Thunder's Place

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

Why doesn't science support jelqing

12

Originally Posted by scienceguy106
OK, it’s been a topic of debate over and over again on this site, but this is not quite a fair assessment.

While it’s true that a lot of what is researched has financial motivations, you’re talking there about stuff done by the pharmaceutical industry itself. But there is also a whole world of basic and applied “knowledge for the sake of knowledge” stuff out there that is funded by sources other than people trying to make a profit off of it.

National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Science Foundation (NSF) and other government and non-profits fund stuff like this all the time. Think about things like research on bird migration or astronomy as extreme examples. Think about things like research on dieting
or the dangers of radiation as more subtle ones.


Nobody is making any money off of saying dieting, exercise, or staying away from strong radiation is good for you. Nobody is making money off of knowledge about bird migration either. But people do the research because they believe (mistakenly or not) that this knowledge about nature will be good for society. A jelqing study may fall into this category - some urologist may find it interesting to understand natural forms of correcting ED, and may try a study like this.


Woah! Slow down cowpoke. Are you trying to tell us that dieting is not a profitable area of research? Pardon my incredulity, but do you realize how huge the dieting industry is? How many millions of dollars it pulls in each year?

The space program and the study of astronomy is also lucrative. Do you realize how much space junk, much of it profit generating, is floating around the earth? Do you realize how much of this particular study is done with military advancement in mind? Studies about the universe outside of this planet have potential profits with tecnology and the future. They aren’t only done for the sake of knowing. If that you can be sure.

And the study of animal behavior helps us to gain an understanding on the impact we have on the planet and that effects regulations that effect businesses all over the planet. Humans do nothing that they do not benefit from, in some way. Nature of the beast.

[/QUOTE]

There are problems with that scenario of course - for one, there are already safe ways of treating ED, and a urologist, understanding the risks of jelqing, may follow the main tenant of the hypocratic oath (do no harm!) and shy away from this. There is also the fact that funding for research on penis size and function are considered peripheral and less important (rightfully so) than things like cancer and genetic disorders. I’m not talking here about research on drugs for cancer that will make pharmaceuticals money - I’m talking about basic research we do in the lab on why cancer occurs in the first place. Things that pharmaceutical companies don’t want to touch right now because (you guessed it) there’s too much of a risk that they won’t make money.

So before everyone goes on another tirade bashing scientists for not researching PE because we “just want to make money” remember that most of us live barely above the poverty line and research things for knowledge sake because somebody (other than a for-profit company) believes that the knowledge will benefit humanity.
[/QUOTE]

Look, I have gout. It’s genetic. It’s very painful and can be very harmful if not regulated. You know what the DR gives you for it to cure an attack? Anti-inflamatories.
Do you know how to keep it from flaring up? Use mederation in the consumption of things that contain purines, like beer and shrimp. Eating dark cherries helps insure that it doesn’t flare up. So does keeping your left toe warm, not letting it get cold. If you feel a flare coming on, you take afew advil. It’s an anti-inflamatory.

Does anyone really make money from these things, except for advil if you get a flare? No.

So, do you see ads for these remedies? No. You have to look them up on-line. The Dr office gives you a list of all but advil. They don’t tell you about that because they want to make money off of you if youi do get a flare up.
What do you see ads for? A perscription medicine, that the companies do make money off of, and that has all kinds of side effects.

Science doesn’t care about natural, free, ways of making your dick bigger. There are a lot of natural, herbal, remedies for a lot of things, but the scientific community tries to demonize them because they can’t make money off of them..the same as they try to cast doubt of PE. If they could come up with a drug that really would make your dick bigger, especially if you had to take it regularly to maintain, they’d be all over research for that because they could see a profitr from it. That is simply the way it is.

I am not sure about length,but I have definitely gained girth by doing erect jelqing.

Originally Posted by devilknight666
Are you trying to tell us that dieting is not a profitable area of research? Pardon my incredulity, but do you realize how huge the dieting industry is? How many millions of dollars it pulls in each year?

The space program and the study of astronomy is also lucrative. Do you realize how much space junk, much of it profit generating, is floating around the earth? Do you realize how much of this particular study is done with military advancement in mind? Studies about the universe outside of this planet have potential profits with tecnology and the future. They aren’t only done for the sake of knowing. If that you can be sure.

And the study of animal behavior helps us to gain an understanding on the impact we have on the planet and that effects regulations that effect businesses all over the planet. Humans do nothing that they do not benefit from, in some way. Nature of the beast.


Dieting industry is huge. Pharmaceutical industry is huge. Aerospace industry is huge. Yes. I get it. People with the potential to make money off these things put a lot of money into them. But as someone who has worked in basic research science for years, I can tell you from first-hand experience that there is an ENORMOUS difference between private industry and basic science.

