Why doesn't science support jelqing

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?

Where’s the proof?

Traction devices are for sale. Jelqing is not. So there’s no reason to conduct any studies on it.

Jelqing didn’t do a whole lot for me gainswise. I got EQ out of it though.

I had the same question myself, would be nice to have some science in it.

I believe that it might not be a interesting topic in the medical community right now, but I guess that will become one with more time. (Anyway, is just a guess)

I continue to hold the belief that “girth-oriented” exercises like jelqing, clamping, and pumping increase EQ only. Increased EQ tends to mean increased “girth” in most guys, even though what you’ve really done is filled your dick more to its capacity.

I think stretches of all sorts are what really add the size in both directions - length and girth. So a combination of this and “girth-oriented” exercises (EQ exercises in my opinion) is how you really gain size.

If science actually studied it, it would support it.

But like it was said before, what drives most Science these days is the profit motive. Someone who thinks they can make money off of it, will lay down the money for the research. There will never be any money in jelquing, so don’t hold your breath waiting for a study.

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.

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.

Fair enough, I concede your point.

Several of you beat me to it; it’s a financial thing.

Imagine trying to persuade the boys in Washington to fund a study on PE.

I can’t remember where the hell I read it, but I’m sure I recall something about one small study that produced some prima facie evidence. I could be wrong though, I’ve never been able to find it again.

Science? What kind of fucking nonsense is that?

There’s some really big religious forums out there. How could science not accept our Phallic Gods?

It’s also a slightly embarassing topic to conduct a study on, don’t want to mess up one’s reputation. Kind of like how very few adult actors are taken seriously in “real” acting.

It’s the thing where they tell you that your expertise is outstanding and highly desired but they can’t pay you a dime for it. The goofy guys with horns and one or two stuttering problems.