Cell Recycling and Cementing Gains

Cool. :)

Please don’t confuse sarcasm with cynicism - they are quite different animals! ;)

And please, in the interests of creating a valuable thread for those who follow, please try to keep on topic. This thread is about “Cell Recycling and Cementing Gains”. If you have issues/questions regarding my own personal PE history, by all means, start another thread - I’ll be quite happy to address your concerns there as best I can.

Marinera has beat me to the rest! Unless you can come up with peer reviewed journal articles to support your assertions, then the points you have raised are baseless opinions and are of no scientific value. Sorry, but that’s the way science works - if you are going to play their game, then you must abide by their rules.

lil1 :lep:

Hehe, ok, no complaints here. :)
I’m kind of enjoying this thread in a mad-sadistic kind of way.

Nah that’s ok, this argument is more personal than professional(?) and I’ve had my share of personal problems.

Smartest thing I’ve read today.

Tossed, you were kinda right with that post that caused me to say that. I guess in some psychotic way, I love to argue. Especially if I know I’m halfway right! You gotta love cookie monster!

Passion makes us do crazy things. :)

marinera, there are times when this becomes nothing but a pissing contest; when, no matter what I say, people feel the need to spit a response.

If you really cared about any of that shit, you’d find it right here….in this forum….where you’re a moderator….

Connective tissue- FIRST “THREAD OF THE YEAR” by hobby / Aug. 14, 2002

Benefits of Heat in PE by Shiver / July 21, 2003

See what I’m saying?

This is not something I “made up.” The same with “cellular recycling” (as tinybig454 alleges) - that’s an article of biology. Granted, I applied that concept to explain why I could’ve held my gains for as long as I did without ANY training - something NOT adequately explained by any GvM model.

Nor did I claim that one “loses all one’s gains in 7 years.” I don’t know where tinybig got that bullshit (perhaps it was from my quoting a doctor who once said that we become “new” every 7 years - because within that time frame, every cell in our body had recycled).

As for lil12big1, don’t parse “cynicism” & “sarcasm” with me. You referred to my theory as no theory at all, and suggested that it’s only value was to instruct someone how not to write a theory. That’s sarcasm - not cynicism.

“Cynicism,” on the other hand, is what I feel about your 2” EL gain claims in 5 months.

Furthermore, do the math…even if you’re claims are dead on, you still lost 25% of your length gains. I’ve lost about 50% of my length gains (albeit, in 2 years less time). What does that prove? That I’m wrong? Hardly.

I was getting a bunch of shit together for you guys, including some stuff from an old CD from 2003, when I heard some fucked up news about my buddy (his distraught wife told me that the doctors do not expect him to live much longer)…

so, this shit will have to wait

You want to keep beating a dead theory into submission? Ok…….

I never said you made up “cell recycling” , it is real. The way you forced it into the conclusion of why you lost everything, is, in my opinion, wrong. But not entirely. You and only you, lost to cell recycling, but most of us won’t.

If a doctor breaks a patient’s bones to extend and help the patient grow, according to you, the patient’s DNA will have his cells recycle until the patient is back to square one. Only an extremely small amount of patients have reported this.

Rhinoplasty. My cousin had the procedure done in 1998. Her nose is still 100% better than it was before. Again, a minuscule amount of people report problems coming back.

I have a really big bat and I love beating dead things into the ground. :)

Thoughts, wadzilla?

I have a question for you, wadzilla.

When I was 12, I forced a big ass kitchen knife into my thigh about 3 inches above my knee. The flesh was instantly traumatized, the cells became deformed, and scar tissue was formed. 16 years later, it is still there, all 2 1/2 inches of scar tissue, as plain as day. Why? My DNA should have recycled the scar tissue.

At the age of 17 I took 2 to the leg from a 9mm while running for my life. The scar tissue from the holes are still there. Plain as day. Why, wadzilla?

I am serious, and I’m trying to be civil about it and have a discussion with you!

