Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

Dr. Adams Chem PE Again

Your explanation doesn’t make much sense to me Stagestop to be honest. If Dr. Adams wanted to be the typical urologist not involved with PE, he wouldn’t submit patents like those. Neither being involved with PE pose risks for MD license, there are many urologists who perform penis enlargement surgeries, procedures not approved by any official medical authority or association with a minimum of reliability. Neither is required being an MD to ask for a patent in any field (not checked Canada laws but I would be surprised if there was such a rule), neither you need to have something to offer to your patients if you already are a successful Urologist, and so on. As I understand it anyway, we agree that you can’t trust Dr. Adams as far as any kind of PE is concerned, and on the fact that chemical PE without a good dose of natural PE has little or none chances to give gains.

Dr Adams

Hi Marinara,

I apologize for not writing more clearly. It is my opinion that Dr. Adams did not invent anything, but rather, he purchased the patent for use in his practice. The reason that I say that, is when I went to his clinic, he has a reasonably sized urology practice (or perhaps he would say a “men’s clinic.” He has been doing that for over 10 years by himself, and was at another,larger clinic for many years before that. He is a physician, and not a researcher. As to trusting Dr. Adams, I would indeed trust him on any medical issue that I had in regard to urology. I think that he is a reputable physician. To support my opinion, I noticed these items:
1. When we spoke of successes, he never referred to any of them as patients, but always as “one guy” and he did not have any details of what the “one guy” was like, such as age, physical condition, etc. even though I asked.
2. The purpose of a patent is to protect an invention, while you try to market the invention. To the best of my knowledge,it has never been marketed (and indeed, it would be quite difficult to do so). So,if one is not going to market a patented item, why bother to patent it in the first place? Since he just uses it in his practice, he would have no need to obtain a patent at all. Just use it and be done with it.
3. Since the patent requires PGE-1 which is a very potent drug, especially so for someone that does not have ED, any physician would have to be very careful in prescribing it. Priapism is not fun, and can have very serious results. So, the inventor was pretty much stuck in is marketing of the patent to someone like Dr. Adams, who already had a familiarity with PGE-1.
4. When I discussed PE with Dr. Adams, he did not come across as a “mad scientist” type at all. He is conservative, somewhat reserved, laid back in attitude, and I have a hard time believing that he would take the effort for this type of program.
5. The guy that posted on another board as MAGNUMFORCE, DID sound like the mad scientist type. He also worked in a university lab, with access to all of the needed supplies (or so he said). Also, in his postings, he alluded to trying to put together a program for Chemical PE, but then, I am sure that he ran into a lot of resistance in the medical field for that type of invention, and therefore, it ended up with someone who could actually use the program.
6. As to the “new patent” I am a bit perplexed. A calcium channel blocker is normally a blood pressure lowering drug. Verapamil does seem to be helpful for Peyroinnes, and therefore it may well have some validity, but I do not see the benefit of the other drug.

I do agree with you that any PE program for length has to have traditional PE as the backbone of the effort. As to girth, maybe not. I certainly had a (reasonably) good experience with IGF-1 and DHT in regard to increasing girth. I used IGF-1 lr3, but I would use IGF-1 if I could, if I needed to increase girth in the future. So, Chem PE may have more validity in that regard.

I also sympathize with you in regard to the difficulty in reverse engineering a PE patent. I suppose that when I was active on my PE journey I did not give a heck of a lot of thought to all of the ramifications as to why the protocol was working, since I was growing,and I got reasonable results. But if I had it to do over again, I would do a lot more experimenting. Unfortunately, buying the right drugs, and getting them where they need to work, can be quite a challenge for the average PE’er. I hope that the new group of guys working on the program will keep posting so that we can all learn from their trailblazing.

