New York Texan's PRP Experiment

If you have an accurate measurement of the base thickness then you can place the ruler on the base. If there is a gap between the penis and the ruler just make sure the ruler is parallel to the penis. An angled ruler yields a longer measurement. Also remember if the ruler is not close to the penis you may need a plumb bob (string) on the ruler to get an accurate reading.

32Q, thank you. I will make sure to take that into account/watch for it.

Another point to consider- when difficult to measure accurately you may just want to measure the difference from an easy to repeat starting point. You can then have confidence that “I have gained 1/4” since starting this procedure”.

Yes, thank you. The measurements I have been posting have all been consistently made in the same manner/process. As you have said in other strings, the goal is to have a repeatable measure basis to track progress. I was just struck by the increase in those results by slightly moving the ruler upward on the pad. But I will continue with the consistent method I had been using.

Today I followed my standard protocol (maybe actually less pump time tan usual to start) then added a 4th hour to the time in the Size Doctor (with hear). 20.2 cm in the SD, fully bone pressed, and using the point of measurement I started using, hard against the top of cock to press into fat pad. This was just before removal after 4th hour. I still remove every hour +/- out of concern for blisters. I know/am concerned (a bit) that the typical blister spot almost seems to be getting hard (callous?). That spot was reddening a bit, so good time to stop for the day on anything suction related, though an additional low pressure pump may be necessary. I had measured after the first few hours as well, and was blown away to see the increase with the additional hour.

I (after removal) did a BPSL measure too, but pretty much same as last post (+/- 19.6-7cm).

Today is/was a PRP/Trimix day with the Doc. Max erect (BPEL) length is about 7 1/4” on the button, so holding true to the 1/4” gain I have been seeing from baseline start. Per above, the BPSL has continued to increase, so it will hopefully translate to erect.

Girth is just under 6” at base, so also improvement continued over baseline. Sitting here with my extended erection, courtesy of Trimix….should last over 3 hours.

Thank you for documenting this campaign with cool attitude and in non-biased manner.

Yet I do not expect significant gains, mainly because of the infrequently of the treatments, I will stay in the audience and wait for the conclusive report once you finish the campaign.

All in place I do suspect gains though.

I am curious to know if your doctor have had a blood gas analyzes taken under the high - flow priapism like state you are experiencing with the trimix.
If so, would you be kind enough to provide the numbers.

Keep up the good work.

Kyrpa, thank you. Always happy to see you weigh in!

Even if gains end up being nominal, I am hopeful that I will at least enjoy the PRP benefits typically seen in the past (function, sensation, etc). We will see.

As for testing of blood gasses, I have never had that done in connection with Trimix usage. Interesting thought though. Is this due to concerns on overall effect on the body of the compound, or something else?

Thanks for sharing NY. I have been paying attention to your updates since the whole PRP thing is on my eyesight.

Just as Kyrpa mentioned, I have always been concerned about the infrequency of the treatment, but that doesnt mean no gains. I expect gains on you anyways. Its just a matter if perfecting a protocol, for which I have some ideas….

Just curiosity about the actual trapping the substance potential. The erection induced with these drugs endure both arterial inflow and venous outflow. Otherwise three hour erection should be emergency case.
Not surprised though doctors not taking the simplest safety measure because it is not written in a manuscript.

Also after reading couple of vacuum device studies with animal models, there are readings available pointing out the artificial erection produced by the pump, not with natural sexual arousal has similar profile.

Being sceptic, PRP for perfectly healthy individuals, one could suggest the procedure per se being the trauma which is healed with the vacuum device practices. In this case with prolonged high flow profile erection.
After all the low pressure pumping itself has significant healing effect on the cavernous tissue, keeping the tissue oxygenated multiple times better than at flaccid state.
Other markers of healing potential up also.

Thanks guys. I always welcome good constructive feedback from knowledgeable sources!

I attach below an interesting article on PRP and in many different combinations. Although the report (2020) focuses on ED and related treatments, you will see it details growth factors and various combinations geared toward maximizing them and regenerating tissue. Regeneration to me connotes growth potential as well, but just getting full regeneration (at age 62) is not a bad thing.

Igigi, I would love to know your thoughts. Feel free to share if you can via message if not ready for “prime time.”

Kyrpa, yes, always be skeptical until proof is established! Now that I am at 4 PRP session with two to go, I hope to see further advances.

As for frequency, I know the prevailing protocol for PRP (the “Priapus Shot” as trademarked by Dr. Runnels) has been to wait 12 weeks to see result once the “matrix” has had the chance to be established. The Chinese study I had previously attached instead waited just 4 weeks between multiple shots, but with the added PGE-1. So, by the standards of the original approach, I am getting the PRP 3 times more frequently. But, it could well be that the longer waiting period was based on maximizing profit! See? My half Finn comes out! :)

When you have time to slog through the attached, take a look. Much to digest.

Thanks, I will look into this. Just loaded the Chinese study for further understanding.
The frequency suggestion was more about the prolonged artificial erection like igigi pointed out earlier.
The Chinese protocol with the treatment pattern looks like the way to do it for me.

Actually, the study you are referring to is Indian, am I right? (Kumar C.S)

If so, out of 1220 patients none were normally developed or healthy individuals. The aetiologies were Micro Penis, Small Penis, Bent Penis, Peyronie’s
Disease, severe Erectile Dysfunction, post-penile fracture, post-redo-hypospadias repair, post-redo-epispadias repair, and post priapism.

Using these methods, as I have continuously kept saying, is not going to produce similar outcomes.
Yet, there is a place for it, turning back years on penile health is a valid motivator alone.

I am really skeptical, to a point that I have voluntarily banned myself from causing bad blood in the Chemical PE thread.

Kyrpa, it may well be Indian. I think I was simply going from (faulty) recall.

Yes, most of these studies, save for the Toronto doctor’s “patented” PGE-1 protocol are geared toward repair rather than growth. But, the Indian study does say that, on average, the length and girth gains were pretty substantial. And, inclusion of Peyronies patients gets us closer to the realm we are in here.

Thank you for your clarification. All things being equal I would inject every day, but my “patient” clearly does not like being stuck with needles that regularly.

Very rarely we have seen anyone suffering from Peyronies here. But we have plenty of small penis, bent penis, and severe erectile dysfunction patients in here.
I don´t know why, but there seems to a stubborn legend floating around the forums that PE causes traumatic events, fibrosis, or scar formation.
I´ll strongly doubt it, oppose actually, and if the histological examinations were taken into action, we the PE population would show healthier mean results than any other population group in general.

I really don´t know what to heal in the already healthy penis?

Anyways, sorry for taking this to side rails. I keep on observing and maybe learning something new on the side.