Gaining volume with Kyrpa

“Then it is critical that once those loads aren’t producing any appreciable extension, he must take an extended rest period (at least 3 weeks but I think 6-8 weeks would be better). This is very important and cannot be understated.”

Give me more on this if you can. What limits additional extension short run?

This would be very interesting to hear from you Tutt.

The law of diminishing returns seems to be fairly universal. So I wouldn’t be so bold as to say that gains wouldn’t slow over time.

As Buckfever suggests, I think we need to be careful to differentiate between structure tissue growth and non-structural. In adolescent growth and bodybuilding, there are fundamental reasons why expansion cannot be linear indefinitely. If muscle growth is too rapid, the tendons won’t be strong enough. If the tendons become strong enough, cartilage won’t tolerate the levered compression. A relatively under-developed cardiovascular/digestive system simple won’t/can’t provide the building blocks at sufficient volume. There are simply too many genetic/physical limiters in the structural realm. Once we get into the non-structural realm, it appears most frequently that nutrients/oxygen are the limiter. Stretching earlobes and lips, for example, have impressive capacity, but only if the rate of growth is sufficiently moderated. Stretch too quickly and you see poor circulation and tissue necrosis. Stretch very slowly and the tissue just keeps expanding. This is shown also in obesity. As you note, fat cells seemingly have an indefinite capacity to grow. But more impressively, the skin and connective tissues have an equally indefinite capacity to grow in order to accommodate the fat cells. This is true until there is a nutrient delivery problem. Obese people have notoriously poor circulation, as unlike muscle growth, fat growth doesn’t trigger the same kind of vascular expansion. I guess what I’m getting at is that the examples of growth for non-structural tissues that we have available consistently suggest that the limit is not genetic, it is nutritional.

Absolutely agree on all points. In the normal realm of penis size, is there a legitimate reason to dedicate one’s life to >3” of additional length or >1-1.5” of girth. Seems like body dysmorphia to me.

One thing to keep mind, the studies showing a weakening beyond the proportionality limit also indicate that the proportionality limit creeps with each cycle, which makes complete sense mechanically. This could make the idea of a 10 cycle strain beyond proportionality impractical in vivo. The strain charts suggest that once you reach the 5th or 6th strain, the proportionality limit could be as much as 8-10% total strain. I imagine your nerves would be telling you to stop. Additionally, the stress relaxation effect is beneficial with each cycle in keeping the required load minimized, and this takes some time. Albeit, I would note that one benefit of heat at every cycle would be that at 41C stress relaxation apparently occurs at nearly double the typical rate.

In any case, with the goal of preserving healthy cells as much as possible, I look to cell stress studies indicating that proliferation response peaks at about 30 minutes of stress. Beyond 60 minutes, apparently cell viability suffers and delayed apoptosis accelerates rapidly. My interpretation is that 3 cycles (2 short followed by 1 long) targeting 0.5% beyond the proportionality limit on at least the 2nd and 3rd strain is the overall productive limit in vivo, or what might be called the “sweet spot”.

Well, seems that i was unclear with my statement. As you might have find out that I am favoring only one manual stretching exercise for strain to reach proportionality limit per workout.
When I was suggesting those 10 repeats, I meant series of separate exercises each of them on separate days.

This is exactly one of the findings I have been thinking already, because I am looking for the ways to shorten my workouts without losing effectiveness , or even making them more effective. I am tuning my Period 3 workouts only slightly , as they say not to change a thing if it is working .

Next Period should be then optimized thoroughly , as I have hopefully nothing to lose after presumable reached my goals already with Period 3.

Disclaimer.. This is my opinion and interpretation of clinical research. There is also a fairly strong practical support here and on other forums, but extensive controlled trials here would be very beneficial. Unfortunately, around here it is difficult to convince someone to keep their hand off their junk for extended periods.

A couple things limit additional short run gains in this context. People on these forums tend to have a fundamentally incorrect approach from a physiological perspective. They try to grow as fast as possible, by pulling as hard as possible, for as long as possible. That approach will produce newbie gains because it is highly effective at stretching muscle, elongating cells, and un-crimping/aligning collagen. After the “newbie gains”, this approach starts to become very counterproductive. From my perspective, one should have a few short-term objectives to ensure long-term progress;

1) Avoid injury
2) Preserve cell viability.
3) Weaken without a scar response.
4) Avoid a strengthening response as much as possible.

These things limit short run extension, but I believe dramatically extend long run potential.

