Honesty

Well, only 50 guys would not consitute a "scientific study." But, it has been done before: Dr. Chartham .
That gains were clearly made was not denied. What lost the lawsuit was the issue of permanence, which the defendants had not convincingly met.

How many people do you need for it to be a scientific study?

Juke —

Very few, if you expect reasonably large effect sizes and low error variance. A lot of top-notch medical research is done with only a handful of subjects.

The nice thing about a PE study is that you’d have zero variation on your dependent measure for the control group: no adult’s dick would randomly grow during a 6-month interval without any sort of PE program (unlike, say, the control group in a depression study, where you have plenty of people getting better with an inert placebo or with no treatment at all). For this and other reasons, you would need relatively few subjects in a PE study to prove its efficacy with a high degree of statistical certainty. Judging from the average gains documented here at Thunder’s, I would estimate that 10 participants in each cell (control vs. standardized PE protocol) would be sufficient.

A related discussion of sample size starts here and continues here.

Eloquently written, wad. You’ve made some good points.

Para,
Then why would you need a control group if “no adult’s dick would randomly grow during a 6-month interval without any sort of PE program”??

I understand the protocol of a control group. However, if you assume that 10 participants would be sufficient, its curious that the two experts chose 2 groups of 32.

And if only 10 were used, would you use only white men? And what age? By choosing only 10 men, you would be excluding significant groups/ages of participants - as well as lifestyles (physically fit, sedentary, smokers, non-smokers, drinkers, etc.).

And with so few variables, how could you ever calculate an accurate assessment of PE? I know that with weight training, a huge spectrum of gainers/non-gainers exist. By selecting so few participants (regardless of any “formulae”), you would skew the results. I’m not talking about theory, but about real-world application.

Simple: because without a control group, the obvious explanation for any documented gains would be that the measurer was more “generous” at the “after” measurement. (The same problem plagues us PEers: we often make phantom gains at the beginning when we learn to jam the ruler into our pubic bones harder, for example.) In a medical PE experiment, the measuring doctor would be blind to the Ss’ condition. To eliminate the “generous post-treatment measurement technique” explanation, we would have to see that the control Ss’ measurements were, indeed, the same before and after, whereas the experimental Ss’ measurements increased, despite the measurer having no idea which Ss were in each group at the time of measurements.

I agree — it is overkill. Frankly, even a single case-study published in a medical journal by a reputable researcher would be enough to pique most doctors’ interests, given how odd the idea of natural PE is to the uninitiated. But, as you’ve rightly noted in the past, a normal-sized penis is not considered a “disorder” by physicians (except for the phalloplasty surgeons, naturally!), so we’re not going to see even a single case study of PE in the foreseeable future. (I wonder whether it might be possible to treat micropenis with PE? It seems like it would be hard to get a good enough grip on the penis for stretching, and jelqing would be out of the question.) Erectile dysfunction, though, is a recognized medical issue, and it would be interesting if any docs would be willing to test a jelqing protocol as a treatment. Size gains could be reported as curious “side effects.” ;)

Again, to demonstrate that any group of men can increase their penis size through a simple exercise regimen would be startling enough. You aren’t going to have reviewers saying, “Oh, well, obviously sedentary middle-aged non-drinking Hispanic men can grow their dicks by yanking on them, but what about hard-drinking physically fit octogenarians?” :) I agree with you that further studies could reveal moderators of PE’s success — many here have speculated on some such variables, such as age, starting LOT, etc. — but to simply demonstrate that PE is real, you could select virtually any group of fully-grown adult men, so long as you randomly assigned them thereafter to the experimental and control conditions. (That’s another useful feature of a control group: it eliminates the explanation that the researchers simply selected extremely bizarre men whose dicks were prone to adult growth spurts, since half of the selected men would be randomly assigned to the control group.)

I’m not sure what you’re saying here, unless it’s that more useful information could be gleaned from a study with a huge number of diverse participants. If that’s what you mean, then yes, I would agree; clearly a huge, diverse sample would enable one to identify some of the aforementioned moderators’ roles immediately — so long as such variables (e.g., LOT) were measured at the beginning — rather than postponing that until further studies.

In conclusion I don’t think we disagree that much. I’m just describing a less ambitious study — one that demonstrates to the medical community that natural PE really does work. There are, of course, countless more studies that could be done to yield more information (e.g., having dozens of different treatment conditions to see which PE routines really do work best — and for which men), and some of those studies would require many more Ss both because of the number of groups and because we’d be investigating the roles of individual differences in predicting PE success rather than just collapsing over them by averaging all data.

One test subject making gains would be immediately be regarded as nothing but an anomaly. If I were the 1 test subject of a weight training experiment, when I first began to lift, I would’ve shown a 120-lb gain on my bench press in the first 6 months - drug free. What type of conclusions could be drawn from that?

But if my buddy Ed were used as that 1 subject, he managed a meagre 15 lbs on his bench press his first 6 months.

Furthermore, what about the guys here who’ve PE’d one, two years and never made a gain? If you randomly chose one of those guys, your PE experiment would be a complete failure.

I’m not sure that by picking a guy or two from a group (Hispanic, Black, Asian, Caucasian, etc.), you’re determining any “group” findings - merely individual.

As you’ve stated, some research studies only test a small number of subjects; however, some span thousands of subjects and run for years. That would be the “best” type of PE research and, as has been often mentioned, highly unlikely - unless funded privately, but conducted by professionals. Of course, the absence of any “course” for sale would increase the reputation of the research, as any commercial interests would tend to cast a shadow over the findings, even if conducted by scientists.

