Thunder's Place

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

new penis size study

123

:up:

I got in contact with the lead author David Veale and I pointed out some of the errors me might have made in the study. He’s re-looking over his information as we speak.

This was his reply:

"Many thanks for your observations
We will look at the original data again and get back to you
David Veale”

Attached Images
david.jpg
(76.3 KB, 161 views)

Originally Posted by dhusky
I got in contact with the lead author David Veale and I pointed out some of the errors me might have made in the study. He’s re-looking over his information as we speak.

This was his reply:

"Many thanks for your observations
We will look at the original data again and get back to you
David Veale”

that is a great dig deep.
Lets hope its not just a standard response. please keep us psoted

Originally Posted by dhusky
I got in contact with the lead author David Veale and I pointed out some of the errors me might have made in the study. He’s re-looking over his information as we speak.

This was his reply:

"Many thanks for your observations
We will look at the original data again and get back to you
David Veale”

So what in your opinion were the errors. We all here will probably have the same opinion.

This meta study used both bone and non bone pressed erect and flaccid stretched length to determine the average size. I read a few of the 17 studies that he used.

Originally Posted by dhusky
This meta study used both bone and non bone pressed erect and flaccid stretched length to determine the average size. I read a few of the 17 studies that he used.

We here have always questioned the studies of how exactly are they measuring, both bone or non bone pressed erect. You my friend made it a point to flag them, good job.

The author is a psychiatrist. Why the hell he turned out measuring dicks?

This sensationalized study is very misleading. It claims 15,000 or so patients, but the majority are only flaccid measurements.

In total, there were 692 measurements for erect length, 301 of which are from a single study in India.

There were 381 measurements for erect circumference, 301 of which are from a single study in India.

This study is a decent representation of the average Indian penis length and girth, but says almost nothing of the average Caucasian. Lesson here: read the actual studies.

Inquiring minds. Cool.

Originally Posted by TheoHe
This sensationalized study is very misleading. It claims 15,000 or so patients, but the majority are only flaccid measurements.

In total, there were 692 measurements for erect length, 301 of which are from a single study in India.

There were 381 measurements for erect circumference, 301 of which are from a single study in India.

This study is a decent representation of the average Indian penis length and girth, but says almost nothing of the average Caucasian. Lesson here: read the actual studies.

That is EXACTLY my point. Only a VERY small portion of the 15 000 total were erect length and erect girth measurements. And, from that VERY small portion of erect length and erect girth measurements, most of them were from India. So, this really does show the ‘average’ Indian penis, because the ‘average’ is smaller than what it is usually said to be (~6 inches BPEL, and 4.8 inches girth). Not being offensive to anyone, but this is true- on average, the ‘average’ Indian penis is smaller. There was actually a study on this- about how a large majority of Indians have trouble with International condoms.

its on the lower range of average. With the top range maybe beeing the middle of other studies.
This study clearly shows the distribution of average range which is the real takeaway, albeit not sold this way by the publishers.
The study itself is not sensationalized. its the articles made of it.

Other condom studies US and europe are within the same range slightly bigger.
Many smaller medicinal studies are obviously very possibly skewed due to sample size.
Cause if you make an announcement in a city of 100 000 you will get a bunch of the above range guys wanting to partake. Some with long and thin or short and very thick dicks. And in some you have more of the long thin guys.

while we all know self reported studies are biased to round numbers and uprounding(making the problem in inches more apparent lol!).

The average range distribution is clear and no matter how it is skewed by factors its always within a rather narrow average range that is hard for most females to understand with their senses let alone brains lol to stay with prejudice there is somewhere the aforomentioned african village with huge monster dong who were teached by daddy long dad from old jewish scripture but they dont live all in your neighbourhood.

Top
123
Similar Threads 
ThreadStarterForumRepliesLast Post
Penis Size & PE Growth Rate Study @ ThundersplaceGettinGrownPenis Enlargement Basics2412-27-2014 07:57 PM
Another Penis Size SurveyCock KentPenis Enlargement2412-11-2013 07:48 PM
The Mayo Clinic on PEwadzillaPenis Enlargement1810-04-2012 08:45 PM

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