Possible explanation for slow/no gains

I have spent many hours searching and reading information regarding ligaments and how they are damaged and how they heal. The most interesting article I have found to date is the following:

Subfailure damage in ligament: a structural and cellular evaluation
http://jap.phys iology.org/cgi/ … t/full/92/1/362

I know that this information has already been referenced here at Thunders, but it did not get the discussion that I think it deserves. After reading it I cannot help but wonder if it points to a basic flaw in the hanging strategy most people employ, including myself. I am gaining but I would like to gain faster and spend less time at it if possible. Who wouldn’t? I also would like to know that I am not just strengthening my ligaments and tunica.

I can’t help but think that most people hang such that they induce little to no damage to the ligaments and tunica. Let’s face it, what we are trying to achieve is controlled damage.

I wonder if the slow/no gainers are hanging at too low of stress and consequently stay in the elastic range of the stress/strain curve the so called "toe" region.
I also wonder if the length of time spent hanging is a waste.

The following was taken from the article:

"Each subfailure-stretched ligament received a different magnitude of subfailure stretch, ranging from 0 to 9%. The six ligaments receiving a subfailure stretch were loaded, allowed time to recover viscoelastic deformations as above, and then pulled to failure at 10%/s."

To me this suggests increasing the stress quickly and only for a short duration.
Imagine if it turns out that you could gain faster by hanging a heavier weight for less than 10 seconds.

Also, I retract following an aggressive hang session. Because I don’t like that, for obvious reasons, I tend to hang lighter next time…mistake? Based on something else I have read but cannot reference at the moment, if I was to continue to hang while retracted, my ligaments would "remodel" in the lengthened state. This agrees with something that BIB told me. He told me to ignore the retraction. BIB also hung 45 lbs. It sounds impossible to me but if you didn’t have to hang it very long I think that a big strong cock could achieve this.

So, my experiment is to determine what weight will produce a SAFE subfailure stretch. Then when the retraction occurs I could do one or all of the following:

1) Wear the ADS
2) Do manual stretches
3) Hang lighter

This should cause the ligs and tunica to remodel in the lengthed state.

I going to go for it… very carefully. Any comments? Advise?

>I also wonder if the length of time spent hanging is a waste.

Waste is a little strong I think, but I understand what you mean. There are likely different effective ways to skin a cat (that phrase refers to catfish, not the furry pets, BTW :) ). Recently I’ve started PEing again. I’m using a combination of manual stretching and hanging with a minimal routine. So far, I’m only hanging 2 sets per day at most. I try not to miss a day of either stretching, hanging or both, as I’ve found an everyday approach produced better results in the past. I’ll stick with this for a while and see what happens. Like you, I’m wondering if there really is enough difference between, say 30 minutes of hang time and several hours to be worth the hassle. Going by temporary BPFSL increase, I used to reach my max length after about 3 sets. Was anything beyond that truly of benefit? I don’t know.

Years ago I tried hanging very heavy for shorter periods. I didn’t get any size increase, only a thrombosed vein. A happy medium is probably best. Heavy enough to get a good stretch, but not so much that the more delicate tissues (skin, veins, nerves) get overly stressed.

Re: the retraction, I’ve had that mostly from manual stretching. Rarely, if ever from hanging. Why? Perhaps the stretching was more stressful. I don’t know if I buy that because I felt more fatigue from hanging than stretching.

>Also, I retract following an aggressive hang session. Because I don’t like that, for obvious reasons, I tend to hang lighter next time…mistake?

I’ve been wondering if cycling intensity similar to this could be beneficial. Higher intensity for a few days (meaning more weight, time or both), then ease off for a day or two but maintain frequency and use enough weight so the tissues stay lengthened/expanded. Let them semi-recover, but not fully. I’m of the opinion that allowing full recovery is a bad thing, resulting in the tissues becoming stronger quickly. I’ve experienced it. Miss a few days of hanging and I’ll need more weight when I resume. Not good.

Hobby,
Agreed. “Waste” is a little strong. After all, I am gaining, possibly only because of the time factor.
Interesting that you are measuring your BPFSL between sets. I just started doing that with the BIB still on. It is very interesting. I am starting to think that I might be able to determine my limiting factor (ligs or tunica) by noting this measurement between sets. I switch angles if I increase the weight and don’t see an increase in BPFSL. I have noted an increase of 1/8 ” between sets where I increase weight by 2.5 lbs.

Thrombosed vein !? What weight? I considered that as an immediate risk. I have had most of the injuries but not that. I will read up on it origins. I really only intent to do a “shock treatment”. I am hanging 15 - 17.5 SD now. So maybe I will start at 22.5 and work up to a weight that I can safely lift without any sharp pain.