When I let my mind wander on the subject of how to improve PE through chemistry, I think that a board like this could be invaluable, if we were to post prospective protocols for Chemical PE. We would have to come out and explain that they are experimental, but perhaps if we gave the members here a “track to run on” we might get back information on which components of a Chemical PE program were of benefit. To do this, we would have to start with our existing track record, which is mediocre at best, with a lot more people not achieving their goals than achieving them. Of course, I do not know how to differentiate those who failed with Chem PE from those that failed with more traditional PE. The scientist in my hopes for measurable results, which will probably be difficult in this environment, but maybe it will happen.

As to what to suggest to those so inclined to do a “Chemically supplemented PE program” the very first thought that came to me is Vitamin C. I know that this probably sounds funny, but I do a lot of work in some fields of medicine, and with those who have soft tissue injuries, such as “tennis elbow” adding 5-6 grams of Vitamin C is quite helpful, with results being seen in as short a period of time as one day. The reason is simple, collagen cannot be formed without Vitamin C. As we are stretching to add the tension element of growth, generally we do not add Vitamin C to our protocols, which is absolutely needed to make collagen, which is necessary for growth. I suppose that this is too mundane for the average PE’er, but the chemistry makes sense.

When it comes to DHT, I have seen a lot of people say that they have various reasons, (usually hair loss) to avoid this part of a protocol. Well, the treatment for micropenis in children is simply DHT applied liberally at a time in their life when growth is going full blast. This includes a number of hormones besides DHT and Growth Hormone, but you get the idea. So a discussion of the value of DHT in PE might seem worthwhile.

We have a number of references to Relaxin, and finding human recombinant Relaxin proved very difficult to me, but perhaps things have changed. Then, we would have to get it into the penis, most likely transdermally, to be effective where we want it to be, but that might be worth a discussion.

Then we have DMSO, and the resulting onion breath that it brings with it. I see some discussion of DMSO on the board, but not so much as a part of any protocol.

Verapamil might well be a valuable addition.If it can help with Peyroinnes, getting some remodeling of the tunica may be in the ball park.

If the intent of this side of PE is to develop effective protocols, we need to be as inexpensive as possible, as I tend to believe that many of the members may not be flush with cash. So, if the thought is to SUPPLEMENT a more traditional PE program, then we can suggest small and less expensive additions to regular PE. That would tend to indicate that DMSO, maybe DHT, maybe Verapamil (along with a method of getting it into the tunica), certainly a good dose of Vitamin C, maybe relaxin (human if possible, maybe Porcine if nothing else is available) and a method to get it into the penis. These all seem less expensive methods of supplementing a traditional PE program,and they do not have the danger that goes with PGE-1. If we were to get a number of guys working on one part of Chem supplementation, perhaps we could develop a more effective protocol.

Just a thought.

We’d need a control group too. Actually, as you know better than me given your background, we’d need a double blind study, but that would be impossible. A simple control group with a good number of people doing exactly the same NPE, one with vitamin C supplementation and the other one without, would be a good starting point. My concern is that the ‘magic pill’ syndrome will push people on trying something that carries, at a major or minor degree, some risks, and is also expensive, when there isn’t the vaguest objective empirical proof that it helps gains.

I know that I sound pretty much negative, but I’ve seen the same happening in the fitness field, people trying any kind of shit because in theory (or basing on a couple of small studies) that would help theirs improvements; then after months or years you see the same guys having not better - and if anything less - gains than people who never bougth a supplement or a drug. Don’t get me wrong I am interested in your experiments and thoughts though.

Not negative, but experienced

Originally Posted by marinera
We’d need a control group too. Actually, as you know better than me given your background, we’d need a double blind study, but that would be impossible. A simple control group with a good number of people doing exactly the same NPE, one with vitamin C supplementation and the other one without, would be a good starting point. My concern is that the ‘magic pill’ syndrome will push people on trying something that carries, at a major or minor degree, some risks, and is also expensive, when there isn’t the vaguest objective empirical proof that it helps gains.

