The importance of the FLACCID STATE as a guide in productive PE

Thanks Pe_is_an_art. This is all great information and really makes for interesting study.

The more I read the more I am confident that everyone’s PE journey is unique and different. Safe exploration and expermentation is the best way each of us to develop our own path to success. I appreciate you taking time to share this information as it is a great help to so many.

The open discussion your post has influenced has allowed me to take a few new ideas and try in my own journey.

I m glad we are all being helped from my observations.
I d like to say for one more time that the observations I made through my PE journey are not originaly made only by me.
The 1st person that came to the same conclusion as mine, was Sparkyx and he has 2 threads about everything I have discovered.
I had read them a long time ago but I had not payed much attention to what he was saying because I was also in the trap of more is more.
I am just a person that happened to find out that what ever he was describing was right after I learned my lesson the hard way.
The 2 things that I have evolve are

1. The only PI that we should care is the flaccid size and state.
It makes everything a lot more easy and clear because when the flaccid is impressively bigger and softer then all the rest good PIs are present.
2. That there are no micro tears formation either plastic deformation and that the only thing that is happening when our penis is gaining size is a stretchier state that allows the erected penis to be stretched further through the blood.

Having in mind my 2nd conclusion makes us be 100% focused on our flaccid state and mfsl and its making us feel good about taking rest days in order to keep this stretchier state instead of doing PE like maniacs and triggering the stiffness that is killing every effort of gain.

An other vital condition that has to be present for a penis to be able to gain is the Pelvic Floor state.

When a PF is over tensed ( maniac PE is tensing it a lot) is resulting in a stiff dick unable to gain.

So the PF should be balanced in order to keep the dick relaxed and soft and able to be stretched for having progression in the mfsl

”That there are no micro tears formation either plastic deformation and that the only thing that is happening when our penis is gaining size is a stretchier state that allows the erected penis to be stretched further through the blood.”

This is a big claim. It’s an interesting theory with some circumstantial evidence and logic, but what solid evidence is there that explains there mechanisms behind it?

I would think it would be plastic deformation, but you seem to be suggesting that plastic deformation doesn’t exist?

It obviously isn’t sufficient to say that the cells themselves become ‘stretchier’ through the mechanism of being made more ‘stretchy’, so I’m interested in what you think is the reason they are able to stretch so they give the appearance of more size.

I’m very open minded about the idea of one-on one-off extender gains and not trying to do 12 hours every day, because of the same idea as in body building that the body grows in rest.

However true or superior that may be, to me it doesn’t debunk theories such as micro-tears, plastic deformation, cell division, that do have some evidence behind them as biological processes

It seems the literature is more pointing towards the stretch causing cell density to decrease which causes cell proliferation to regain the density the tissues want to have.

Very interesting. That sounds highly plausible, and that would be a good explanation for the OP’s theory. But that would need to involve things like micro-tears and a causal factor, which it seems the OP is claiming doesn’t happen. Which is what makes me curious to find out what he actually does think is happening to cause the stretchiness.

No it doesn’t require any actual tearing, there’s no dishesion between cells needed.

What beyond9 posted is covering my theory.
But there is no purpose on trying to analyse or defend theories that can not be prooved ( at least in our times…maybe after years some research will be done and we will have our answers)
For now … all we know ( from members results and experiences…because these are all we ve got) is that
1. More intensity and more volume are leading to no gains.
2. When we stop cold turkey we are losing gains.
3. More intensity and more volume is decreasing the mfsl instead of increasing it.
4. The softer the flaccid is… the more mfsl can achieve

These things above are FACTS.
Most if not all of them have happend to me and you and to any dedicated PEer.
So if the micro tears and plastic defo theories were correct… the above things would not happen.
It would be a case of the more pe we do the more micro tears or the more plastic defo… so the more gains.
But… its the opposite…so many PEers comfirm it.
So which theory is left and it make more sense according to our successfull gaining periods indications that have being covered in this thread???
That all that is happening is a STRETCHIER dick state when the EL gains occur and that if we get to the overtraining side once again… we are LOSING gains because of a stiffer dick reaction.
So IF the permanent theories of micro tears and plastic defo were accurate … then the loss of gains would not be able to happen because there would be an actual adding of MEAT on our dicks… and this couldn’t be undone.
So … stretchier dick = longer Erect dick
And stretcher dick walls ( from jelq and clamp etc) = thicker Erect dick

This is the best thread on thunders. Everyone needs to read this.

Would you say that having a big flaccid is a necessity to gains or just an indicator that you have had a good workout in the sweet spot of not too much and not too little. For example, say you live in a very cold environment, and you had a great workout that would have resulted in a big flaccid if your living environment was much warmer, but your penis is fairly shriveled up all day because it is cold. Would you think that would hinder your gains, or is the big flaccid just correlated with gains (hence, physiological indicators) not actually causing them?

