Length gains -- why 20-40 erection jelq

Can somebody please explain to me why jelqing at a low erection (20%-40%) is better for length than jelqing at a higher erection (70%)??

I am interested in the mechanics.

It’s pretty straight forward. Jelqing at low erection provides for better stretching action, similar to why you do your manual stretches while flaccid. Jelqing at higher erection allows for greater internal shaft pressure build up and that pumps up the girth.

Ryan.. For length gains you could work up to 60-75% erections. Most of my gains in length have come from erections at 90%+. So you may want to experiment a bit (not suggested untill you are confident that your dick is tough enough) with higher levels aswell.

As far as the mechanics, Im not sure there is any scientific data which can tell us that jelqing at 20-40% increases length ONLY. Even with a low erection you could buildup more fluid pressure by tightening your grip. I agree with gprent that jelqing low allows you to stretch more.

According to scientists, enlarging the penis isn’t possible. Almost all things regarding to PE is speculation and personal experience. Stop worrying about scientific proof.

If I believed in those scientists then I wouldnt be here. ;-)

BTW the place where i live has a very large community of doctors,surgeons etc and a friend of mine is at who studies at Medical school once said to me that a teacher of his actually expalined how a person could increase penis size. Well his teacher suggested a good heat wrap and a gentle massage starting from the base to the glan. Maybe the scientists do believe that PE is possible.

I think that the scientists know that PE is possible but they go where everybody else in this country goes and that ‘s wherever the money is located. I’m sure in Arab countries that the docs do not tell their patients, “Jelqing doesn’t work, it’s an old wives tale.”

Let me predict something:
Once the medical establishment figures out a way to make PE profitable for them, they will believe in PE.
I predict that by 2012 or so, you will have a subset of urologists break off and specialize in PE, just as you have a subset of internists and endocrinologists breaking off and specializing in weight management now (the irony there is that the scientific establishment knows that diets don’t work in order to maintain weight loss gains!)

By 2015, you will have entire fellowships devoted to PE, just as you now have entire fellowships devoted to plastic surgery.
They will probably call it plastic physiological exercise medicine or PPEM for short!

RB

This will never happen due the simple fact that most people don’t have the discipline and issues with dick size to do PE.

That’s what people say about weightlifting, running, and dieting and those are 3 huge money-making industries!!

When the money is right, PE will absolutely be pushed on the mainstream by those serving to profit — businessman, physicians, pharmaceutical companies, etc..

Let me ask you a question: If I asked you 10 years ago if you thought that ENZYTE commercials would make it to primetime TV, would you have believed it?

I know I wouldn’t have believed it..

First come the ENZYTE commercials and then the PE commercials will follow..

The dieting industry started out the same way..
A few decades ago nobody would have predicted the rapid rise of Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig as heavyweight corporations.

I wonder what ‘ENZYTE’ is, could be that this has something to do with the fact that I am no yank ;) .

Gash we hijacked this thread. lol

I wonder where we would be as a society if everyone stopped worry about scientifc proof.

Sorry I didn’t see this thread until Rem bumped it (thanks).

Bird, this forum is filled with scientists.

Scientist (via Merriam-Webster):
a person learned in science and especially natural science : a scientific investigator

Science (via Merriam-Webster):
1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study <the science of theology> b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <have it down to a science>
3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE
4 : a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws

You’ll recognize these scientists as the members that are dedicated to study, test and (as in entry #4, above) reconcile the practical ends with the phenomena that we observe. The “scientists” that you claim deny the efficacy of PE aren’t really scientists, because they cannot be citing any evidence or studies, otherwise they would know differently. I’ll say that the majority of people here consume the knowledge that is being tested and shared by the scientists, but the best scientists that I can find that are doing legitimate work on natural PE and PE in general are here in this forum.

I’m generally skeptical that the haters you refer to are really scientists, but rather MDs. While maybe a bit deluded to the potential of and time line to commercialization by the medical community, Ryan is right about one thing in the medical community: they are unlikely to endorse it if they cannot capitalize on it. Also take into account the dangers associated with PE, and you’d be hard-pressed to find an MD that would risk their professional reputations on it. Look no further than Girtha’s urologist, if you need proof.

Let’s just say, they don’t teach med students about penis enlargement.

I hope PE doesn’t go mainstream, what would the average be then? 8x6?

If you explain it this way I am a PE scientist too. The type of science I meant is the mainstream science, the type they teach on schools, university’s etc.