Using the ultrasound for therapeutic heat in PE

I’m reminded of Stagestop’s mention of the “sausage effect” where IGF-1 injections seemed to expand his size inside-out in comparison to primarily stretching the tunica, which I guess you could call outside-in.

With ultrasound protocol we are we are concentrated completely in elongating BPFSL.
Which by the way is the primary target in all length training being it hanging or extending etc.
The BPEL comes as a seamless secondary co-product of this elongation.

The difference being that with these novel methods we are able to achieve relatively significant increases in BPFSL, the BPEL being difficult to grow at the same rate.
BPFSL gains come more as a direct consequence of connective tissue elongation by the heat amplified stretching. BPEL growth is volumetric growth to fill this void as a simplification.

For inducing this growth almost every viable technique which involves expansion and stretching the cavernous tissue serves fine.
I have found BPEL growth with jelqs, any manual expansion exercise I have came up with, low erection bends, pumping, clamping , you name it.

There is a downside as well on adding these exercise in conjunction. As I have found out and stated it many times in my log, having excessive work load in conjunction with the BPFSL protocol the exhaustion is easily felt and EQ may drop significantly.

That’s why I dropped the jelqs and rest of the similar exercises aside at some stage.
And concentrated on BPFSL as long as it kept coming and then switched in to BPEL work for the rest of the period. It has worked just perfectly every time.

For what I have been really surprised that even that I dropped all additional workouts I still have managed to gain BPEL parallel to BPFSL.
Now seeing many already starting to master the BPFSL gaining, they may lack the BPEL gains.

This has made me think about it a lot and I can´t find any reasonable explanation other that that I have chosen to use the cyclical stretching as a cooldown method instead of static stretch /extension. I can´t prove it unless there more users going the same rout, but I do have very strong suspicion that being the crucial difference.
The cavernous tissue and tunica layers getting enough stimuli for inducing growth responses is the possible explanation.

As we can see the static method is working fine as it is also strongly backed with the literature.
Another thing is that is the protocol insufficient to trigger BPEL growth responses without additional exercise used along?

That’s why I dropped the jelqs and rest of the similar exercises aside at some stage.
And concentrated on BPFSL as long as it kept coming and then switched in to BPEL work for the rest of the period. It has worked just perfectly every time.

For what I have been really surprised that even that I dropped all additional workouts I still have managed to gain BPEL parallel to BPFSL.
Now seeing many already starting to master the BPFSL gaining, they may lack the BPEL gains.

Are you saying you quit doing the BPFSL focused routine and switched into a BPEL focused routine? As in, stopping US heated hanging/stretching completely to do jelqing/clamping/etc?

So you gained BPEL while focusing on the US heated BPFSL routine (without jelqing/clamping/etc)?

I was reading another thread about stress relaxation and someone (marinara?) made a point: if you are trying to do stress relaxation in a hanger-type set up, you constantly have the same amount of force on the tissues even if they want to loosen up and relax. But if you did a manual stretch or used a rod-type extender, instead of having a consistent amount of force, you would have one single length to which the tissues can relax and elongate to. So once the tissues relax and elongate to 7 inches (for example), there is no more additional stress, because the tissues are simply being held at that length, so they can relax once they reach it. But with weights, no matter how much the tissues want to relax, the weight is still pulling on them.

What do you guys think

Good points. The conventional hanger setup is constantly pulling which is utilizing another form of tissue elongation, which is creep. That part he has covered right.

For the manual stretching there is some aspects to re-evaluate. The exercise does induce stress relaxation but only partly because of the static hold at certain length. There is more into it.

The hold , no matter how accurate you try to be with the static hold, is constantly moving and the load changing every second. That makes the exercise some degree of insufficient on the stress relaxation aspect.
What the manual stretching has to patch up the incompleteness, is that it is performed in cyclical fashion.
Repetitive pulls combined with the rest between.

Cyclical stretching alone is known to produce stress relaxation to its maximum with no more than ten repetitions or so. This combined with the static hold, as best we can, surely makes the manual stretching one of the stress relaxation type elongation exercise.

Static extenders are pure stress relaxation devices , even hanger can be tuned up to be one.
There are guys using the hanger with pulley , adding the lock device to attach the hanger cord to a static position once the load has been applied. There are another possibilities as well.

The static hold issue is likely also load dependent. Kyrpa has done a real good job of suggesting a quantitative range regarding the load beyond which there is no additional utility if not in fact a negative input up to the point of material failure.

It becomes more a matter of a static hold below a certain load threshold allows for stress relaxation. One needs to consider why it is that stress relaxation to the extent to which it has been compared to creep has yielded better results in the literature.

Also as a practical matter what static devices that are readily available provide a measure of load?

Maybe that’s a factor but anecdotally when reviewing the records here, there seems to be better results reported with spring loaded rather than static devices.

Thanks

So you think creep can achieve maximum stress relaxation if done properly? Say for example, hanging with only 1.25lbs for 15 minutes?

Ten rounds of cyclical stretches.. how long for the hold and how long between holds?

No. Your example is purely for creep.

Creep don´t produce stress relaxation and neither is stress relaxation producing creep.
They are two separate, differently working mechanisms of producing strain,or elongation, or displacement in different terms.

The duration is always relative to the load used and more further to the tissue temperature.
Low level load and longer duration stretch is always a good guideline.

If the tissue is heated to the therapeutic temperature then the shorter duration stretches with little more load can do the trick.
I did found the 15 second smoothly ramp up load, 15 sec hold, 15 sec rest making the difference on the elongation with heated tissue.

So your warm-up is ten rounds of 15 second manual stretch, 15 second hold, 15 second rest - under heat? I thought you only used best during the US portion of your routine?

No warm ups included in the protocol.

Instead of the static cooldown after heated stretch, I went to perform these manual stretches with fine outcome.

I was very blister prone with the vacuum so I couldn’ t wear it during cooldown.
In the respective of BPEL gains, I have suspections of the cyclical stretching having positive effect.

So you aren’t following this routine ?

“Currently, the basic foundation of the protocol consists in 1 hour workout per day, 3 days on, 2 days off.
- 30 minutes of stress relaxation
- 20 minutes of US stress relaxation
- 10 minutes of cool down”

If not, what’s yours?