Gains genetic or related to other factors

Long has raged the discussion concering whether the variation in peoples gains are due in main to genetics or to differences in the way people perform exercises/how often they exercise/how in tune they are with their cock etc…

It occurs to me that this can be tested. Gains from jelqing/squeezes are fundamentally different from gains achieved by stretching/hanging. They are different at a phyiological level- on the one hand the soft tissue of the penis is being stressed/grown/expanded while on the other the ligs are being stretched. There is no reason to believe that someone posessing a genetic advantage for one form of gains should posess the same advantage for the other, they are genetically independent.

Next we can say that girth gains are primarily from jelqing/squeezing while length gains are mainly from stretching/hanging (not 100% true but reflects the trend). We should also assume that individuals are equally as ‘good’ at performing length exercises as they are at girth exercises.

If the main factor in what people can achieve by way of gains is genetics then there should be little correlation between length and girth gains- ie loads of long thinner dicks and short thicker ones. If however exercise factors are more important, then girth gains should more often tally with length gains.

Having scanned the stats page (no statistical tests though) my gut feeling is that genetics are the overriding factor.

dongers, the missing link in the stats page is age IMHO. big gainers primarily older (>30).

As a veteran around here for over three years, I have seen it all,
seen it come and go, seen it work, seen it be overtouted.

The basics are in place yet we only “tweak” things here now, the
wheel has been invented.

I once gave a very very very long post in which I gave the basic
PE model. I have seen lots of results and data.

Intensity is a big one. Age is NOT, with virtually zero effect.

Many will not like this but “genetic” predisposition is the number one
main factor, no matter how you shake it.

I posted recently on this.

Without re inventing the wheel again, since I began PE back in 1999,
I have been on all three major PE boards and persued others like
Big Als. I’m a Ph.D academic researcher and I know how to analyze data.

Enough of my credentials.

I “conservatively” estimate that since 1999 I have seen well over 8,000
guys (probably more like 12,000), and ONLY TWO HAVE REGISTERED GAINS
EXCEEDING 4 INCHES!! [uh, maybe three, but I don’t think Uli gained as much length
as he did girth, Bib can verify that one—Uli was a legend ].

Read that line again.

Some who didn’t gain much were very intense with their workouts but they were
just unlucky in that they were not genetically predisposed, unlike Bib
or DLD, for examle. Bib and I have discussed this at length but will
I shall speak for myself.

It is true the bigger gainers, ceteris paribus, tend to be more intense,
but I have seen some who did very very little and got huge gains over two inches
very fast, less than a year, often in a matter of a couple of months.

Now, a slightly larger number of guys have registered gains between three and
four inches, but even they are VERY rare.

Then, the frequency increases exponentially as we go down in the size gains ladder
for the two to three inch crowd and of course, most guys get at
least a half inch to an inch after a year or two.

That said, and I do not want to discourage anyone, there are a VERY small minority
who never gain a millionth of a millimeter, no matter what they do. Bib and Big Al
and I once estimated this group to be between 1 and 2 percent. Many
in this group I am convinced (Bib agrees) give up too quickly, however, and
they may have forgone some minimal gains due to premature
cessation.

Nonetheless, I think we must be honest and straightforward here. Not
all will be entirely successful. Even those who gain little will have a
healthier member, which is tenfold more functional than pre-PE. So
everyone will have some sort of success.

If I were to plot this gains function as a graph from zero gains up the
ladder to four plus, it would be a curve which increases at a
decreasing rate. (for you calculus guys, the second derivative is
negative??? LOL)————————beam me up Scottie………..

Hope this clears it up.

Phat

Phat,

Lam reported gains of over four inches, and JAP was very close I believe. Their have been others fairly close.

Many lurkers have reported gains by email of between 2-3 inches, still in progress. There have been hundreds over two inches. In general, you are correct in the trend of the curve.

What is interesting and tends to skew the data is that reports are generally while the transformation is still occuring. Seldom do you get the ‘final’ data. Also important is how far the guy wants to go. If he wants an extra inch or two, gets there, and then stops, what does that mean? Maybe he could have gained much more.

In fact, I am afraid we seldom hear the final stats of anyone. By the time they have put in the time, and gained a considerable amount, they fail to take the time and report their final stats. Other than myself, I cannot remember anyone saying, “I am finished and this is what I did”.

Further, I think that those who do not post here, or do not post stats anyway, might tend to lower the average. On the boards, we mainly hear about problems. If a guy is getting good gains and happy, he might not post. Guys without gains want input. Squeeky wheel. Of course, some guys want to report gains for the benefit of the board, or to express how happy they are, but not nearly all.

I agree that the single biggest factor in gains is probably genetics. More specifically the makeup of the tougher collagenous tissues.