I agree.

I also don’t see how this would work. Say some cells recycle and return to their original PE state, yet some haven’t, what sort of cock does this result in? I don’t see how some can go back to their normal smaller length and smaller girth, while some are in the post-PE state… wouldn’t this result in an oddly deformed cock?

One only needs to take a look into life to realize that absolute, permanent deformation of the tissue cells does occur. Not in all cases though.

Wadzilla, couldn’t it be possible that when all the deformed cells recycled, the gains would become permanent with new, stronger, “normal” cells? It happens in other forms of tissue deformation. But wait, sometimes it doesn’t happen that way. Scar tissue does periodically get replaced with new healthy tissue. It happens both ways, and unless you have mapped out and have a complete understanding of what your own DNA will do, you won’t know if it will become permanent or not.

Hmmm, debating about something that hasn’t been scientifically proven.

This is like 2 guys at a party fighting over who gets to fuck the fat chick.

Ok, now that’s funny.

That’s neither sarcasm nor cynicism - it’s the simple truth. At best it’s a working document for an hypothesis, but it needs much more work to be of real value. If you want to write a document like this you need to be far more selective with your research sources otherwise it just falls into a heap of speculative, subjective pseudo-science. I suggest you first take a look at the “MLA Handbook” - required reading for first year university students. When writing a research papers you must remain totally objective and approach the question from all sides, all view points, all possibilities - not just select those that provide “a convenient truth” that fits your own agenda.

This is a juvenile circular argument that doesn’t belong in this thread and is ultimately counterproductive. In my defence, I have provided photographic documentation which, in part, supports my claim and is on record here for all to evaluate.

Glass half empty, or half full? The way I see it, even with your losses, according to your own admissions, you are still 50% larger than when you started and that’s not too shabby at all! ….. at least that’s what you claim on this page. In post #9, in an exchange with bigtiny454, you claim otherwise - I gained more length than you have, and I've lost nearly all of it. Same with girth. So, Mr Wadzilla, which claim is true?
You also claim that in that post You can no more “cement” PE gains than you can “cement” a suntan, and later, PE gains are NOT permanent. You seem fairly certain of this. Do you have any evidence to support these claims? And if you are relying on the anecdotal reports garnered from these boards, the reports seem to contradict this. Men who’ve lost all their gains are, in fact, a very rare breed. The reports of losses that I’ve read would seem to indicate that most dedicated practitioners still retain at least some of their gains and that those who keep all their gains after extended periods of inactivity would appear to be a rare as those who lose them all. And we still have no idea what effects ageing has on penis size - both natural and post PE. It’s not as simplistic as you would make it seem - there are far too many variables at work here to make blanket statements.

I think it’s naive and unreasonable to expect that any man will retain all their maximum gains from PE. From the reports I’ve read so far, it would seem that results will create a classic bell curve. But look on the bright side - current reports suggest that even after years, most will still be bigger than when they started PE ….. and that includes you, Mr Wadzilla!

lil1 :lep:

I gained all my length from lig stretching and hanging. I have not done one bit of stretching or hanging in over two years and have not lost ANY length.

Nope. I can’t see how those links could sustain any of your ideas. There isn’t any explication about how connective tissue is deformed in those pages: is this happening by cell deformation? Cell proliferation? Hypertrophy? Hyperplasia? Changes in extracellulare matrix?

This thread of mine:
Loading, lengthening, healing.
is about this topic, and if you really cared about, you’d had read. That ‘plastic deformation’ they are speaking about in the link you provided is due to the viscoelastic response of connective tissue. I’d say it contradicts your hypothesis that new cells, ‘deformed’, are replacing the old normal cells; nor there is any hint that some cells are deformed. Finally, what they are speaking of isn’t really ‘permanent elongation’.

