the studies they use for the western average and they’re less than the agreed upon standard. A more recent review published determined the length was about a half inch if not more than the average calc SD uses. The actual ranges also cap out at like 8 and a quarter inch length and 6.25 girth per 2000 people in the studies they use for the western average so I’m not sure how they extrapolated some of their numbers

Everyone bigger than 99% of population…

W must be doing a good job!

TenaciousD you are the guy!!!

RebelRebel they use a statistical distribution, not a specific length. They use thousands of measurements to generate the distributions (I didn’t dig into the raw data… unless the methodology of the study was wrong in terms of how they measured or data was stale it should be valid). Penis sizes are bigger in recent years so old data isn’t representative of the general population if data is very old (eg decades). What makes you believe data is wrong?