I know that I sound pretty much negative, but I’ve seen the same happening in the fitness field, people trying any kind of shit because in theory (or basing on a couple of small studies) that would help theirs improvements; then after months or years you see the same guys having not better - and if anything less - gains than people who never bougth a supplement or a drug. Don’t get me wrong I am interested in your experiments and thoughts though.

Hi Marinera, I am smiling at the thought of a double blind, placebo controlled experiment with PE. I can just see me writing to Pub Med on that one….NOT. I understand your concern about the “magic pill syndrome” and there is some validity to your concerns. On the other hand,most physicians would tell you that PE cannot be done at all. As to risk, there is risk in every form of PE. Certainly if one does 1,000 jelques in a day, he is going to be quite sore, and most likely will have worn away a fair amount of skin. Crank up the vacuum pump, and one’s penis could be full of fluid the next day. Certainly there are a lot of accidents described in these pages from people using all kinds of instruments in their quest for PE.

But like you said, I know that I would not want to lead anyone astray in any of my postings, and I have tried to do a good job of describing the pitfalls that went along with my campaign. The challenges here is to put together a protocol that is low risk, low cost, and has a chance to succeed, and see what the results are. All PE is challenging, and many fail. Quantifying why they fail, and why others succeed is the only want to get empirical proof,and as we really at not going to inspect the various penises in the study, we also have take a face value the various postings.

We may well be in a situation where there are so many variables, that defining which are the critical ones is impossible. Having said that, the various members may want to try, and assume the risks that come up. They assume the dame risk for regular PE, except the cost of the supplements. So, to develop a data base for others to use, it may be of interest to establish perhaps two or three “chemical assist” PE protocols, and see if there are any members that want to try them out for say 6 months. For this undertaking I would suggest that PGE-1 (caverject, tri mix, quad mix, etc) be left out as this was the most troublesome drug, and in my group of guys that followed my progress, it ended up giving them all priapisms sooner or later. We were lucky that nobody got hurt.

If there is any interest in that, I could help with a protocol, or just be an interested bystander. I solicit your thoughts.

Let’s say you write down in details the least expensive and dangerous of protocols, to begin with, and start an experiment about. It will be hard to find people who stay committed on it long enough etc. etc., but you never try, you never know. Good candidates for the experiment would be experienced PEers, with a short description of theirs PE career and personal relevant infos. Each member would start a progress report thread and also write down a periodic summary in the experiment thread. Before/after pics would be mandatory.

I could be part of the experiment group myself who knows. Not saying that an experiment would give definitive answers, but it would be a step ahead in our knowledge.

I would like to try chem PE

Originally Posted by stagestop

As to what to suggest to those so inclined to do a “Chemically supplemented PE program” the very first thought that came to me is Vitamin C. I know that this probably sounds funny, but I do a lot of work in some fields of medicine, and with those who have soft tissue injuries, such as “tennis elbow” adding 5-6 grams of Vitamin C is quite helpful, with results being seen in as short a period of time as one day. The reason is simple, collagen cannot be formed without Vitamin C. As we are stretching to add the tension element of growth, generally we do not add Vitamin C to our protocols, which is absolutely needed to make collagen, which is necessary for growth.

hi there stagestop

i don’t want to deviate the discussion but your post regarding vitamin c brought my attention .

I think is clear that vitamin C is helpful in maintaining a healthy body, but when linked to PE I don’t think it would be very helpful. One anecdotal experience was a post made by bib that said something like he made sure to not take in very much vitamin C to help with gains.

Some studies show that vitamin C increases collagen production and collagen crosslinking.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505499
“Exogenous VitC supply could thus contribute to the maintenance of optimal collagenic density in the dermis and locally strengthen the collagen network
I don’t think enhancing cross linking would be helpful to PE.

