Thunder's Place

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

Girth theory: Pumping vs. clamping

Originally Posted by Para-Goomba
One question, pudendum: I don’t understand why you’re saying girth gains through pumping are easier to comprehend (physiologically) if one pumps with a low level of erection. As the negative pressure expands the tunica, won’t it eventually reach the same level of low compliance as when one begins pumping with a full erection — and isn’t this the point beyond which further expansion is necessary for gains to occur? Obviously I’m misunderstanding something; any clarification would be appreciated :)


Originally Posted by ticktickticker
Doesn’t make much sense to me:

If a guy has a rock hard erection that means that his tunica is stretched a lot.

(Of course the stress can be increased by jelq - pump - clamp).


My confusion comes from my attempts to understand a confusing situation. That is, how, if at all, does an external and indirect force (negative pressure from pumping) induce enough circumferential (or longitudinal, if you believe) tension in a rock hard, very low compliant tunica. I’m having problem getting my hand around it (which in my mind is a good thing, as my wife says). I have a pretty good idea of living systems and it doesn’t make sense to me.

So let me turn the tables. I come to you after 8 months of PE with 1.25” increase in length (now 7.25” BPEL) and 1.1” increase in girth (6.1” EG). I’ve had plateaus and have taken decon breaks to push beyond. I’m curious about pumping. Never used it and wonder if I could expect any further gains with it. I have rock hard erections at peak; a trophy to my PE success. I not sure it will work. Tell me, do you think I should try it? Should I expect gains? Do the potential gains out way the risks? If you think I should try it, tell me why and how do you think these changes occur in light of our understanding of tension-induced changes in connective tissue.

Clampers don’t get off the hook either. I’ve never clamped. I understand the effect of direct intense internal pressure-generated tension on the tunica. However, I’ve heard all the potential problems of putting a hose clamp on the only “little guy” that I own. I’m concerned that putting this clamp on my rock hard base could potentially fracture my tunica (this may be a unjustified concern; but I still have it). Do the potential gains out way the risks? Do you think I can make gains any greater than with jelqs, squeezes or slinkies that I use now? Or will I just increase collagen fiber diameter faster and plateau quicker? If you think I should try it, tell me why and how do you think these changes occur in light of our understanding of tension-induced changes in connective tissue.

I’ve tried to understand but can’t. What can you tell me.

Originally Posted by wadzilla
Mr Happy,
And, regarding the doctors’ dismissal of NPE, few if any of them conducted any research of their own whatsoever (in fact, one of the few NPE studies I’ve ever seen - which is also linked here - DID show gains, the defendants lost the (mail fraud) case based on the issue of *permanence*, not that gains never occurred. . Again, I believe they’re dismissing it based on the misunderstanding of what we do. They’re arguing that the penis cannot experience hypertrophy…….and most of us agree with that.


Does “N” mean nonsurgical?

There are a number of us in the medical professionals on this forum. We don’t dismiss it and use PE with great success.

Why are the urologist (and plastic surgeons) quiet about penile enhancement, other than by surgery (do you hear the crickets)? First, urologists and psychologists are still fighting over what is the “normal” length of the penis and why anyone would want to be bigger than normal. Second, urologists and plastic surgeons have procedures which they have available to increase penis size. They are, however, expensive and have questionable success and safety. Third, these same surgeons do not have a vested interest in “cheaper” methods like extenders and exercise programs. So why even study them. There is little to no grant money available for cosmetic enhancement procedures from government sources. A lot of medical research money comes from drug companies; they have no interest here. Unless the extender and/or penis enhancement programs want to pay for studies, the chances of any future research on these methods (which we know work) are very slim. Oh well. BTW - who cares? I don’t. PE works, why do we need professionals to say it does or does not.

I should have though of that. It’s only natural that it should be called that.

Originally Posted by pudendum
Chances of any future research on these methods (which we know work) are very slim.