Bigger

dear dr phat:

please back your definitive statement that age is not a factor with some of your research please.

I also think that physical strength can play a big role in making/not making gains. To a degree anyway, you need to have enough grip/forarm/shoulder/combined upper body strength to be able to provide the resistance needed to overcome the strength of the tissues you are trying to expand in your exercises whether you are jelqing/squeezing/or stretching. If you cannot provide enough resistance your exercises will most likely be non productive. Opinions?

phat9, thats a very good point, but you can not think that all other things are held constant.

Not everyone is striving for a 8+ inch penis, I would say the majority set their final goal at 8 inches even. If the average starting penis is around 6 in. then a large portion of reported gains are going to show ~2 inches.

Still,

I think it might be more a factor of endurance than strength. I think I might be the only person here who has hung 30 pounds and not gained, and you can bet that everyone on the board can exert 30 pounds of pressure with their hands. But if they can keep it up for enough time to break the bonds is another matter.

SS4

I always feel like a freak when I bring this up…Like everyone is going to think I am a hokey hippy but I belive in this and I am curious if anyone else feels this way.

I think there is a very large mental pre-disposition that may effect each man differently when engaging in PE. The reason I say this is because I experienced this when I first got into PE and it followed me through my whole program. I only had limited information in the begining of my program and my only contact was the mentor that gave me this information. This may sound very silly to some but after my first 8 months in PE I was disapointed I only made a 2” gain because this mentor said that within 1 year you will gain up to 4” and I thought I was failing somehow. I remeber registrering at PE forums and my first post was how I was so down about only gaining 2”. Needless to say I got land-blasted by the forum and everyone thought I was full of shit and so forth. This is when I started reading about other peoples experiences and I saw that many people were very happy to make a 1” gain in a year. These gains were different then what my mentor preached so I got confused. I think for a while I had a sort of disbelief that monster gains were really possible. I think these doubts put me in a platue state I no longer really believed what the original mentor told me. Well soon after I joined peforum I made some very small gains and I remained stagnant for a bit. I started to read about people like Bib, R (Richard) and others that made incredible gains and I think my atitude started to go back to my original way of thinking. This was around the time I started the “Is Everything you See Really What your Seeing” thread. I started to believe again. I went backk to my original Visualization techniques (I need to post this stuff) Soon after I changed my way of thinking I made the biggest gains of my program over about a 8 month period. I do agree there has to be a genetic piece but I think this genetic piece is highly influenced by our mental atitude and our own personal beliefs. Ok Call me a Fucking Hippy

In order after I posted:

Bib:

You basically agree with everything I say, but update the stats
a bit. Thanks.

In fact, my very good friend Bib upped the over four inch group to the
huge total of three in over 12,000-15,000 cases. No, Jap was
close, but not four. I remember that.. he went from just under
six to 8 3/4 last I heard. He used NBP before and after if I remember
right.

I did mention there were a larger number in the three inch group, so
you basically agree with me on the success curve.

I was not aware of this Lam………..lucky bastard.

$$$

Stillwantmore (why do you??, hehehe, just joking)

Your point only applies to manual methods like jelq but with hanging
it is not a factor so much.

$$$

pumaz

No, I WAS holding all else constant (“ceteris paribus” means that).

Sorry. Holding all else constant, the evidence shows that genetics
is the number one factor followed by intensity/frequency.

Does that make better sense? Of course, there are many many other
factors that are important, just not AS important on average. For some,
intensity can overcome genetics up to a point.

$$$

S4Jelq

You are right. Intensity and frequency, which are an amalgam of
endurance, are the second most important factors. Yes indeed.

Those who are not gentically predisposed can find hope in intensity
and pure ole endurance, yes siree.

$$$

DLD

OK, I’ll call you a “hippie.”

Your own admitted insecurity and obsessive-compuliveness cannot have been a
fertile ground of positive mental images. You say you had intermittent ups with
the downs, but I seem to remember your earlier posts, and you were gaining
then.

In short, no offense, but “mental schmental”…………..and I used to be a REAL
hippie (nuther life).

The evidence I have seen on three boards does not support your
hypothesis very “strongly.” It does not mean there is nothing to it
all either.

You are gentically predisposed and with you I will not touch
base any further on the mental aspect with my ten inch thing (hehehe, LOL,
don’t take that the wrong way, I like to joke). You may PM me as you
like.

Now, I will admit in all areas of life, no matter what the endeavor,
a positive attitude will help and the most handicapped person on
earth is a negative thinker. So I suppose a positive attitude may
help one’s PE perseverence, and in that way it will help biologically.

But with PE, applying such tremdous force consistently will
most likely produce results no matter what your emotional state.

