Marinera: Thank you for the insightful post. You made some great points … and I wouldn’t have known English isn’t your native tounge if you didn’t point it out ;)
First of all, I thanks you, Iguana and Remek, for your hard work and this interesting thread.
That said, I have some perplexity about your theory.
First of, does this theory implies that if someone has done only manual stretching, than he will have a longer tunica but pretty the same smooth muscles than before?
Not exactly. It does imply that if someone focuses on stretching and hanging 100 percent (no jelqs, ulis, or other girth exercises), then their smooth muscle will be worked out less — and possibly much less — than their tunica will.
I agree with t3 that this is the weakness in our theory. If you we had to break it down into two parts, our theory mainly states:
1) When you PE, your growth is mainly being limited by two things: The SM and the tunica.
2) You can focus on one of these two with different types of exercises (girth for SM, length for tunica).
I am 90 percent sure that Part 1 is true (the research points to it being the case, my experience does, and so does the anecdotal evidence we’ve looked at). On contrast, I am probably only around 75 percent sure that part 2 is true. That leaves 25 percent of my mind agreeing with you.
The other 75 percent of my mind is applying logic (or at least the way I see it) to the situation. On a very basic level, we know that stretching clearly stretches both the tunica and the smooth muscle. We know this because both have to grow for the penis to grow. We also know that the tunica is much closer to the point of impact of the stress (the hand stretching, the extender, the hanger, whatever). Accordingly, it is taking more of the pressure than the inner tissues are (i.e. the smooth muscle). That said, the smooth muscle is no doubt receiving some of the stress, so it will grow on some level.
Taking this logic and applying it to girth exercises, the stress is coming from the inside rather than the outside. So, for example, when you do a ULI, the blood goes into the penis, fills up the SM, and completely relaxes it. The SM is taking most of the stress here because it is at the epicenter of the stress — inside the penis. It is directly impacted by the ULI. The tunica is indirectly impacted by the ULI due to the SM relaxing. That said, the tunica can indeed be stretched by a ULI. Think of a priapism — the SM is uncontrollably relaxed and pushed at its limit for so long that the tunica is getting an amazing workout (and thus can lead to megalophallus)
The second point is that your hypothesis about the relation between [BPFSL>>BPEL]-> [less smooth muscle than needed] doesn’t cut-off the role of the blood in filling the void space: i.e., you are supposing that
a) you have to make your smooth muscle bigger;
b) you have to fill this more muscle with blood;
now, let’s apply the Occam' Razor: could the more blood alone fill that gap? I’d say yes, for two reason:
1) smooth muscles are really elastic, by what I know; should not be a problem to expand them a little more than in the “pre length gain state”;
2) those who have BPFSL>>BPEL, are usually able to reach BPFSL when clamping - and we can’t suppose that smooth muscle grow instantaneously, agree?
So, if your body “learn” how to push this little more blood in the penis, this fact alone can explain why girth routine are good choices in that situation. The hypothesis on smooth muscle growth is not required to explain the same phenomena: this is a consequence, not the cause, of the filled gap.
About point 2, I’m not sure if everyone who has a high BPFSL can reach that during clamping. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but I haven’t read anything to suggest that it’s common place. Does it happen for you?
Either way, I think (???) we’re agreeing that in this case you’d want to focus on a girth routine.
On the other hand, thinking of a tunica too little for the smooth muscle inside, is a little unnatural: think that, if it were, you could not achieve a real 100% erections, because the tunica, exceptionally strong as you know, doesn’t permit to smooth muscle to fully expand: so, tunica has to be the limiting factor, in any case.
I disagree. I think in this case the erection will indeed be 100 percent. The reason I say this is that an erection, the way I see it, is simply the smooth muscle relaxing enough to press against the tunica. In turn, this causes the veins to be “shut off.”
Whay way do you see it?
Finally, I agree with memento about the studies regarding the hypothetical relation [smooth muscle lackness -> ED]; I think that, by what we know, only the inverse relation is somewhat proven :[ED->smooth muscle lackness] - due to progressive atrophy.
I think it would be somewhat hard to prove the opposite the case. That said, we do know that the relaxation of the SM causes an erection. If the SM can’t relax all the way (either by overtraining or presumably there not being enough there), then there isn’t an erection.