Retraction… Interestingly, I have been doing more manual stretches and subsequently I too have had more periods of retraction. Maybe manuals exert more stress than we give it credit for… and the short duration thing agrees with the study.

I also can’t help but think of DLD. I never understood what all the issues were but he was a manual stretcher and I can’t help but think that when we do manual stretching we instinctively exert a maximum force. I have strong hands and I know that they hurt by the time I am done with a manual stretch.

A big concern of mine is how intercourse may be affected by a technique that virtually guarantees retraction. Any advice there?

I have been measuring a solid 7.0 BPEL so it will be interesting to see how this goes.
Thanks for your comments.

I started tracking pre and post workout BPFSL quite a while ago. Everyone should, IMO. It is interesting. See how long the changes last. Compare with your PE schedule to get a feel for what is going on.

I think the temporary post-workout increase is one sign that you’ve had a good workout. When hanging, a minimum amount of weight is needed to produce the ~1/8” increase I expect. I remember when I began a fulcrum hanging program and started very light that a relatively small increase in weight made the difference between having no post-session increase and an added 1/8”. So, I agree that there is a minimum amount of tension needed to do the trick. I could hang a feather off my penis 24/7 and it wouldn’t get any longer.

>Thrombosed vein !? What weight?

Way too much. I was hanging OTS while standing, with 10-15 lbs. of plates dangling near my butt. I pushed down quite hard on the weights as I paced around.

>Retraction… Interestingly, I have been doing more manual stretches and subsequently I too have had more periods of retraction. Maybe manuals exert more stress than we give it credit for… and the short duration thing agrees with the study.

That is interesting. You may be right. Usually when I had those retractive times from manual stretching (and it is real shrinkage, both in BPFSL and BPEL, not merely weaker erections from overwork), I’d hang for a few days using moderately light weight. That brought the length back, then later I’d get a real gain if one was in store.

>I also can’t help but think of DLD.

Despite his hype and incessant self-promotion, DLD doesn’t know any more about PE than anyone else. I would imagine he knows even less than most here if his ever-changing claims are even close to true. What would such an anomalous easy gainer know about PE that could help the majority of men?

I agree the tendency seems to be to pull quite hard when manually stretching. I pull hard these days. Pressure in the glans limits how hard I can pull without negative consequences (darkening of the tip). This relatively high intensity, low duration tension may cause or contribute to retraction/shrinkage. I suspect it does.

>A big concern of mine is how intercourse may be affected by a technique that virtually guarantees retraction. Any advice there?

My advice is to avoid schemes that cause this retraction on a regular basis. I don’t view it as something desirable. Maybe, and that’s a big maybe, reaching this stage occasionally can be of benefit, perhaps as part of a cyclical plan.

Hobby,
Thanks for your responses. I performed this method for the first time last night. I also updated my size data. After a short warm-up I did 20 lbs for 20 seconds. I did this 4 times. I was a little surprised that I could not do more weight but that is probably a good thing. My old max was 25 lbs before a 3 month break. At this point, skin seems to be the limiting factor. I am not able to get the BIB as tight as before as I am not conditioned yet. However, I did notice that my BPFSL was up near my max. I will check BPFSL before and after my workout. I plan to record all this new information to see if something pops out (hopefully not a vein). Actually I am pretty careful.

sheLovesIt

This supports my exact way of thinking. Recently I have taken to hanging heavier weights for much shorter periods of time, 10 minutes in the morning and the same at night. The rest of the day I wear ADS to stop ant healing that might occur. Also when ever I get chance I do manual stretching. I have only been doing this for a week but I am definately noticing a difference (won’t measure until a month is up). Previously I hung 5lbs for 2 or 3 hours a day a made little or konw gains.

So Hobby,

Any progress in bpfsl, during your light manual/hanging routine?

Yours

Stretch man

I don’t believe that the penis follows the typical stress-strain curve used to characterize solid materials.

Correction: it probably does but this is not relevant at the weights we apply. It’s been said many times that collagen has a tensile strength greater than steel. I would be extemely surpised if the penis as a whole enters the “plastic deformation” phase during hanging, even at what we consider to be heavy weights. My guess is that plastic deformation happens at hundreds, not tens, of pounds.

I believe that the penis grows under traction because of a process called “distraction hystogenesis.” This is the biological process whereby cells divide and tissues grow in the direction of applied stress. This phenomenon is the reason the soft tissues grow during limb lengthening procedures and certain craniofacial procedures, in which bone is broken, allowed to begin healing, and then stretched.

I think the notion of “plastic deformation” takes us in the wrong direction, because it suggests that more weight is always better, provided it doesn’t cause the penis to snap off.