In fact, chances are zero, considering the market which is running perfectly for the companies - with, or without proof of efficacy.

Pills, for sure, are 100% ineffective. Nevertheless, the market is gigantic.

Npe :) which works works well for the companies as well. So don’t expect research money for that kind of stuff.


Later - ttt

Pressure, quot;negative pressurequot;, and pressure gradients

Originally Posted by pudendum
My confusion comes from my attempts to understand a confusing situation. That is, how, if at all, does an external and indirect force (negative pressure from pumping) induce enough circumferential (or longitudinal, if you believe) tension in a rock hard, very low compliant tunica.

I am tempted to assume that you might be misunderstanding the pressure story.

In fact, pressure is relative, we just call atmospheric pressure zero, truth is that atmospheric pressure is 760 mm Hg.

Pressure effects are in reality pressure gradient effects:

In the penis inside the tunica the pressure may be 200 mmHg, plus 760 mmHg atmospheric pressure equals 960 mmHg. Compared to atmospheric pressure you have a pressure gradient across the tunica of 200 mmHg.

If you decrease atmospheric pressure in the tube by 100 mm Hg, then the pressure outside of your dick (in the tube) equals 760 - 100 = 660 mmHg.

The total pressure gradient (from the air in the tube to the corpora cavernosa) then is 960 - 660 = 300 mmHg and therefore the wall stress in the tunica is increased accordingly.

Same concept holds if you set atmospheric pressure to zero instead of 760 mmHg: then you obtain, for the pressure gradient:

200 - (-100) = 300 mmHg.

Unfortunately, this gradient is across tunica + subcutaneous tissue between tunica and skin + skin. Therefore, not all of the -100 mmHg will effectively stretch the tunica, but only an (unknown) fraction of it.

Again, we will never know exactly, because, as you said, the (our) medical community has no interest investigating issues that are not funded by research grants and have no market potential.


Later - ttt

Originally Posted by pudendum
I not sure it will work. Tell me, do you think I should try it? Should I expect gains? Do the potential gains out way the risks?

Risks of pumping are minimal if you stick to the guidelines set out in this forum.

Risks of clamping are a bit higher but tolerable if you use cable clamps and some soft tissue underneath ( I ucually use a scuni hair tie cut and wrap it around the base of my dick. So there is a soft interface between the hard clamp and your ROCKHARD dick. You may want to use more than one clamps to increase the effect. What I like most is the stress in the glans which becomes rock hard under these conditions as well (not normally as you know, since it is connected to the spongious chamber which is a low pressure one. Why? Because if the urethra were running trough one corpus cavernosum ejaculation would be impossible.


Later - ttt

Originally Posted by ticktickticker
What I like most is the stress in the glans which becomes rock hard under these conditions as well (not normally as you know, since it is connected to the spongious chamber which is a low pressure one. Why? Because if the urethra were running trough one corpus cavernosum ejaculation would be impossible.


I hope guys are listening here.

It would be an evolutionary disaster if the spongiosum was plumbed and boxed like the cavernosa. If it was, we’d all be ejaculating into our bladder. That just won’t work. We’d have died off as a species thousands and thousands of years ago.

So you guys that worry that your spongiosum isn’t showing gains, don’t worry. It’s suppose to be that way. That’s why it’s called corpus spongiosum.

Great point ttt

So you think I should clamp, eh.

Originally Posted by ticktickticker
Unfortunately, this gradient is across tunica + subcutaneous tissue between tunica and skin + skin. Therefore, not all of the -100 mmHg will effectively stretch the tunica, but only an (unknown) fraction of it.

Again, we will never know exactly, because, as you said, the (our) medical community has no interest investigating issues that are not funded by research grants and have no market potential.


I agree.