A known pde 5 inhibitor (tadalafil) decreaes collagen content in penile tissues concomitantly with increasing its smooth muscle content ,making the penis more healthy
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17888043
“Tadalafil also normalized the increase in penile shaft collagen content, and the reduction in corporal smooth muscle cell (SMC) content, SMC/collagen, and replication index, and improved the lower collagen III/I ratio and the increase in apoptotic index, caused by CNR, compared with sham operation. “

Even the ‘backbone’ of chemical PE (PGE 1) has an inhibitory effect on collagen
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7861547
“PGE1 suppresses the induction of collagen synthesis by transforming growth factor-beta 1 in human corpus cavernosum smooth muscle. “

What I’m trying to say is even though I don’t feel excessively reducing collagen production is of best interest, increasing it is no good either.


Starting stats: 6.4" / 5.6" Current Stats: 7.4" / 5.8" Short term goal: 7" / 6" Long term goal: 8" / 6.5"

It depends where it is and what kind, I suppose. ‘Optimal collagen density’ sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by marinera
It depends where it is and what kind, I suppose. ‘Optimal collagen density’ sounds good to me.

Sounds good to me too if we want to maintain joint health,strong blood vessels ,etc or when we’re done with PE, but not when we want to alter the fibrous tissue . I’m not saying this is the absolute truth, it is just what makes sense , at least to me.


Starting stats: 6.4" / 5.6" Current Stats: 7.4" / 5.8" Short term goal: 7" / 6" Long term goal: 8" / 6.5"

Tunica Albuginea is made of connective tissue, if you enlarge TA you have more collagenous tissue. The links you posted are referring to collagen in the smooth muscle and fibrotic tissue, that’s my understanding. Anyway SG can enlighten both of us I guess.

a different way to look at the problem?

Hi Allin, Thanks for the post and for the research.

Your first reference would seem to support my theory that for PE purposes, Vit C would be beneficial. What we are trying to do with the application of tension over time is to pull apart the collagen strands, which the body would then build back up and strengthen, The cross linking is what we are trying to rip apart, more or less, and thereby cause tissue remodeling. To look at it another way, if we were to want to add 3” of length, we would need to generate a considerable amount of new collagen. That can only be made from protein with Vitamin C as a co factor.

I have not checked Pub Med as you have done, so I appreciate your highlighting those studies. I will take a look at them soon. What caused me to bring up this point is a number of soft tissue injury cases that I have dealt with, along with a few cardio vascular cases. In the soft tissue cases, they all have had the same basic issue. That was long term pain in either the elbow, shoulder, or knee, that was resolved quickly with the supplementation of 5 to 6 grams per day of Vitamin C. In the cardio vascular case, one patient had 22 stents in 4 arteries, and was not in good condition. With the supplementation of Vitamin C at a dosage of 6 grams per day, chest pain was relieved in one day, and so far, there has been no increase in plaque. While these cases are clinical as opposed to research,and there is no way to quantify the increase in collagen, the fact that relief was obtained so quickly seems quite significant.

As another example, when one wants to build muscle, then exercise is how that is accomplished. When we exercise, we are tearing down muscle, and response of the body is to replace it and add a bit more for protection in the future. Therefore, body builders but a good deal of effort into their protein supplementation, and to a lesser degree, vitamin and mineral supplementation. Their object is to make available to the body, that which it needs to replace what was torn down.

When it comes to collagen, there is a LOT of collagen in the body. One of the things that I have not given a lot of though to, is how collagen is allocated in the body, if the supply is limited. It may well be that it is “first come, first served” as is the case in most neurotransmitters and most hormones. It is something that I am chewing on.

The next question is how does one quantify in a clinical setting ones basal levels of Vitamin C? Since we don’t make Vitamin C, and it is an essential Vitamin (meaning that we must have it, and it must come from our diet since we don’t make it), how does one tell if some one is drastically short of Vitamin C, and how does one tell if someone has plenty? The answer is that since we don’t make it, it just depends on our diet and our supplements. Going back to my various experiences, for those with the soft tissue injuries, the fact that relief was obtained in a day, is indicative that those people were rather short of Vitamin C. Indeed, it also seems to strongly indicate that their levels of Vitamin C have been low for a long time, and may be part of how their injury happened.

