Loading, lengthening, healing.

A tension treshold for that specific duration, that is the problem. Maybe using 5 lbs for 40 minutes they could gain more with less toughening, but the hanger is limiting the duration of sets.

You start low with load and time and constantly monitor whats happening with your dick. EQ down - load down - time up. EQ up - load up - time down. Apply heat - cold when it makes sense.

Measuring whenever EQ is good :)

This is my conclusion from the read.

Unfortunately, I doubt EQ is a sure indicator for lenght gains. It is pretty common to experience lower EQ with prolonged length work and this is when gains seems to really kick in. Loss in EQ seems more to be related to lower elasticity, so with visco-elastic adaptation; this means you could have low EQ although there isn’t really any ‘damage’ that requires rest to heal.

Adversely, short but very intense stretches seems to cause a temporary raise in EQ. This could be due to a protective reaction of the body against the strong strain, or simply to the fact that more blood is carried to the damaged area, who knows?

I really liked this post from firegoat.

Marinera and others, it’s great to see you guys continuing this thread.

Hello MARINERA, I wanted to know where I can find link about routines without days off, or no-rest.

thanks

Hi Mam59. If I remember correctly, this routine

2-inch Growth Comparative Pictures

had no days off and Bennett8 had incredible gains with it. It is a routine based on manual exercises only.

Thanks Marinera for you response.

No problem Mam.

Just an interesting link

Another good read.

http://cardiova scres.oxfordjou … t/72/3/375.full

Indeed. Although I’m not able to say if cardiac tissue can be really compared to penile tissue.

I would have thought the smooth muscle component could be ?

The main thing for me is it’s more evidence of how parts of the body can grow due to stress without a specific injury/repair process.

At least that’s how I’m reading it, I could easily be wrong.

Could very well be. The article shows that mechanical loading has complex effects both on muscle extracellular matrix and smooth muscle. There are several parts who are interresting; for example:

"Static stretch has been reported to increase SMC synthesis of tropoelastin, the precursor of elastin [78] . Three studies in particular have directly compared the effects of static and cyclic strains [11,79,80] . In the first study, cyclic strain (10%, 0.86 Hz), compared to 10% static strain, caused a 3-fold increase in total protein and collagen synthesis [79] .

…………..

All three of these studies clearly demonstrated that static strains promote ECM degradation and adhesion molecules whereas cyclic strains enhance SMC synthesis of fibrillar ECM proteins."

As I read it, sounds like continous static stretching works remodelling tissues, whereas cyclic stretching works making them grow.

"….cyclic strains applied to cardiac fibroblasts have been found to modulate collagen synthesis and to cause the secretion of various growth factors into the ECM. When these cells were subjected to cyclic loading, their collagen I gene expression increased up to 4-fold compared to no loading conditions [37–40] ."

This accords with what posted elsewhere; anyway, as the author underlines, cardiac tissues are highly specific because they, by their very same function, are subject to cyclic stress, differently than tissues in the penis.

The issue of static or cyclic strain is the interesting bit for me, after all we know that for tendons cyclic strain as in weight bearing exercise makes them grow stronger but long duration static strain makes then get longer.
This seems to be in keeping with the above study regarding ECM whereas smooth muscle seems to respond more to cyclic loading.

I guess this is why any stretching type exercise and jelqing work so well together.

Yes it is interesting, because it suggests that growth could be triggered through differente mechanisms. Manual exercises and pumping are cyclic, extenders are static; hanging is kinda a mix of the two.

The donwside of this complexity though is that can be hard to understand what kind of approach is the best suited; the sole practical suggestion we can take from that is changing something when we see things are stalling. Notice that the complexity is enhanced by the fact that the very same kind of stimuli (static or cyclic here) has an optimal duration and doing more than that can be harmful. Look at the study posted here for example:
Stretching effects at microscope. 1