#1.. Seems obvious, but I’m constantly surprised by how often people here are so driven by desire that they are willing to risk injury. By all accounts, if the strain is slow enough and the load is high enough, the TA will stretch quite far on a single cycle. But I’d rather have a functional penis and not be writhing on the floor in pain.

#2.. As mentioned previously, under extended periods of high strain, cells begin to die. It is my opinion that resources committed to eliminating and rebuilding dead cells just slow things down long term. It’s possible that very low tension ADS use for extended periods doesn’t cross too far over this viability threshold, but high load hanging for extended periods does. I don’t think a single strain or series of consecutive strains should exceed 60 minutes without allowing cells to recuperate.

#3.. The proliferation phase is dictated by the environment that you create. Referring back to the obesity example, the skin/connective tissues have incredible ability to expand without triggering a scar response. Once that is exceeded, we call it a stretch mark. Apparently this is dictated by not just the rate of change, but also the accompanying biochemical environment. For example, fetal injuries in the presence of incredibly high levels of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid have the ability to heal via normal tissue proliferation rather than via scar tissue. Subsequent research indicates that HA provides a similar effect beyond the fetal stage. Again, HA and other healing agents reach peak production at 30 minutes of high stress and after 60 minutes evidently the environment starts to become sort of toxic. Soft tissues stretched slowly and without injury will first elongate and then proliferate to avoid a chronically stressed situation. Stretch them too fast beyond the elastic limit and the body’s rapid response mechanism is scar tissue. Don’t confuse the phrase “too fast” to mean >6% in a single session or something like that. Stretch marks occur on a much slower timescale than that.

Take a look at the load strain curve for tendons and ligaments. Within the linear (proportional) region is where Hook’s Law applies and theoretically in this zone the crimped nature of collagen has flattened already in the toe region and now all of the fibers are aligning and stretching proportionally based on the increased load. But as long as we are in this region we have not damaged the tissue yet. At a certain point, the proportional limit is exceeded, but we are still in the elastic region. My personal opinion is that the proportional limit is the point where no additional immediate alignment is possible and the fibers must now stretch to retain their elastic properties. During this stretch beyond proportionality, the fibers increasingly weaken while fully retaining their ability to completely recover their original length once the load is removed. But because they’ve weakened, any subsequent stretch will be able to take them right back to that point at lower load. IMO, repeated cyclical stretches are able to access and align fibers that couldn’t be reached during the previous stretch, which extends the proportionality limit, at which point the newly aligned fibers are engaged into a stretch. After several cycles, available fibers have been fully aligned parallel to the force, and have also fully weakened within the elastic limit. After exceeding the proportionality limit and weakening the fibers, the structure will approach the elastic limit and there will be a significant increase in required load to achieve incrementally larger strain. I believe this is the point Kyrpa is reaching as the curve begins to flatten off.

To this point, I don’t think he would have incurred much trauma. But as indicated, there will be no further extension with the load remaining constant. If he were willing to dramatically increase the load, he could exceed the elastic limit and enter the flow region where load requirements fall rapidly. I would suggest that this is because he would then have reached a point where individual fibers are being compromised. Some will have severed while others deform beyond recovery. There is little doubt that this would trigger a scar response. Conversely, he could stop and rest. This would allow for proliferation and a disorganized matrix of new fibers would be added. After several weeks, the repaired structure resembles a slightly longer version of the original structure but has regained its natural crimp and non-parallel orientation. It is ready to start the process all over again. The new beginning point is likely a bit shorter than the previous end point, but incrementally longer than the previous beginning point.

#4.. This objective ties closely into #3. It is pretty conclusive at this point that repeated strain and increasing loads triggers a thickening/strengthening response in tendons. That is a basic tenet of healthy joint function. For decades, the prescription for a ligament sprain had been to isolate the joint and rest. More recently they are finding isolation and rest to be completely counterproductive. Exercising a compromised joint during healing results in a stronger ticker ligament with fibers pre-oriented in parallel fashion. Isolation and rest results in a weaker ligament, with thinner fibers, and random orientation. Although joint recovery desires ligament strength, PE certainly does not. The goal here would be to effect a strain past the proportionality limit with as light a load and as little cycling below the proportionality limit as possible. Constant cycling (especially at increasing loads) below the proportionality limit only serves to trigger a strengthening response in the collagen structures. A few brief heated strain procedures over a 2 week period should achieve the maximum elongation and weakening effect without pain, trauma, or strengthening. After that the tissue needs to be allowed to rebuild as weak and disorganized as possible. Because collagen structures are so slow to repair, we are talking about several weeks of trying not to do anything that would trigger a strengthening response. Once repaired, the next 2 week cycle shouldn’t really require a load increase unless the cross sectional area of the penis has also increased.

