This is an interesting study. I posted the whole thing before here, so I’ll just highlight a few paragraphs; but, in brief, the author of the course was Robert Chartham, PhD, and the expert testimony was provided by a Dr. Richards, a celebrated physician:
“This proceeding was initiated on November 19, 1976 by the filing of a complaint alleging that respondent is engaged in conducting a scheme or device for obtaining money or property through the mails by means of false representations in violation of 39 U.S.C. 3005….”
….
“12. After the initial measurements, test subjects were instructed in the "Chartham Method" and told to start practicing it (Tr. 139). Insofar as possible the penis of each subject was thereafter measured, in the method above described, on a weekly basis (Tr. 139, 140). Dr. Richards recorded each measurement. Of the test subjects two dropped out of the test and two achieved no gain in dimensions. Dr. Richards recorded gains among the twenty-eight remaining subjects ranging from 2.4 cm. to 3.6 cm. (.94 in. - 1.4 in.) in length and from 1.4 cm. to 3.1 cm. (.55 in. - 1.2 inc.) in girth (Tr. 142; RX-5). No changes of any significance were found in the measurements taken of the control subjects (Tr. 145, 146). He reported the success rate as 87.5 percent in the test group (Tr. 143). In Dr. Richards’ opinion, the study was conducted in accordance with prevalent medical and scientific standards (Tr. 142). The report of Dr. Richards’ study has been accepted for publication in the British Journal of Sexual Medicine (Tr. 143).”
….
“14. In Dr. Richards' opinion the "Chartham Method" will enable a large percentage of males to enlarge the dimension of the penis and, to his satisfaction, is a scientifically evaluated and proven effective means for so doing. Further, in his opinion, it incorporates new and significantly different principles from all other methods and products intended to increase the size of the penis that he knows of (Tr. 148).
15. Dr. Richards was skeptical that enlargement of the penis produced by the "Chartham Method" would be sustained for any considerable length of time. He will not be satisfied on that point until he has done further investigation (Tr. 208, 211).”
http://www.usps .com/judicial/1 … deci/5-102d.htm
So, you can see, even that physician agreed that "growth" occured for a "large percentage of males," but Chartham lost the case primarily on the permanence issue. So, where’s the large-scale follow up?
This is why the medical community is looked upon with contempt by hardcore PE enthusiasts.