As to the cross linking of collagen, this is what we are attempting to disrupt when tension is applied. That it is rebuilt is how growth happens. So, it seems normal to me, as growth is the desired outcome.

There is another item that I have been pondering for a while, and that is thyroid hormone. Most physicians do not give too much concern over inadequate levels of thyroid hormone, unless the TSH levels are quite low. There is a difference of opinion in the medical community about the action levels of TSH. The new philosophy is that TSH levels should be near 2. The anti aging crowd, says perhaps 1, and the old line endocrinologists say “nothing to worry about until you hit 10. All in all, quite a large range of opinion. In my own experience, I have noticed that when TSH levels are below 5, healing is slowed, and sometimes it is quite noticeable. There really is nothing new there, but what it does bring to the forefront of PE, is that we are all working to achieve a particular goal, that may be substantially more difficult for those that have lower thyroid levels.

Inasmuch as the reach of this board is quite widespread, and since the PE process all by itself is a long term effort, where many fail for any number of reasons, it seems that whatever can be done to be supportive on a generalized basis would be a nice thing to do. Hence, my posting.

I look forward to hearing your comments.

Stage

Originally Posted by alin
hi there stagestop

i don’t want to deviate the discussion but your post regarding vitamin c brought my attention .

I think is clear that vitamin C is helpful in maintaining a healthy body, but when linked to PE I don’t think it would be very helpful. One anecdotal experience was a post made by bib that said something like he made sure to not take in very much vitamin C to help with gains.

Some studies show that vitamin C increases collagen production and collagen crosslinking.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505499
“Exogenous VitC supply could thus contribute to the maintenance of optimal collagenic density in the dermis and locally strengthen the collagen network
I don’t think enhancing cross linking would be helpful to PE.

A known pde 5 inhibitor (tadalafil) decreaes collagen content in penile tissues concomitantly with increasing its smooth muscle content ,making the penis more healthy
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17888043
“Tadalafil also normalized the increase in penile shaft collagen content, and the reduction in corporal smooth muscle cell (SMC) content, SMC/collagen, and replication index, and improved the lower collagen III/I ratio and the increase in apoptotic index, caused by CNR, compared with sham operation. “

Even the ‘backbone’ of chemical PE (PGE 1) has an inhibitory effect on collagen
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7861547
“PGE1 suppresses the induction of collagen synthesis by transforming growth factor-beta 1 in human corpus cavernosum smooth muscle. “

What I’m trying to say is even though I don’t feel excessively reducing collagen production is of best interest, increasing it is no good either.

Originally Posted by stagestop
Hi Allin, Thanks for the post and for the research.

Your first reference would seem to support my theory that for PE purposes, Vit C would be beneficial. What we are trying to do with the application of tension over time is to pull apart the collagen strands, which the body would then build back up and strengthen, The cross linking is what we are trying to rip apart, more or less, and thereby cause tissue remodeling. To look at it another way, if we were to want to add 3” of length, we would need to generate a considerable amount of new collagen. That can only be made from protein with Vitamin C as a co factor.

I have not checked Pub Med as you have done, so I appreciate your highlighting those studies. I will take a look at them soon. What caused me to bring up this point is a number of soft tissue injury cases that I have dealt with, along with a few cardio vascular cases. In the soft tissue cases, they all have had the same basic issue. That was long term pain in either the elbow, shoulder, or knee, that was resolved quickly with the supplementation of 5 to 6 grams per day of Vitamin C. In the cardio vascular case, one patient had 22 stents in 4 arteries, and was not in good condition. With the supplementation of Vitamin C at a dosage of 6 grams per day, chest pain was relieved in one day, and so far, there has been no increase in plaque. While these cases are clinical as opposed to research,and there is no way to quantify the increase in collagen, the fact that relief was obtained so quickly seems quite significant.