Pressure transmission across a tissue is related to its distensibiliy (compliance). This is seen most dramatically in the lung where things like severe pneumonia drastically decrease lung compliance. Even if the patient is on a ventilator with very high pressures to keep them alive, only a fraction of the pressures are transmitted across the lung to the heart. When lung compliance is normal, the same pressure would have a striking effect the hearts ability to fill with blood.

This is why I have questions about pumping’s effect on a maximally stretched (low compliance) tunica

Originally Posted by pudendum
I agree.

Pressure transmission across a tissue is related to it’s distensibiliy (compliance). This is seen most dramatically in the lung where things like severe pneumonia drastically decrease lung compliance. Even if the patient is on a ventilator with very high pressures to keep them alive, only a fraction of the pressures are transmitted across the lung to the heart. When lung compliance is normal, the same pressure would have a striking effect the hearts ability to fill with blood.

This is why I have questions about pumping’s effect on a maximally stretched (low compliance) tunica

I’ve got your point, and yes - I would suggest clamping rather than pumping. Pumping is fun but I am not so sure whether gains are permanent. Also, the doughnut effect is a drawback in my eyes.

Please allow me to suggest - whether you clamp or pump - since you made that excellent remark that “girth is circumferential length” I suppose that “never let is turtle” should apply for girth work as well. I am using scuni hair ties to maintain a moderate erection throughout the day and night.


Later - ttt

Originally Posted by pudendum

I have problems understanding how a negative pressure will cause further distension of the tunica, the target of your endeavor. At maximum erection with a very rock hard tunica, pumping at pressures not exceeding medically recommended levels (200 - 250 mmHg, 270 - 340 cmH2O, 7.9 - 9.8 inHg) would have minimal effect. You will not be able to elevate the tunica to increase blood volume in the cavernosa as the pressure will still be above arterial pressure (unless you’ve got untreated very high blood pressure). I see pumping only effect at this degree of erections to be on the tissue under the skin and over the tunica (subcutaneous tissue) filled with very loose connective tissue.

First let me admit I haven’t read this all the way through, I wanted to address this before I move on. Second, let me thank Pudendum for his contributions…really first class! Its great to have you here.

Now, let me understand this. I have always looked at the expansive forces on the tunica as a net effect. The expansive force of the blood pressure in the cavernosa…MINUS the atmospheric pressure compressing it inward.

So to use arbitrary numbers, if the pressure expanding the tunica outward was 7, and the atmospheric pressure compressing it inward was 2…you would have a net expansive force of 5, allowing for an erection. If you were to reduce the atmospheric pressure by 2, you would have a net expansive force of 7…causing a much harder erection and possibly some expansion from its normal volume (depending on the strength of the tunica).

Its the classic science experiment of taking a empty paint container, heat it to expand the gasses…tightly screw on the cover, then cool it. It will collapse like an invisible elephant stepped on it. The internal atmospheric pressure has been lowered, the external pressure remains the same (before they were in equilibrium), and pressure differential is enough to crush the metal container.

In the case of the tunica and the penis, its the same experiment, but in reverse.

Say you have a expansive force of say 5 (again, I’m using totally arbitrary numbers, because I don’t have the real ones :) ), you can increase it by EITHER clamping the “closed container” of the tunica(increasing internal pressure), OR decreasing the compressive force of the external atmospheric pressure, thereby increasing the net expansive force by DECREASING the compressive force of normal atmospheric pressure.

So lets say I use a clamping force of 2, added to my internal blood pressure in the cavernosa, I now have a net expansive force of 7. Let say instead of clamping I reduce the COMPRESSIVE force of the atmospheric pressure by 2…wouldn’t that produce the identical net expansive force to 7?

As far as I can see, by lowering the external atmospheric pressure, it is causing a “relative” increase of internal pressures, therefore producing a significant expansive force.

By working on this premise, I have always found that a maximum erection in the tube allows me to generate the greatest net expansive force with the least vacuum needed…and this is classic pumping doctrine. Further, I find by hard kageling, I can further cause expansion in the tube(increasing internal pressure), without having to increase vacuum levels.

