Found full text penis length study, a bit more clinical than Lifestyles
I finally found the full text of a study that has hard, accurate data and while not providing raw data (sharing raw data underlying a study in the medical profession just doesn’t happen), it provides enough statistical information to make the data useful. Just to add data.
Since I can’t post in main forum, maybe someone could move it there.
The study is: Schneider T et al. Does penile size in younger men cause problems in condom use? A prospective measurement of penile dimensions in 111 young and 32 older men. Urology 2001; 57: 314–318.
The data below is from the younger, potent cohort (111 subjects). The subjects achieved erections naturally, using visual and manual stimulation, and only those who achieved erections of 5 points on an arbitrary 5 point scale (max. Rigidity) were measured. Measuring was unambiguously done bone pressed, with maximal compression of the fat pad. Unfortunately width and not circumference was measured. The subjects were chosen by placing ads, and all measuring was done by the same clinician (for consistency of measurements) in a clinic (as opposed to a bar in Cancun.).
Here is the data, in the following format:
(Mean) +/- (standard deviation) (range) [first cm then in]
14.48 +/- 1.99 (10-19)
5.70 +/- 0.78 (3.94-7.48)
BPFL (note: these seem short for BP, perhaps flaccid measurements were done NBP; but erect was expressly BP)
8.60 +/- 1.50 (5-14.5)
3.39 +/- 0.59 (1.97-5.71)
Erect width at base
3.95 +/- 0.38 (3.0-5.0)
1.56 +/- 0.15 (1.18-1.97)
Erect width glans
3.49 +/- 0.35 (2.6-4.5)
1.37 +/- 0.14 (1.02-1.77)
Flaccid width base
3.08 +/- 0,40 (2.2-4.2)
1.21 +/- 0.16 (0.87-1.65)
Flaccid width glans
3.02 +/- 0.34 (2.4-3.7)
1.19 +/- 0.13 (0.94-1.46)