As another example, when one wants to build muscle, then exercise is how that is accomplished. When we exercise, we are tearing down muscle, and response of the body is to replace it and add a bit more for protection in the future. Therefore, body builders but a good deal of effort into their protein supplementation, and to a lesser degree, vitamin and mineral supplementation. Their object is to make available to the body, that which it needs to replace what was torn down.

When it comes to collagen, there is a LOT of collagen in the body. One of the things that I have not given a lot of though to, is how collagen is allocated in the body, if the supply is limited. It may well be that it is “first come, first served” as is the case in most neurotransmitters and most hormones. It is something that I am chewing on.

The next question is how does one quantify in a clinical setting ones basal levels of Vitamin C? Since we don’t make Vitamin C, and it is an essential Vitamin (meaning that we must have it, and it must come from our diet since we don’t make it), how does one tell if some one is drastically short of Vitamin C, and how does one tell if someone has plenty? The answer is that since we don’t make it, it just depends on our diet and our supplements. Going back to my various experiences, for those with the soft tissue injuries, the fact that relief was obtained in a day, is indicative that those people were rather short of Vitamin C. Indeed, it also seems to strongly indicate that their levels of Vitamin C have been low for a long time, and may be part of how their injury happened.

As to the cross linking of collagen, this is what we are attempting to disrupt when tension is applied. That it is rebuilt is how growth happens. So, it seems normal to me, as growth is the desired outcome.

Stage

Hi again Stage, thank you for your time and effort providing an in detail explanation.

Regarding the collagen issue I will post here a phrase from the chemical PE patent :

”The inventor hypothesizes that an important reason why penis growth slows and stops after several months in all patients he has observed who have enlarged their penises is because the rate of new collagen formed is faster than the rate that it is being removed and that this hypertrophy of the structural collagen fibers which the inventor has observed in all patients whose growth has slowed, must reduce the effectiveness of any further biomechanical stimulation.”

Basing on the above statement, one could think that collagen is produced enough in response to biomechanical stimulation without needing to enhance its production, even more the patent inventor states that it is produced much more and degraded less than what’s needed to sustain continuous growth, so one would actually need to optimize the balance between collagen production and collagen degrading, shifting more towards elements that reduce collagen production or increase its degradation.


Starting stats: 6.4" / 5.6" Current Stats: 7.4" / 5.8" Short term goal: 7" / 6" Long term goal: 8" / 6.5"

The below study is saying that even if a compund increases the length and weight of a fibrocartilage it doesn’t mean it necessarily increases collagen content , but quite the contrary(at least in the below study) it reduced collagen content

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8756561

“Relaxin administration significantly increased the length (140 +/- 6%) and weight (170 +/- 9%) of the interpubic fibrocartilage “

” Relaxin administered alone reduced the total collagen content by 64 +/- 4% “


Starting stats: 6.4" / 5.6" Current Stats: 7.4" / 5.8" Short term goal: 7" / 6" Long term goal: 8" / 6.5"

Originally Posted by alin
Hi again Stage, thank you for your time and effort providing an in detail explanation.

Regarding the collagen issue I will post here a phrase from the chemical PE patent :

”The inventor hypothesizes that an important reason why penis growth slows and stops after several months in all patients he has observed who have enlarged their penises is because the rate of new collagen formed is faster than the rate that it is being removed and that this hypertrophy of the structural collagen fibers which the inventor has observed in all patients whose growth has slowed, must reduce the effectiveness of any further biomechanical stimulation.”

Basing on the above statement, one could think that collagen is produced enough in response to biomechanical stimulation without needing to enhance its production, even more the patent inventor states that it is produced much more and degraded less than what’s needed to sustain continuous growth, so one would actually need to optimize the balance between collagen production and collagen degrading, shifting more towards elements that reduce collagen production or increase its degradation.

I think this is key information I’m just not exactly sure how to interpret it yet.
Is this higher rate of collagen production normal or a product of the chem part of the program ?
You would think persistant overtraining would ultimately increase degradation ?

May I ask if you are a physician Stagestop?

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:01 PM.