There is a difference between NIH researchers demonstrating that eating more vegetables has positive health benefits and a for-profit food company showing that eating their microwavable diet meals makes people lose weight.

There is a difference between university researchers showing that cancer cells have mutations in a certain gene and a pharmaceutical company that conducts a clinical trial with their new cancer-killing drug.

Yes, a logical mind can put together the connections between the different players in the above scenarios and even make a Glen Beck-esque chalkboard drawing of how it’s Obama’s fault. But the reality is - and I can tell you from experience - that pharma and other industries don’t have any stake in or desire to fund basic research questions like discovering a new cancer-associated gene.

Once basic researchers have conducted enough basic studies to show some idea might work, then pharma comes in and uses that idea to try to make a drug and a profit. But the basic research scientists don’t see any of that money. We make discoveries that are of interest to the population in general. Industry sifts through those discoveries after the fact and picks which ones they think will make them money. The two parts of the system are absolutely dependent on each other but are absolutely separate, with a definite and unmet need for a proper interface. There are even a whole bunch of laws and peer review processes that are meant to ensure that people with a financial stake in a discovery are treated as biased, and rightfully so.

The basic researchers do indeed have motives like everyone else. We are motivated by the fact that if we make discoveries that are novel and exciting, we are more qualified for promotions or not-for-profit funding. And to put it into terms guys here would understand, “novel and exciting” in the world of penis science could equally include a pill that would make your dick bigger and an exercise that would make it bigger, because either way we get our promotion and we don’t get a piece of any intrinsic profit generated by spreading that knowledge to the world.


I'm a disciple of science.

Originally Posted by scienceguy106
Dieting industry is huge. Pharmaceutical industry is huge. Aerospace industry is huge. Yes. I get it. People with the potential to make money off these things put a lot of money into them. But as someone who has worked in basic research science for years, I can tell you from first-hand experience that there is an ENORMOUS difference between private industry and basic science.

There is a difference between NIH researchers demonstrating that eating more vegetables has positive health benefits and a for-profit food company showing that eating their microwavable diet meals makes people lose weight.

There is a difference between university researchers showing that cancer cells have mutations in a certain gene and a pharmaceutical company that conducts a clinical trial with their new cancer-killing drug.

Yes, a logical mind can put together the connections between the different players in the above scenarios and even make a Glen Beck-esque chalkboard drawing of how it’s Obama’s fault. But the reality is - and I can tell you from experience - that pharma and other industries don’t have any stake in or desire to fund basic research questions like discovering a new cancer-associated gene.

Once basic researchers have conducted enough basic studies to show some idea might work, then pharma comes in and uses that idea to try to make a drug and a profit. But the basic research scientists don’t see any of that money. We make discoveries that are of interest to the population in general. Industry sifts through those discoveries after the fact and picks which ones they think will make them money. The two parts of the system are absolutely dependent on each other but are absolutely separate, with a definite and unmet need for a proper interface. There are even a whole bunch of laws and peer review processes that are meant to ensure that people with a financial stake in a discovery are treated as biased, and rightfully so.

The basic researchers do indeed have motives like everyone else. We are motivated by the fact that if we make discoveries that are novel and exciting, we are more qualified for promotions or not-for-profit funding. And to put it into terms guys here would understand, “novel and exciting” in the world of penis science could equally include a pill that would make your dick bigger and an exercise that would make it bigger, because either way we get our promotion and we don’t get a piece of any intrinsic profit generated by spreading that knowledge to the world.

All of that aside, I do question the physiological premise of jelqing. Most people do it way below erection level, and the realised internal pressure never comes close to paralleling even typical erectile parameters.

Yeah, and training below your max pulse will never increase your max pulse, eh?


regards, mgus

Taped onto the dashboard of a car at a junkyard, I once found the following: "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." The car was crashed.

Primary goal: To have an EQ above average (i.e. streetsmart, compassionate about life and happy) Secondary goal: to make an anagram of my signature denoting how I feel about my gains

Originally Posted by mgus

Yeah, and training below your max pulse will never increase your max pulse, eh?

I never thought of it this way, but I think you’re on to something. Perhaps the act of pushing blood into the penis is enough to make more blood want to be in there more of the time.


I'm a disciple of science.

Originally Posted by bsem
If jelqing actually works (and I accept that it does because I can’t imagine a site like this would thrive with no results), then why doesn’t the medical community acknowledge it? Or does it? There have even been studies that support that traction can work, yet I never hear about any scientific proof that jelqing works. What’s the deal?

Because you can’t sell it. However, science backs up all these pills you can take that will “make you bigger” which if they even work is only temporary. The best the manual penis enlargement industry can do is sell you penis pumps, extenders, weights, ect. But they wouldn’t make nearly as much on you as surgery or a constant supply of male enhancement magic pills.

Top
12

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:03 AM.