This is against everything we learned!

Hello guys and sorry for posting an MOS link but I want to ask you guys about this thread.

It basically states that hard exercises SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS because they sort of make too many cells and tissue becomes too dense thus slowing gains.
It makes a very nice distinction between mitosis and hypertrophy that sparked my mind sort of…I feel kind of bad after reading all that stuff because of the heavy stretching and hanging i’ve been doing inspired by vets, but they might have been wrong?
He also has another theory that decon breaks are useless or even counterproductive.
He ALSO thinks that positive PIs might be misinterpreted for other erec.quality factors, but I don’t get it because I can feel exercises giving me better EQ, but maybe I am wrong..
Shouldn’t low EQ be the main indicator for “growth”?
I hope some of you guys get into this, I am really confused and for real I don’t know what form of PE I should perform anymore.
I also hit a length plateau because of too short too heavy sets…I am thinking of only wrapping for girth and length, as in only ADC/ADS, ONLY?
But other than that I am very inclined to not do another manual stretch like Stan and others IN MY LIFE! After all, stan only gained like an inch or so in 20 something years…from 2012 to this day, stopped gaining in 2014…same as saiyan who gained a little more but hasn’t gained since…2011? It always was kind of creepy to me not seeing anymore gains from these guys since…

My dream is that one day some billionaire with an interest in PE is gonna fund some research into PE so that half the world’s population can know wtf their doing when trying grow their dicks.

Forum Guidelines

Ok, srry about the link.

Is it ok if I copy paste some stuff here, in order to be debated?

Or is this already old for you guys seeing that it’s from 2012…?

I never found anything similar anywhere o n PE forums…not that I’ve read every thread existent, but my guess is I went through quite a few in 1,6 years of PE…I guess..

I’ll admit that whenever anyone gets too scientific, I get lost. I’m a simple man.

This absolutely doesn’t go against everything I believe, and promote, though. It’s 100% what I endorse.

Read my routine Train and you’ll see complete alignment.

Almost 1-1/2 inches in gains from what he’s saying.

I put myself in traction for 12+ hours per day seven days per week for months.

I only came out of traction for very short periods of time (less than 10 minutes) and in those ten minutes, i would get an erection, massage it out and firegoat roll before going back under tension.

I do believe that I could go back to that exact routine and get more gains, but given where I’ve gotten to, I’m less motivated to be wearing the extender all day, every day, which is what it took.

In the new year, I may consider this, or while on vacation over the holidays, I don’t know.

It may go against “manuals”, I’m not a firm believer.

It may go against hard core hanging, I’ve yet to try. That said, I’m not sure it does. If you’re hanging at a consistent weight for 60+ minutes, isn’t that aligned? I think it could be.

I’m not a “this works and nothing else does” guy. Everyone’s “gained” from different routines. That said, I do personally feel that extending, under consistent and solid tension, for 8+ hours per day for 7 days per week ought to produce the most consistent gains for people over time.

Copy and paste isn’t a good idea, they might come after you for reproducing their content.

Have you scanned the less is more and EQ threads?

Surely the answer is up for grabs.

By the way, your first post gave us the idea in order to start an discussion.

I have yet to see a consensus on what works. Additionally, anyone claiming they’ve got the inside track on what works for everyone is usually lying.

The bottom line is it’s a theory based on his personal experience. That he hasn’t done any tissue density testing to validate hypertrophy. And that there’s no answer that accounts for all the different ways various people have gained.

Shopping for a theory that fits your ideas is cherry picking. Which is bad data collection.

Spot on with the “cherry picking”, that’s exactly what I am doing on MOS whenever I read their threads.
Thank you RJ, Lenny and TG for your answers, it gets annoying for me to start reading too much scientific stuff about cells, tissue, traction lengthening and all that, especially since ncbi seems to be packed with information.

From what I remember I read most of the important stuff but clearly I must have missed out on something. Thanks!

I’ll take a good sleep tonight and stop cherry picking on the internet and I will go back tomorrow on finding useful info, I got a headache so far, nothing else.

This is very much inline with my sentiments. There are so many variables that have not been isolated and controlled, which requires lots of dudes doing the same thing coming from similar conditions and this is just one element required to address variables.

I record every minute of every exercise and even have some cool looking graphs, but the fact of the matter is that I’m not isolating variables, so I’m just one small little out of control data point.

Train Spot,
I have to find the discussion you are referencing and see the responses because as a general rule, that doesn’t seem like a popular opinion for that website.

As for you…. which ever way you decide, you have to trust your decision and not second guess what you are doing.

Hang in there TS… I will post more after doing some reading.

I forgot to mention the weird part about it, they guy mentioning all this stuff keeps mentioning dld’s name on and off calling him either “mike” or “daddy” and promoting his “srt” as genious and whatever. But dld talks about lots of bundled/size blasting/engorgement keeping for a hole day stretches on his Srt thread promoting a 800 and something $$ pen. enlrg. kit with everything you can want in it….I know it sounds good, but it really was debated before to pull hard/hang/extend and then either ADS/ADC, whatever…force was needed, right? Look at dld’s device for bundled stretching and stuff: hardcore:) )).

But then you have this new genious on a small closed thread because of the OP being banned(wtf!?), who says that hard stretches start this wrong mitosis process we don’t want, no decon no rest days, even talks A lot about maintaining some sort of expansion while asleep because only that will make it constant PE….I know these things work, I read them on other member’s progress threads, but not with that “no hard stretching” part.

I got so worked up about it I even started to hate on other PE vets like stan, manual stretching gainers, etc, thinking that maybe they are lieing and keeping secret ADS routines or something…but that is definately not the case. Sry for putting down others but I get paranoid when reading too much internet forum stuff. I open like 20tabs constantly keeping them in “one tab” and rarely go back to them because of too much to think about in my unprepared brain…and it might be from weed as well, but idk.

You can tell us the name of the thread so we can search for it ourselves, otherwise it’s difficult to know what we’re discussing.

It’s an older thread from 2012, effort and rest discussion, the guy’s name is “irspow” and he hasn’t posted anything else since 2014 apparently.

I don’t remember when or where but I read that it may be beneficial to stop P.E for a couple of weeks after a long period of doing it. Tissue usually takes about 4 to 6 weeks to soften up after it has become hard.

Again I’m not 100% sure if this is true but I just wanted to share this idea because maybe someone might know more about this.

TS, i replied on the other site.

Don’t get worked up about Tom being banned, that was two years later. He had plenty of time to show positive/amazing results from his ideas but that never happened…?

As for DLD being called Mike, that is his name, lol.

I do give Tom credit tho, the only way that post survives on that website was to flatter DLD with the SRT props… lol.
Well played by Tom to have a better discussion on his topic.