Example— My biggest gain (and I have FEW to show for over 2,500
damn hours of intense work) was in the depths of my deepest broken
heart I have ever experienced. I spilled my guts on this very board
and I was shocked when it happened. I have never been more down
and negative.

There have been threads about this issue, and some try to even sell
the snake oil of “mental imagery” (RACA), but it is a minor
factor IMHO.

Bottom line DLD: yes, by all means we should keep a positive
attitude because you we will in so doing try harder, and it may
have some minor biological “feedbacks” in some. That is always
good advice.

But, as a major factor in gains, I don’t think so.

Peace

Phatboy in Love

I agree with DLD. The mental aspect plays a big role.

Before I found PE Forums, I was just following the advice of what the paysite was telling me. They advertised 3” in length in a few months. So I honestly believed I was going to gain an inch a month. At the rate I was gaining, I thought I was a slow gainer. After reading some posts at PE Forums I realized that wasn’t the case. Maybe me expecting to gain a few inches in a few months attributed to the big gains?

Youth may or may not be helpful. Only benefits I can think of is higher testosterone level, which may or may not be helpful in PE gains, and recovery time.

OK

Many older guys seem to gain more or more quickly or some with
less effort.

The reason appears to be several, but mainly it is an “illusion”
because their penis had shrunk (as mine had) from their youthful
size and that part of regaining what you already had is what appears
to be large gains.

I think regaining what was lost from youth happens fairly rapidly but
after that, it takes more effort.

This is just a theory and I cannot prove it very much.

Phat - it’s a variable with older guys. I’m one.

If you don’t regularly use your dick in sex or masturbation, if you lose your formerly healthy nocturnal erection pattern (4 - 5 a night, each lasting about a half hour) or have a serious health or emotional crisis that effects any of this, you are likely to see some atrophy. We don’t naturally experience atrophy as we age, is my point, so long as we remain active.

phat, the thing is that ceteris paribus can’t be applied because all other things are not held constant. There are other factors that stop people’s growth other then genetic limits. You’re analyzing a base that does not have all things constant. The great majority of people are stopping after 2 inch gains because they take their average starting dick and grow to 7.5 or 8.0. These people stop growing because they stop exercising.

In order apply ceteris paribus the only limiting factor has to be genetic. You can only look at the base of long term PEers who have set out to gain 4+ inches, then out of that group evaluate what percentage of people made the big gains. To say that big gainers are as few as 3 or 4 in per thousands then that starting thousand must have set out with the same goals.

How can I argue with you here? You make a “technically” valid
point about the nature of the population base upon which I base
my conclusion.

We are talking two different things and in my science, if I adopted
your view, then everything changes all at once and scientifically
we cannot separate out the influence of any one distinct factor. We
have to draw a line in the sand and take what data we have, even
if it is not the best, and go from there for some “ballpark” estimates.

That is all I can do.

What I am saying is different, that the MAIN factor is genetic
predisposition. I didn’t assert my “base” was ideal, it was all
I have. I didn’t say in the real world in real time, all the other
factors just stop and get outta the way. They exert a varying
influence too, as I asserted, especially intensity and frequency and yes,
length of years of PEing.

Do you have a better measure? This is actual observed measurments,
and I cannot scientifically sort out who stopped after two inches
because they hit a goal. If you do that, we would remain ignorant
in not speculating from data we do have. No stats are perfect, and
none can pick up all data points. Yes, I agree with that.

But that does not mean the data we have has no meaning or that
just everyone can gain 2 or more inches if the just “try harder” or
“persevere longer.” Some will and some won’t.

There is NO DOUBT that some guys do very little and gain huge
amounts, some do a bit more and have gargantuan gains, while
others do a lot and gain very little. Some guys gain 2-3 in less than
a year while some PE for years with little to no gain. This can
be a long long time frame and most PEers hit a “wall.” Yes,
with effort some, not all, get past the wall. Bonds become harder
to break, and so on.

Some guys just have tough ligs and there is no getting around it or
sugarcoating it. I have seen a tendency lately for some to believe
that if slow gainers only did it “like they do”, they would be successful.

Lord, I wish that were true.

I guess this is what I am discussing more than anything. We had
one guy that “claimed” to have PEed intensely for FIVE years
and had zero gains. No, I cannot prove he actually did it. We
wondered if he was a troll. Bib might remember him.

So, you make a good and valid point. Let’s say you are 100% correct and I
am out to lunch, then what percentage do you say will gain that elusive
four plus? If you put the very very best spin on it and followed guys for
around for years and years, the percentage would still be
miniscule.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out the nature of the changing and “evolving”
base which I put in the denominator. You are technically correct.

Phat