My thinking is that my hardest erection isn’t enough to cause expansion of the tunica beyond its normal limits, but if I can decrease the COMPRESSIVE force of normal atmospheric pressure by using a small amount of vacuum force, I am causing a large enough change in the net expansive force to make changes to my tunica.

So, where do I have this wrong, because gains achieved by pumping tend to indicate that a increased net expansive force is indeed being produced.

Originally Posted by ticktickticker
Doesn’t make sense to me, either.

My impression from experience and after reasoning would be that the higher the pressure difference the better (higher) the wall stress in the tunica. Then, the positive pressure in the corpora would add to the negative pressure in the tube. With the advantage that the erection cavernous chamber pressure translates 100% into wall stress of the tunica while only a fraction of the decreased pressure in the tube would translate into wall stress.

Finally, I believe that girth gains require primarily tunica gains. Once the tunica becomes bigger the spongy tissue will easily fill it by expansion and probably both hypertrophy and hyperplasia.

I don’t see how it would only be a fraction.

I’m no Physics major, but it seems to me that the majority of the negation of the expansive force on the tunica would be produced by elastic force produced by the tissues external to the tunica…in other words, like a compressive sock that generates inward pressure against the tunica walls.

Intuitively, this would seem to increase as that compartment fills with edema…which is probably more reason why edema isn’t conducive to gains.

Originally Posted by sparkyx
First let me admit I haven’t read this all the way through, I wanted to address this before I move on. Second, let me thank Pudendum for his contributions…really first class! Its great to have you here.

Now, let me understand this. I have always looked at the expansive forces on the tunica as a net effect. The expansive force of the blood pressure in the cavernosa…MINUS the atmospheric pressure compressing it inward.

So to use arbitrary numbers, if the pressure expanding the tunica outward was 7, and the atmospheric pressure compressing it inward was 2…you would have a net expansive force of 5, allowing for an erection. If you were to reduce the atmospheric pressure by 2, you would have a net expansive force of 7…causing a much harder erection and possibly some expansion from its normal volume (depending on the strength of the tunica).

Its the classic science experiment of taking a empty paint container, heat it to expand the gasses…tightly screw on the cover, then cool it. It will collapse like an invisible elephant stepped on it. The internal atmospheric pressure has been lowered, the external pressure remains the same (before they were in equilibrium), and pressure differential is enough to crush the metal container.

In the case of the tunica and the penis, its the same experiment, but in reverse.

Say you have a expansive force of say 5 (again, I’m using totally arbitrary numbers, because I don’t have the real ones :) ), you can increase it by EITHER clamping the “closed container” of the tunica(increasing internal pressure), OR decreasing the compressive force of the external atmospheric pressure, thereby increasing the net expansive force by DECREASING the compressive force of normal atmospheric pressure.

So lets say I use a clamping force of 2, added to my internal blood pressure in the cavernosa, I now have a net expansive force of 7. Let say instead of clamping I reduce the COMPRESSIVE force of the atmospheric pressure by 2…wouldn’t that produce the identical net expansive force to 7?

As far as I can see, by lowering the external atmospheric pressure, it is causing a “relative” increase of internal pressures, therefore producing a significant expansive force.

By working on this premise, I have always found that a maximum erection in the tube allows me to generate the greatest net expansive force with the least vacuum needed…and this is classic pumping doctrine. Further, I find by hard kageling, I can further cause expansion in the tube(increasing internal pressure), without having to increase vacuum levels.

My thinking is that my hardest erection isn’t enough to cause expansion of the tunica beyond its normal limits, but if I can decrease the COMPRESSIVE force of normal atmospheric pressure by using a small amount of vacuum force, I am causing a large enough change in the net expansive force to make changes to my tunica.

So, where do I have this wrong, because gains achieved by pumping tend to indicate that a increased net expansive force is indeed being produced.