Yes, I realized that after I’d posted that tears weren’t actually needed.

However, if there are no tears, wouldn’t that suggest that cells can stretch and elongate without needing to increase their volume or create new cell material.

That there is some inherent property in them that means if you put a certain mechanical stress on them they automatically increase in size and stretch all by themselves.

Without needing to split and form new cells, as in mitosis and cytokinesis?

You’re making big claims that have the air of scientific validity. That’s why I’m asking for some kind of mechanism that would explain it.

Circumstantial and anecdotal evidence are important, no doubt.

But you confidently dismiss other valid theories as if you have totally disproved them and shown them to be false. I’m not trying to be antagonistic or catch you out, but if your going to say things like mitosis, cytokinesis, plastic deformation, micro-tears and other forms of cell-division and multiplication are not real.

And you’re doing so only because in your experiences and that of others correspond to your less is more approach:

1. More intensity and more volume are leading to no gains.
2. When we stop cold turkey we are losing gains.
3. More intensity and more volume is decreasing the mfsl instead of increasing it.
4. The softer the flaccid is… the more mfsl can achieve

There is lots of evidence for those things you have dismissed as impossible. And there are many people on this board who have experiences that are the total opposite of yours.

They have gone balls to the wall, and the results have been great for them. Some haven’t lost gains after stopping.

In the picture proof thread, they have added obvious ‘meat’.

As of yet, there is no scientifically proven mechanism that would say all their gains came from just an inherent stretchiness of the cells in their cock that have been, through consistent PE, stretched enough so that now have an extra inch or two.

If a person is going to dismiss all other theories for growth as false and claims to have disproven them, then for me there needs to be something more behind it than something that doesn’t even have a discernable mechanism that would explain it.

For me, your claims would be so much more solid if you didn’t try to dismiss all those known ways that tissue in the body can grow. Because it would support your case better to say those things exist, and your approach is the best way of taken advantage of them because it allows for sufficient recovery time for those things to occur in the body, and that if you overdo it you impede those processes.

But to say they don’t exist and then to claim growth happens because cells simpy get stretchier, but not being able to posit and explanation for how they do, is confusing for me.

JPLondon, I agree with you. It does not feel right to just forget about 20 years worth of experience on this website providing opposing theories to his just by him saying, no, this is true. I can’t speak to the cellular level, as I am no biologist, but I do have something to say on the “less is more no matter what” theory.

I think it is an oversimplification to simply state that less is more, and that no one else has experienced growth any other way. For me and seemingly for Pe_is_an_art, less is more does seem to work, but that doesn’t invalidate my opinion of tons of members of this forum throughout the years who have grown using a different strategy. For example, I have read plenty of posts of people gaining from long periods of hanging/extending. What you, Pe_is_an_art, are saying is very important to most of the people reading this post, (people with less than two years of experience, as they should be very careful about how intense their routines are, and more experienced PErs already know what works for them, so it doesn’t matter as much), but I don’t think it should be stated as a universal truth.

It might be a better idea to phrase it as, “find your sweet spot,” but for people with less than 1-2 years of experience (the majority of PErs numbers wise), it is productive to note that their sweet spot is usually much less than they think. That is not to say that everyone will gain from the same exact type of workouts, and to the PEr who has been at this for years, their “sweet spot” is probably many orders of magnitudes higher than someone just starting out. It is also much safer to find your sweet spot by slowly easing up to it rather than trying to overshoot it, hurt yourself, and only then decrease intensity/volume.

I think part of this clash may be arising because the majority of active PErs at any point in time most likely have less than 2 years of experience as most people give up well before then. So for the majority of PErs, less is more probably will seem to be the correct strategy to gain even though it won’t for an experienced vet, and that is why “find your sweet spot, but if you’re a newbie, it’s most likely way less than you think”, might be a better way to put it. I love the fact that we are still trying to innovate, come up with new theories, and not be complacent and blindly accept the current status quo, but we should all be wary of extrapolating universal truths from our own anecdotal experiences and be wary of confirmation bias when searching through threads in attempt to gather information. If only we could get some research grants in here, now that would be incredible!

More is more and less is more will fight for the end of time in PE, sports, learning, most anything really. Why? Because there will always be sucessful people in both camps. That is why great coaches in any discipline are the ones that don’t just blindly throw their already pre-set dogma at you. They work with the individual to find what’s best for them.

I’ve read of a guy going slow for 2 years and zero gains. That sweet spot is one of a kind for each one of us. Heavy routine has given me gains, while a soft approach none.