Thunder's Place

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

In which studies do they use MEG?

In which studies do they use MEG?

Those studies of penis size I’ve read uses base girth as circumference and some did use head girth. Latest example is the recent “Erect penile dimensions in a cohort of 778 Middle Eastern men: establishment of a nomogram.”.

So can you point out the studies where they use MEG when measuring girth? I can’t find those studies.

It’s seems that base girth is a common measurement in studies and that the average girth is average base girth sometimes. It’s something to reconsider since members always compare their Meg to the studies.


BPEL: 7.25"

HG: ~6.25" | MEG:6.25" | Low shaft EG:6.5" | BG: 7"

I have never really understood why Girth is measured at the mid point. Personally I think your penis circumference should be measured at its thickest point whether that be at the mid shaft, the glands or the base.For example if your penis erect girth was 5.25” mid shaft.And your glands were 6.0” girth to me that is where you take your girth measurement from.It is the glands that your partner would mostly feel.Not the mid section that is 0.75” smaller.


A Small Leak Will Always Sink A Great Ship.

(Fat Pad 0.25")

Originally Posted by The Wizard
I have never really understood why Girth is measured at the mid point. Personally I think your penis circumference should be measured at its thickest point whether that be at the mid shaft, the glands or the base.For example if your penis erect girth was 5.25” mid shaft.And your glands were 6.0” girth to me that is where you take your girth measurement from.It is the glands that your partner would mostly feel.Not the mid section that is 0.75” smaller.

Yes, but I’m more interested in where middleshaft-measurement come from? Could it be that one study used it and it became standard within PE? Because it doesn’t seem to be a standard within other studies.

I’ve yet to find a measurement who uses middleshaft but several that uses base girth.


BPEL: 7.25"

HG: ~6.25" | MEG:6.25" | Low shaft EG:6.5" | BG: 7"

-Kinsey uses the thickest point:
Girth measurement in Kinsey study
p.120 you can find the insctructions on how to measure:
https://books.google.se/books?id=s7…ference&f=false

-Israeli study uses BG:
http://www.eng.tau.ac.il/%7Emsbm/li…_12_328-333.pdf

The one cited in the OP (Middle eastern men) uses BG:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25904106

- German study uses BG and head girth:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11182344

This are the studies I’ve found within 10 minutes of searching, but yet I can’t find a MEG-measurement in any studies.
I’m sure that all the studies done by condom makers does not take MEG inte account since the base girth is more important.

Edit: As you can see in the results in this study (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/…6806.x/full#ss4) just one study uses midshaft, the other uses max girth or base girth.

So are you comparing our MEG to the BG/Max girth in the studies? Maybe the average girth is lower than we think.


BPEL: 7.25"

HG: ~6.25" | MEG:6.25" | Low shaft EG:6.5" | BG: 7"


Last edited by Gyrta : 09-20-2015 at .

The doctors/scientists conducting the research need to produce an accurate (but more importantly) a precise number.. A number that can be easily and accurately repeated between hundreds of samples. Base and head measurements are two examples of easily repeatable measurements between samples. Middle girth has no real reference point and is just too damn arbitrary to use during a study.

We PEers like to measure all parts of are dick from base middle to head to track progress. The MEG just sounds like a more accurate way to describe the thickness of your dick since a lot of times it is the average thickness of your dick (even in tapered dicks). If I have a 5.0” base, a 4.9” middle, and a 4.8” head. I will probably be telling people I have a 4.9” girth since that is the average.

But good point to bring up.. If people are going to compare their thickness to these studies, they will probably be comparing against base girth.


Started: BPFSL: 6.18" BPEL: 6.14" MEG: 4.70" BEG: 4.70" (July 2014)

After JP90: BPFSL: 6.85" BPEL: 6.58" MEG: 4.70" BEG: 4.70" (Sep 2014) Break until July 2015

JP90 & Clamp BPFSL: 7.13" BPEL: 6.65" MEG: 4.80" BEG: 4.90" (Sep 2015)

Originally Posted by Texastravis
The doctors/scientists conducting the research need to produce an accurate (but more importantly) a precise number.. A number that can be easily and accurately repeated between hundreds of samples. Base and head measurements are two examples of easily repeatable measurements between samples. Middle girth has no real reference point and is just too damn arbitrary to use during a study.

We PEers like to measure all parts of are dick from base middle to head to track progress. The MEG just sounds like a more accurate way to describe the thickness of your dick since a lot of times it is the average thickness of your dick (even in tapered dicks). If I have a 5.0” base, a 4.9” middle, and a 4.8” head. I will probably be telling people I have a 4.9” girth since that is the average.

But good point to bring up.. If people are going to compare their thickness to these studies, they will probably be comparing against base girth.

Fair point, but a person with a baseball bat penis may have their max at midshaft, where a person with a tappered dick may have a mean value at midshaft. So are we still comparing apples with apples?
Many newbies needs to understand that their 4.8” meg maybe is bigger than the average of the studies.


BPEL: 7.25"

HG: ~6.25" | MEG:6.25" | Low shaft EG:6.5" | BG: 7"

I agree with ya.

How common are natural “baseball bat” dicks though? I thought these were mostly from the result of PE.


Started: BPFSL: 6.18" BPEL: 6.14" MEG: 4.70" BEG: 4.70" (July 2014)

After JP90: BPFSL: 6.85" BPEL: 6.58" MEG: 4.70" BEG: 4.70" (Sep 2014) Break until July 2015

JP90 & Clamp BPFSL: 7.13" BPEL: 6.65" MEG: 4.80" BEG: 4.90" (Sep 2015)

Originally Posted by Texastravis
I agree with ya.

How common are natural “baseball bat” dicks though? I thought these were mostly from the result of PE.

I have a stranger shape. Thinnest is in the center and the base is roughly the same shape as just under the head. Around 0.25 inches thinner for the center.

I’d say it’s an interesting question on how studies determine where they will measure. From the standpoint of consistency it doesn’t seem measuring the thickest point would be the best. I’d probably measure guys at 0.5 inches under the glans and 0.5 inches above the fat pad then take the mean of those two.

Top
Similar Threads 
ThreadStarterForumRepliesLast Post
Big Penis Secrets big-penis-secretsPara-GoombaPenis Enlargement29411-25-2009 07:14 PM

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:44 AM.