So there’s no proof that PE works? Funny, I think there’s been quite a lot of talk about this and a lot of people have racked up scientific citations over the years. Here are a few and how they relate to PE:
Penile elongation and thickening—a myth? Is there a cosmetic or medical indication?
Austoni E, Guarneri A, Gatti G. - Andrologia. 1999;31 Suppl 1:45-51
This study looked at a relatively new way of increasing penile size. The authors conclude that for length, the dual attack of suspensory ligament surgery and stretcher device is suggested. For girth they discuss a new method which is about making an incision in the tunica albuginea and enlarging that structure with grafts. That allows for more space for the corpus cavernosa to expand into as they should after the stretch stress of the stretcher device. After a 9-month follow-up, the increase in girth was 1.1-2.1 cm. Unfortunately, the regimens of stretching were not revelead, neither when they were begun (considering the post-operative recovery process).
Penile enlargement surgery.
Alter GJ. - Tech Urol. 1998 Jun;4(2):70-6
To cite the revealing text of the abstract “Penile lengthening is performed by releasing the suspensory ligament of the penis followed by use of penile weights”. Why the weights? Because without that stressor there has been no statistically significant gain in length after surgery, some even experiencing a slight reduction in size. Proof enough that just the stretching should give benefits.
There has also been a study peformed on actual PE. This study was ordered as part of a court case against the Chartham method and was carrie dout by independent researchers. Here’s the gist of the relevant part of the case (the actual documentation can be found in full here).
10. Dr. Richards conducted the trial and prepared a report thereon received in evidence as respondent’s exhibit 5. Sixty-four randomly selected patients of Dr. Richards participated in the study, thirty-two as test subjects using the “Chartham Method” and thirty-two as a control group (Tr. 140, 186). Dr. Richards excluded from the test group those who by reason of special problems or conditions would cause confusional factors (Tr. 192). None of the test subjects had what Dr. Richards would characterize as an underdeveloped penis (Tr. 184).
11. The trial lasted approximately three months. It began with measurement of the penis of each test subject at maximal erection. Length was measured with a metal rule and slide marker, the base of the rule being placed on the pubic symphysis and pressed firmly against it. The slide was then moved to the top of the glans where the measurement was read. Girth was measured with a flexible metal tape at a position one inch proximal to the coronal sulcus. The same technicians conducted all measurements throughout the trial with the object of reducing personal error factors (RX-5).
12. After the initial measurements, test subjects were instructed in the “Chartham Method” and told to start practicing it (Tr. 139). Insofar as possible the penis of each subject was thereafter measured, in the method above described, on a weekly basis (Tr. 139, 140). Dr. Richards recorded each measurement. Of the test subjects two dropped out of the test and two achieved no gain in dimensions. Dr. Richards recorded gains among the twenty-eight remaining subjects ranging from 2.4 cm. to 3.6 cm. (.94 in. - 1.4 in.) in length and from 1.4 cm. to 3.1 cm. (.55 in. - 1.2 inc.) in girth (Tr. 142; RX-5). No changes of any significance were found in the measurements taken of the control subjects (Tr. 145, 146). He reported the success rate as 87.5 percent in the test group (Tr. 143). In Dr. Richards’ opinion, the study was conducted in accordance with prevalent medical and scientific standards (Tr. 142). The report of Dr. Richards’ study has been accepted for publication in the British Journal of Sexual Medicine (Tr. 143).
13. Dr. Richards’ conclusion as a result of the test was that the “Chartham Method” is a very certain and very positive working method for enlargement of the penis (Tr. 146, 147). His rationale for the results observed was that as the result of the intense application of the “Chartham Method” for three months the actual tissue spaces of the penis had increased sufficiently to account for the changes in measurement; that the tissue spaces of the erectile tissue of the penis had been expanded to the extent that they would accept more blood during erection (Tr. 146, 147).
14. In Dr. Richards’ opinion the “Chartham Method” will enable a large percentage of males to enlarge the dimension of the penis and, to his satisfaction, is a scientifically evaluated and proven effective means for so doing. Further, in his opinion, it incorporates new and significantly different principles from all other methods and products intended to increase the size of the penis that he knows of (Tr. 148).
15. Dr. Richards was skeptical that enlargement of the penis produced by the “Chartham Method” would be sustained for any considerable length of time. He will not be satisfied on that point until he has done further investigation (Tr. 208, 211).
This is to the best of my knowledge one of only two studies actually done on the effaciacy of PE by hyperemitation. I think you’ll all be interested to know that the “Cartham method” involves:
4. The “Chartham Method” consists of four elements.
a. A series of exercises involving the large muscles of the upper thighs, the lower abdominal wall, the gluteal, or buttocks, region, and the larger muscles of the pelvis (Tr. 134).
b. Application of hot compresses to the penis.
c. Massage of the penis.
d. A vacuum developer consisting of a partially sealed plastic tube so designed to permit creation of a vacuum with the penis inserted in the tube.
Looks somewhat familiar. Too bad they don’t mention what the actual “massage” consists of. The main thing to remember about PE is that we’re dealing with tissues that are collagenous. Collagenous tissues can be stretched, that’s just common sense. But hey, if you don’t want to believe that’s fine.
2010-01-09: BPEL: 19,7cm [7.75"] EG: 15,0 cm [5.9"]
2010-04-24: BPEL: 20,4cm [8.0"] EG: [???]