So getting back to the original question, the biggest limiter of additional short run extension is the desire to achieve greater long term length without requiring dramatically increased load over time and running into a physics limit.

Sorry that post was a novel. I should keep things more concise.

Because I make frequent reference to certain terms in the IPR protocol, I will clarify a bit. There is not really a discrete line of demarcation between the I and P phases of healing. All of the theoretical and practical results that I’ve seen point to an ideal I/P phase (aka intense workout phase) of 14-21 days. Beyond that, there seems to be a plateau which I referenced previously. So when I say “a few brief heated strain procedures over a 2 week period”, what I really mean is something like 6-8 total workouts with 2-3 days rest between. After about 14 days if there’s been a plateau, the rest phase should begin. After about 21 days, even if a plateau hasn’t been hit, the rest phase should still begin. If you haven’t reached the plateau within 21 days, your strain and heat protocol isn’t optimal, which means you are spending a lot of effort cycling below the proportionality limit, which is counterproductive. One shouldn’t stay in that cycle indefinitely in hopes of continued gains. Take the proper rest and then try to adjust the workout to be fully effective within the 2-3 week window. In terms of proper rest.. I’m sure that as little as 3 weeks would produce some results. I believe over the long term 6-8 weeks is optimal. Beyond that is likely just wasted time in this context. So fundamentally you’d be able to do 4-5 full cycles per year with a 5-10mm expansion in each cycle.

So you wrote another novel?

Not at all. Great post!

Great response. Beautifully put.
First two paragraphs seems to be obvious and secondly I already feel to have personally said enough on efficiency of another PE practitioners approaches. So if anyone out there is building a massive attack, do not bother to do so.
Here is going this kind of operation which is about be optimized all along the way.

The new beginning point seems to be 2mm shorter and is conquered back in the very first try.

Continuing with “girth workouts” and vac stretching with light loads and no heat cycles, have not seen to be hindering the process.

I am reflecting all you are saying to my work of course, and reaching the plateau in 21 days, would mean quite an difference in effectiveness as I now have reached the verge of plateauing in 33 days.
Trying to perform +50% more efficient workouts and pulling out 13mm BPFSL in no more than 21 Days, sounds impracticable at this point. Not to mention doing it in 14 days.

Is there a real risk and where it would be capitalized, if we increase the efficiency that much.
Would it lead to plateauing surely at 21 days but with a results not so great?

What I would suggest here is that the process should not need to be taken to the very edge of everything.
And instead of precise date for stopping we keep the approach already adopted.
This BPFSL gains driven concept with efficient enough exercises that surely plateau somewhere between 21 to 35 days.
As soon as descending trend start to show, that would be it.

I am talking again of the balance between input and the returns.

Right and I think some consideration needs to be given to the host response. Imagine a period of time in which there is inadequate sleep, as an example, impacting the healing response. So allowing for that is important not only from a physiologic standpoint, but also in terms of execution. Because temperance is an important part of the execution, we need to be mindful of those factors exogenous to the process that impact it.

This is very helpful insight. Firstly because it provides a look into how far past the proportionality limit you are going. Also it gives insight into the effects of proper heat and stress relaxation on residual extension.

I personally like the idea of squashed (restricted length) clamping in this context.

The first consideration for me was the total phase timeline and gain rate. For example, if I assume a 6 week decon period, with a 21 day workout phase there are 5.8 phases annually vs 4.8 for a 33 day workout. Analysis of your gain rate suggests that 80% of the increase (10mm) comes during the first 21 days. The next 12 days produce only 3mm more. Mathematically, after a year the results are nearly equivalent, but with the 21 day workout requiring slightly less effort.

However, I think it is critical to get that last 3mm per phase, because it is the most permanent strain right up to the elastic limit. So, it might be an unfair assumption to think that the initial 80% will be as permanent without the last 20%.

Theoretically, some studies indicate a total elastic limit of 6% before the fibers begin to tear. Coincidentally, that seems to be very close to where you hit a plateau. If that’s true, your regime appears to be reaching the effective limit, which is the main goal. If that limit cannot be reached within 21 days, I can support the idea that it is worth chasing.