I am personally of the belief that there is an optimal amount of weight to be used. This weight stretches the tissues and gives them the biochemical impetus to grow, but is not so traumatic that it induces an inflammatory response directed at rescuing the stretched tissues from being severed. The body “wants” to keep itself together. Use too much weight and it will resist.

Another argument against plastic deformation is that, in solid materials this happens very quickly. It makes only a few milliseconds to plastically deform steel. Why should the penis take many 20 minute sets, repeated day after day, to accomplish the same thing? It doesn’t make sense to me. If the penis is going to plastically deform, wouldn’t it do so more quickly?

I think the penis stretches after a few good sets not because of plastic deformation, but because of viscoelasticity. The elongation is temporary and related to squeezing water and proteins out of the spaces between the collagen. Once the traction is removed, however, the water and proteins slowly ooze back in, and normal dimensions are restored.

Neat stuff Modesto. Makes sense. Great contribution. Thanks.

ModestoMan

That was one great post!

Thank you, gentlemen, but I really didn’t expect you to agree with me so easily.

I essentially agree with what Modesto has written. After a fair amount of reading and research, I have come think that any collagen deformation we are likely to achieve with PE is, at best, temporary. Permanent changes are probably the result of remodeling. IOW, PE exercises stimulate/trigger fibrocytes/fibroblasts to start the remodeling process.

As Modesto stated, plastic deformation would most likely require much higher loads. And even then, the “deformation” would actually be progressive fiber failure rather than true plastic deformation as found in materials such as metals.

For those interested in exploring the topic further, these books are worth reading:
Biology of Collagen, by Andrus Viidik
Frontiers in Biomechanics, by G.W..Woo, S.L-Y Schmid-Schonbein
Therapeutic Heat and Cold, by Justus Lehmann
Therapeutic Exercise, by Carolyn Kisner
Biochemistry of Collagen, by Ramachandran
Collagen: Primer in Structure, Processing and Assembly, by Jürgen Brinckmann

Good to see you around, MX! I think you’re probably right about remodeling being the real mechanism behind gains, at least where it comes to the dense, collagenous tissue. This is why workout consistency is so important. We always need to be pushing the envelope, so to speak, so that our penises remodel in longer states than their prior ones. “Stretch it and keep stretching it” should be our motto.

The remodeling theory is going to be very good for the ADS business. I always avoided using an ADS during my first round at hanging. It didn’t make sense to me that I needed to keep the micro-tears open. If remodeling is the real growth mechanism, however, an ADS becomes a very important part of one’s overall routine.

My sense is that remodeling works in conjunction with distraction histogenesis. Remodeling may be the underlying mechanism for the really dense tissue, whereas DH may be the mechanism for the softer stuff.

I wonder whether remodeling and DH may be essentially the same thing. I’ll think about that after dinner.

I am glad to see this thread get some attention. As you may recall I created an experiment around it. I did not update this thread with my results because I thought nobody was interested.
In my experiment I hung heavy (20-27lbs) for short durations (20-60 seconds) for 4 to 6 sets every day for 2-3 weeks. Sadly I LOST 1/4” BPFSL and 1/8” BPEL in the first week! By the third week I did not like how my penis felt nor did I like how it looked. It hurt like hell to tighten the BIB. I was in totally unfamiliar territory. The inflammation also caused pain (read torture) while wearing my ADS. My penis lost it’s “stretchiness”. My ligs felt tight like pieces of rope. Manual stretches and dry jelqing helped loosen things up but the overall retraction remained. I stopped the experiment mainly because of the risks. I know that my old routine works. Maybe if my gains had totally stalled I would have continued. I was concerned that what I was doing put me on the fast track to injury. So I went back to my old (standard hanging) routine. Interestingly, I have found that I cannot hang anywhere near as much as I could before the “shock experiment”. I mean 10 lbs now feels like 20 lbs did. As a result I am only hanging with 7.5 to 10 lbs for 5 or 6 sets and the fatigue feels good. I get a slight retraction the next morning however by mid-day my penis is back to it’s normal stretchiness. I am now willing to accept a “slowly but surely” approach to PE hoping that the less-is-more strategy is the most efficient for me.

ModestoMan,
I am very anxious to research distraction histogenesis, I have never heard of it. I have been researching Myofascial Release(MFR). I believe MFR has been mentioned in Thunders at least once. I can’t help but think that jelqing uses the principle of MFR. I am wondering if hanging and occasional jelqing could be more efficient than doing either alone. My hypothesis is that adhesion’s in the ligaments and tunica are a byproduct of hanging and stretching. At some point these adhesion’s collectively slow down the gains forcing us to use more force to the point of diminishing returns. Maybe jelqing by the principle of Myofascial Release will release these adhesion’s and allow the gains to resume at an optimum rate.

sheLovesIt