Someone once told me that you need 30 occurrences of something for it to be statistically significant.

Anyhow, I just threw out the 50 number as a starting point. To really make it count, should have at least 100 subjects. Obviously, the more the better!

That study you highlighted is about 30 years old now. Maybe it is time for a new one!

GOTTABHUGE!

When it comes to psychological research, it is generally accepted (as far as I’ve gathered from reading popular literature on the subject) that in-depth observations of ONE subject will yield a more accurate and valuable result than general studies of many. So it’s not necessarily the more the better. The better, the better!

>Why do the doctors dis PE? Well, all their theory tells them that it won’t work.

Wad,
You have made an interesting post.
As a former medical doctor myself I can confirm that PE is agains everything I learned in the university.
Even I did not believe it being a curious person I tried PE myself.
I think its 5 months or more now. Did I gain anything?
Before PE I was 7” NBPEL. Now I am exactly the same. Girth is the same. Did my erections change because of Kegels? No.
Did anything change at all?
Yes. I got a minor dorsal nerve injury because of stretching which stays (nothing too serious, just occasional dumb pain which seems to subside over the time).
Does it prove anything to me? No. I might be just unlucky one with PE gains.
But if you guys for some reason want medical community to believe PE then you must find a interested doctor and funding and a group of at least 50 people that would do PE at least for a year with all the controll measurements and scientific stuff.
I would bet that will be hard as I don’t see why should someone fund this kind of research.
The thing is medical comunity is hard to convince with just talks and few pictures. You must have a scientific proof.
Hope this helps to understand why doctors are sceptical.
I still continue PE and reading this forum is fun.
I wish one day I could say I can prove PE just by pulling my penis out of my pants :)

Sorry to hear that your only results from PE were negative. Perhaps you will find the right combination to unlock some gains.
For what its worth, I can assure you that I have made gains - in all 3 categories that you’ve mentioned (length, girth, erectile firmness).

PE definitely helped me to regain iron-hard erections. Then the girth gains kicked in and then some length. I have absolutely nothing to gain by lying to you, nor am I claiming the gains of a PE superstar. But my gains have definitely been real.

Hope you can start to gain.

- w a d

Wad,

I wish I had taken a pic of my origanal size. The reason I didn’t is because I got more serious about PE the more I started seeing results and I guess by then it was too late.

Aso my results have been on an even time line (apart from the last 1/2inch length due to an ADS). When I hit 9 inches I’m going to post pics for the first time. Enforcing again the notion that maybe I was always 9inches.

Going from 7-9 inches is still within the believable limits unlike from 5-10! So I agree with what you ar saying.

Maybe 30% is the real maximum gain with a few years of work but then again, what if I spend 10 years wearing an ADS (7-10 hours a day) and doing girth work at the same rate as now? My stats would suggest I would be 15” BPEL and 7.5” EG!!

HI
Can a french newbie (15 cm BPEL) say some words . Wad (can I call you Wad) I agree 100% with you.
I am a regularly looking on each post and sometimes amazed by the length and girth of some guys.
I do not need a proof to beleive that they got 2 or 3 more than before because It is not so important.
The only thing important is that someone like you is asking the good questions and notice what is true and what woul not. I hope the majority of people are taking advices to improve their length with 1” or 1 1/2 ” which is I think a great result.
And One reason why all of us could not have a scientific behaviour (pics etc) is maybe we find it difficult to show our penis in the face of the world (it is my case and you can call this shyness ). The other reason is maybe the difficulty to beleive that PE is possible (If you know what a french Doctor told me when I ask him if it was possible) but we try it .

We are only human and many of us (newbies) will not have the patience to wait for the firts result because it is a long ,long way alone.
I first consider PE like a solution but it is only a mean. It is better for me to consider PE like a Sport (Martial Art for example) in that case I do’t need a jpg file to understand that Piet or DLD are “huge”, of course they are “huge” and I would never drive like Michael Schumacher.
I am very happy to read your post because it is the post of a Man looking for truth. And I like that.
And last :
Don’t mind of what Doctor or Vets are thinking they are unable to open their brain (Hélas). And they never know how it is hard to do PE in fact and can you imagine yourself as a Doctor telling to his patient you want 2” more ! OK it will take 4 long years of a daily work , one or two hours a day. It would be painful sometimes, disapointing often. Of course PE is not a disease but a priesthood. And you know what you have been doing it for years and succeeded for you only for you . And I just begin and I need your feelings about PE but not really a scientific analysis.
Well I hope I have not be too long (humour) and not too much out of the subject.
Soory for my very basic English
A bientôt

maxdetaf,
Votre Anglais est meilleur que mes Français. Vos mots sont vrais. Il peut exiger que 4 années gagnent 2 pouces. Le travail est difficile.
Je vous souhaite de la chance.

- w a d

Wadzilla wrote:
>I have absolutely nothing to gain by lying to you

Wad,
I don’t mean you are lying or anyone else at this forum. I don’t see any reason why so many people would do that. And I personally believe PE can work for some people.
It just does not work for me for some reason.

What I was trying to say is that medical community do not believe PE because it is against the knowledge which they obtained in universities and strongly believe. Knowledge that is based (well most of the time) on scientifically proven data.
We do not have such a data and thorough studies when it comes to PE unfortunately for more or less obvious reasons.