That’s why I remarked your confusion about real entities and abstract concepts. Those are leading you out of road:

>>Plastic deformation should not be confused with the phenomenon of creep (Fig. 6). When a load is applied
to a viscoelastic tissue over a prolonged period, the tissue will progressively deform until a new resting
length is achieved. If the load was within the elastic limits of the tissue, the tissue will gradually return to the original resting length after the load is removed. In biological tissues, this phenomenon primarily represents the redistribution of water from the tissue to the anatomical spaces surrounding the tissue.
………
Creep deformation is not permanent, and the tendon will slowly resume its original length after the load is remove this response is called a "damped elastic response." <<

http://www.ptjo urnal.org/cgi/r … t/72/12/893.pdf

>>The resistance of a tissue to deformation.

The physiologic loading region of the stress-strain curve represents the range of forces that usually act on CT in vivo and implies that primarily elastic deformation occurs at these loads. The region of microfailure overlaps the end of the physiologic loading zone. Microfailure represents the breakage of the individual collagen fibers and fiber bundles that are placed under the greatest tension during progressive deformation. The remaining intact fibers and bundles that may have not been directly aligned with the force or those that had more intrinsic length absorb a greater proportion of the load. The result is progressive, permanent (plastic) deformation of the CT structure. ………
It is important to note that a low level of CT damage must occur in order to produce permanent elongation. The collagen breakage will be followed by a classical cycle of tissue inflammation, repair, and remodeling that should be therapeutically managed in order to maintain the desired tissue elongation…………

[Threlkeld AJ. The effects of manual therapy on connective tissue. Phys Ther. 1992; 72:893-902]

>>Intrinsic fibroblast-mediated remodeling of damaged collagenous matrices in vivo

Paolo P. Provenzano a, b, , , Adriana L. Alejandro-Osoriob, c, Wilmot B. Valhmub, Kristina T. Jensena, b and Ray Vanderby, Jr.a, b
…….
Abstract
Numerous studies have examined wound healing and tissue repair after a complete tissue rupture and reported provisional matrix and scar tissue formation in the injury gap. The initial phases of the repair are largely mediated by the coagulation response and a principally extrinsic inflammatory response followed by type III collagen deposition to form scar tissue that may be later remodeled. In this study, we examine subfailure (Grade II sprain) damage to collagenous matrices in which no gross tissue gap is present and a localized concentration of provisional matrix or scar tissue does not form.
……….
For instance, following subfailure tissue damage, collagen I and III expression was suppressed after 1 day, but by day 7 expression of both genes was significantly increased over controls, with collagen I expression significantly larger than type III expression.
……..
Interestingly, this remodeling process appears intrinsic with little or no inflammation response …. Hence, since inflammation plays a large role in wound healing by inducing cell migration and proliferation, and controlling extracellular matrix scar formation, its absence leaves fibroblasts to principally direct tissue remodeling. Therefore, following a Grade II subfailure injury to the collagen matrix, we conclude that tissue remodeling is fibroblast-mediated and occurs without scar tissue formation, but instead with type I collagen fibrillogenesis to repair the tissue. As such, this system provides unique insight into acute tissue damage and offers a potentially powerful model to examine fibroblast behavior.

Matrix Biology, Volume 23, issue 8, January 2005, pag. 543-555

Subfailure damage repairing in ligaments

All those studies (and many others) were linked in that thread of mine. So said, near none of the studies I posted, nor any of the studies linked by you, is referring specifically to TA. It should always be reminded. Maybe TA has very specifical way to adapt to stress - we simply can't know at the actual stage.

CT reactions to stress are way much more complex than you seems to believe - basically, you (but you are not alone) are figuring your penis as a piece of metal that is instantaneously deformed by stress; then (when?) this inanimate thing magically becomes a living thing when you stop PE: so deformed cells are removed and new (DNA programmed) cells are moving back the size of your penis to his original length.
I find it the most confused model of penis growth I’ve never heard.

Also, you are answering to none of the objections that me and other members made on your hypothesis, Wad.