Full text penis length study, a bit more clinical than Lifestyles

Bohm, I noticed that study put the majority of guys in the average group. No surprise. But I am surprised they found more in the big group than the small group. I always assumed small is as common as big, maybe that’s not true.

I’m very surprised because of the inconsistent results with other studies. In this study 26% of subjects had a stretched penis that was greater than 6.1” (and this is probably a very light bone-pressed or non bone-pressed measurement, I think?). Also contrary to what guys on PE sites report most studies also suggest that erect length is slightly greater than stretched length. For myself, this is especially true.

There was a study though (can’t recall it) that showed that the reason erect length was greater than stretched length is because the researchers did not apply enough stretch. Regardless, it is confusing. This study basically suggests that over 25% of subjects have a penis length that is at ~6.1” NBPEL or greater (if one assumes a NBPEL measurement). And probably this is an underestimation because this is stretched length, not erect length. Almost all studies have found that erect length is greater than stretched length, for reasons alluded to above. Obviously I’m a bit confused.

One possibility though is that these subjects did have ED and there is some suspicion that longer penises do tend to have a higher incidence of ED (all other things being equal). But I’m not sure I buy this.

BPEL is certainly not always greater than BPFSL. I have tried to attach a graph from the study by Wessels et al, which shows the relationship they observed. Although the average erect length was a little greater than stretched flaccid length (that is why the line does not go through the origin at equality) you can see that many guys had a stretched flaccid length greater than their erect length.

Look at figure 2 (Schoenfeld et al.) and figure 3 (Wessels et al.): Correlation between stretched flaccid penile dimensions and erect dimensions. It shows a pretty close relationship but still on average erect length appears longer than stretched length as is the case in most studies, as far as I know.

Yes, the graph I was trying to attach is on page 12. And yes, in that study average erect length was longer than average stretched length by a little. But of course, stretched flaccid length is going to depend on methodology, specifically where and how you grab hold, and how hard you stretch.

I found the study. Some interesting quotes:

"The engineering analysis predicted that a minimal tension force of approximately 450 g during stretching of the penis is required to reach the potential erection length. The stretching forces exerted by the urologist in the clinical setting were experimentally shown to be significantly (P<0.01) less than this value."

"Using these diagrams, the stretching force that should be used to predict the length of the penis during erection can be estimated, assuming normal intracavernosal pressure and tunical elasticity. It was thus clearly demonstrated that in order to obtain the most accurate prediction of penile length during erection, ie to approach the value Le=Ls 1, a stretching force of around 450 g (~4.5 N) should be exerted."

Also note Table 1:Average penile dimensions (in cm) during flaccid, erect and stretched states (8.3 vs 13.6 vs 12.5 cm respectively).

Also extensibility seems to decrease with aging:

See figure 1. "However, as in the penis, urethral extensibility decreases with aging. In older patients the urethra is less extensible than in young patients, which should be considered at surgery."

http://www.urog enitalresearch. … 2042_5_2002.pdf

The erect penis and the stetched penis are two different things, they measure the stretched penis because it is easier and tends to give the a measure that is near the erect penis with a 5% error, which is considered a good approximation in many fields. With the discovery of erection drugs probably the measure of the stretched penis will be less used.

Just to among some different reasons FLS and EL can differ:
1)the shape of the penis: curves are common, when you stretch the flaccid penis their incidence is negligible but when the penis is erect it can have a bigger incidence on length;

2) size and elasticity of the glans: when erect, the glans can add a significative length to the penis, not so when the penis is stretched.

The first article is kind of interesting. A number of assumptions were made to predict the force required to maximally stretch the penis to its elastic limit. One is that the penis can be modeled as a single uniform cylinder. It might perhaps better be modeled as two smaller cylinders (the corpora cavernosa). Of course there is also the corpus spongiosum, but its tunica is thinner so it probably doesn’t contribute as much resistance to stretch. They also assume a constant and uniform modulus of elasticity for the tunica with identical properties in both axial and radial directions, probably not the case for most guys. And they assume “standard anatomic dimensions” of 1 cm for the inner radius of the tunica and 1.2 cm (the 12 cm in the article is an obvious typo) for the outer radius of the tunica. This assumes a thickness of 2 mm for the tunica which might be reasonable for the flaccid state, but I suspect is rather thick for the stretched flaccid state (and that is the state in which they are trying to estimate the stretching force required to create equality between BPEL and BPFSL).

But overall their model seems reasonable. A stretching force of 450 grams corresponds to just under 1 pound. That doesn’t seem like a whole lot, especially to guys who hang much greater weights, but guys who are not used to having their dicks stretched are probably somewhat quicker to express discomfort, and the doctors are probably understandably reluctant to tell them to just grin and bear it. Also note that the lower the intracavernosal pressure during erection, the less force is required to stretch the flaccid penis out to erect length.

I may be one of those guys who is more sensitive to discomfort (I’m a wimp) or I may have a lower tunica elasticity or my tunica may be tougher/thicker as my erect length is significantly > stretched length. It would be interesting to see if the ~ 1 pound weight hanging does lead to a flaccid stretch length equivalent to about erect length for guys starting out. It’s nice to have this figure though. I kind was interested in this question of intensity versus duration (volume) partly for that reason. See:

Increasing intensity or duration?

It was argued by senior members that duration is probably a better and safer approach to follow in order for long-term gains. This was also suggested in order to minimize tunica hardening/toughening. But I still don’t fully understand how I can apply this principle to my routine:

1. For how long do you continue increasing hanging time (increase duration)?
2. If you’re hanging, and start at 1 pound at what point do you start to add load (increase intensity)?
3. Is a deconditioning break absolutely necessary so you can get back to the initial 450 gram extensibility position or is that unlikely once your knob gets bigger (i.e. at the bigger size you will always have to hang more weight for your stretched length to approximate erect length).
4. Are guys who are PEing progressing too fast (less is more)?

I know this shit has been brought up in countless threads but we gotta discuss something. Any opinions?