Having read your evolving and excellent treatise on Physiological Indicators (and other equally excellent posts and threads), I am honored to have your interchange.

ttt has argued and I have to agree that the transmission of pressure across a living organ (like the penis) is, unfortunately not as simple as the single compartment system in the paint can. The can is also filled with air, which is highly compressible and fluids are not. In addition, there is in essence a paint can in a paint can when you try to model the tunica inside of the skin and connective tissue between it to the tunica (subcutaneous tissue). Unlike ttt, I don’t believe that the tissues outside the tunica have any affect on pressure transmission, until they fill with edema fluid (that is they become edematous; like the Michelin Man).

Lets arbitrarily pick peak erection, not painfully hard, but very firm, rock like tunica. Your cavernosa is filled to capacity. No more blood can enter because the pressure in the arteries feeding the cavernosa is now equal to the pressure in the cavernosa. You’ve been dry jelqing and masturbating to reach this peak, so this engages the Ischiocavernosus muscles so your have now reached inner cavernosa pressures of 200 - 300 mmHg. The connective tissue constrains outside the cavernosa, the tunica, are stretched to a point where the tension is so firm that no further stretch can be achieved without mechanical intervention. Compliance is very low.

So enters clamping or pumping.

You now attach a vacuum and generate a uniform negative pressure over the entire penis.

If the penis were a balloon filled with water placed in a vacuum, it is not hard to envision an expansion of the balloon that correlates with the amount of negative pressure you expose it to. The balloon is very distensible meaning its compliance is high. The high elastic component of the balloon resists little to the negative pressure even at high inflation (in this case with water). The degree of expansion will correspond with the amount of negative pressure generated. That is, the pressure gradient from sub-atmospheric outside to the distending pressure at the center of the balloon will be relieved to equalize with the atmospheric pressure surrounding the system.

If instead the balloon was in a flexible plastic tube closed at one end with a nylon mesh core holding it taut, the consequences would be difference. It is not a simple system. You now have a low compliance situation, much like the tunica. Let say we can inflate this balloon to 250 mmHg to simulate cavernosa pressures within the taut tunica. As I posted before, the amount of pressure transmitted across fluid filled tissues depends directly on the amount of distensibility or compliance of the tissues it is made of. Now lets generate a negative pressure outside this. I picked peak erection with a very tight tunica for a reason. The amount of negative pressure actually transmitted across the tube to the fluid within the balloon will be restricted by the very low compliant nature of the restricting cover, no matter what the magnitude of negative pressure. This is to say that unlike the balloon alone, only a fraction of the negative pressure that this system is exposed to is transmitted in to the fluid within the balloon.

Now the original clinical goal of a penis pump in the pre-Viagra era was to allow impotent guys to draw enough blood into the penis to have a reasonable erection for intercourse. The pressure limits on “clinical” pumps is between 200 - 250 mmHg. As the cavernosa reaches its “normal” max filling volume and the tunica gets stiff, pressure in the cavernosa will equal arterial and filling will cease. Kegels will push small amounts of blood in as well, until kegel-generated pressure cannot overcome inner cavernosa pressure.

It is not the goal of pumping to just get an erection. You want to pull in even more blood to further distend the already taut tunica to get an even grater wall stress for tension-induces remodeling. I am not naive to believe that pumpers stay within the 250 mmHg limit. However, even with intense kegels, it is hard to imagine that you can distend the tunica appreciably with enough indirect pressure to lower cavernosa pressures to allow more blood in through the feeding arteries. I believe that most guys would experience extensive edema before you ever get enough pressure reduction in the cavernosa to allow more distending blood in.

Clamping is a direct pressure, pushing the tunica out, not pulling as with pumping. Distending the tunica even further with the massive pressures generated by the clamp seems possible.

Again I have never pumped for PE. Remember I have chosen the very defined peak erection with a taut tunica. This is strictly opinion. Am I wrong?

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:59 PM.