thoughtfulgold's Penis Enlargement as "Scheduled Trauma" theory

Bullshit.. Just saying.

This thread reminds me of this one : The secret to continued gains.

The way he applied his principles was different .

I do not like downing other theories but it looks like he was smack dab in the middle of the Newbie gains phase, which he admits in the article of only being at PE 5 months at the time of that post. I doubt he had run across a plateau or injury at that point so the point and benefits of rest may not have really shown themselves to him fully yet. It doesn’t seem like he had done much legwork other than notate what worked for him, either.

I can see his logic and application of some of the same principles though.

Peter Dick - The secret to continued gains.

Yes yet he had excellent gains for the time he PEed for (a year or so), and they did not diminish after the first few months either.

The penis doesnt have a brain, so it cant guess anything, get tricked or get confused. Variety is probably good overall but his theory might not be sound.

The idea is that tissues adapt to the stress applied upon them and toughen up to resist it. This is one of the ideas explained in the op.

Well, I think PSAbrah and I are coming from the same place but allow me to elaborate on my own opinion here.

The method you linked and my theory share some commonalities but it diverges on a central point. The value of rest and deconditioning. He puts what appears to me limited value on regular rest and none on deconditioning.

The reason this is important is most apparent when we talk about the body. For him to disregard the value of deconditioning is basically flying in the face of his own “keep your dick guessing” argument. Indefinite trauma, even varied, will eventually catch up with you, citing the amazing regenerative properties of the body he wishes to second guess instead of work with. Additionally, it will not remain productive. The body still has the same amazing regenerative properties we both mention. I simply believe that deconditioning allows the body to recover more fully AND stop fighting the stimuli of the trauma. By the body ceasing this fight, it stops defending against tugging and compression (jelqing, clamping, squeezes, most common PE traumas, etc) and when you start again you can deal more of the calculated damage to cause the microtears that most PE theory find to be the heart and start of the gains we seek. His theory basically states, as long as you vary times, durations and intensity applied that efficacy will not fall.

In the theory you linked, by omitting deconditioning, you basically have to hope that variety alone is going to accomplish what variety and deconditioning do in my theory. This is possible, provided the user of “The Peter Dick” method is prudent and consistently calculating a perfectly random approach but I don’t see how it would go any faster than the method I suggest and see many scenarios where it could go slower or come to a halt. Because the value of protracted fatigue does in fact exist. Without longer periods of rest, this has been known to build in the human body from stimuli outside of PE and this doesn’t get fully addressed in Peter Dick Method theory. I think part of it is based on the short time the research was conducted before being posted and partly because during the Newbie Gains phase the most notable instances of endurance and gaining typically occur which could reduce the impact of protracted fatigue early on. However, protracted fatigue has been repeatedly notated to cause real and severy harm over extended periods. Injuries based on duration or repetition are common in PE and that risk cannot be simply ignored in favor of more efficient use of time when time becomes a hazard the longer you go without extended rest. This is my main misgiving with The Peter Dick Method. Gains eventually stop and force a new method or regroup. Peter Dick Method doesn’t offer a recourse for this. It implies one is not needed.

In the case of the original user, his own miraculous gains aren’t isolated as solely from his method. As he experienced all of the gains well within the Newbie Gains phase there’s no way to know if his results are repeatable with anyone that tries his method. His body was unaffected by skipping longer rest periods, however this will vary from person to person. Furthermore, by his own admission, all of his theory is based on his own experiences in 5 months. In contrast, my theory is based on 7 years of research which consists not only of my own experience but observation of others and extended contact and coaching from an expert in the field Big Al Alfaro.

I don’t wish to speak down to the thoughts of another, much less one who had gained and gained well in a short span. But Peter Dick Method theory, compared to what we consider relatively known facts and tenets of PE theory regarding the value of rest and deconditioning, differs widely enough that it’s hard to reconcile exactly where his theory has merit versus luck and good genetics without more data points over a longer period of time. I am intrigued by what you showed me but I would really like more in depth showcases of the logic used and see more practical application over a longer time in more subjects other than the originator of the method before I weigh in further. I can’t speak to validity or invalidity without more data.

I believe words like “guess”, “tricked”, “confused”, etc. are used as metaphors for some other physical phenomena that is taking place or trying to be avoided.

In this case, some of those metaphors are speaking to the avoidance of an area of the body becoming conditioned to some repetitive method of stress. So confusion for instance is pointing at switching to some other form of stress that hits that area differently than a method of stress that it has become more conditioned to.

All would agree that there is no brain in the penis.

I was mainly pointing at some similarities between the ideas explained in this thread and his, I did not mean they are the same. He actually suggests rest days , but definitely no decondioning breaks. He did not put the time you put into your thoughts either.
MX is one of those who clearly benefited from breaks MX - Progress after a year or longer off? . Tntjockey also had 2 weeks off every 6 weeks on. Then some have gained plenty without long time off .
It’s impossible to create a theory that applies to everyone though, this why I find sparkyx’ attempts at monitoring growth interesting, or BD’s thread on big gainers full of valuable information . I’ve read an awful lot since starting PE, and the routines , excersises and patterns of growth of gainers are very very different from one another.
This has been discussed before but I’m not sure one week (let alone two days) can be considered as a deconditioning timeframe, I remember firegoat mentioned months at a time. This is an other worthy read Punctuated PE Theory
The ideas explained in the OP have been in the air for a long time , it is nice to have them refreshed, nicely laid out and gathered in a post!

What the hell bro?? My brain has been inside my penis since day one and you can be damn sure I’ll keep it that way, all important things in one place.

I know, what was I thinking!

Those theories you just linked, I like. Personally I admit, prior to joining Thunders in late July I was on break since February. Hadn’t been serious since late last year. Additionally I think I’m having some miraculous gaining going on myself and I’ll check on October first with the ruler and a tape.

I never said one week was the only way. In this post (in the comments usually) and another I often recommend more than one week, a month or two off depending on the situation. I’ve fielded a lot of routine questions and most I preface with taking a month long break or more and a fresh start. Regaining lost EQ is a byproduct of rest more often than not if you’re heavy into PE.

My point in the post is not to tout my way as the only way. PE is like a map. Where you are and want to be are on it. The line you draw and route you take is yours. But, I think some of what I’m suggesting can help more people more often even if they can respond to multiple methods. At least I hope so.

Thanks for the compliment. I know I’m not reinventing the wheel here but I just want more of what we commonly use as something cohesive to view as a resource. Take what you like from it. That’s why we are all here, right?

A thumb up for a good work!

Defo. I would think that if newbies started with these ideas in mind they would go further than the current average and keep easy gains coming for a longer time.
But what do I know !!

Right. So it would be okay to do the same routine for weeks or even months before needing to switch. As opposed to the guy who changes it up every day or two.

I’d never in a million years try that, Bill10. Not ever recommend it to anyone. That’s my .02
[/QUOTE]

I know. I won’t recommend it either. In fact I find it the dangerous.

I just remembered that guy’s post cause he was proposing long rest periods.

It is just something to discuss. Nothing more.