TOPIC: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1273132304- Miracle8x7
-
- Offline
- Moderator
-
- Posts: 1328
- Thanks: 1
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272742932Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1273154615Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272749887Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1273132615@HCWhat was your (BEG, MSEG) initial Girth, 6 week Girth and current Girth? Just to quantify what you are saying.HunkChunk wrote: I can confirm attrition after the 10 week mark. My first round with mainly low, possibly mixed concentrations - I expect to know what was used when I go in for my 2nd round - did diminish in Girth. The base was quite large and is now less wide, the shaft is also thinner. I lost approximately one third of the gains made
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272795478Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272755550Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272758392I am starting Girth 5" (length, 6.7-7.1"), so w/in parameters of larger surface-area set by Hoddle, which would make me a better candidate for 20% R2, if maximizing gains were my goal.
In my case, at 4.9 weeks, with 20cc's at 10% for R1, I am at average Girth of +.6" . At current rate, I expect to be +.5", consistent w/ EQ's summary. As my favorite Girth is 5.75", and my range of joy is w/in 5.75-6.0", I am left to either extrapolate from EQ's data or wait til -- and hope -- he posts some R2+6 weeks round-ups.
If greater surface area renders 10% less effective in R2, and aesthetics increase w/ 20%, then I wonder if 20% at lower volume of 12-15 cc's would offer .4" in my so-far stereotypical cEditase.
I think there's enough data on these boards to make some very reliable predictions already.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272749946I don't think we've seen many members have decent gains when 10% is used for the second session, which suggests there aren't enough beads to stimulate a sufficient reaction. On second sessions some PMMA must be being injected into the new PMMA tissue formed after the intial injection and also the surface area will be greater. I think this is why often second sessions when using 10% yield poor gains.Skeptical One wrote: In my experience, 20% yielded more than 10%, but the explanation as to why is not as entirely clear since I've seen some decent gains with 10% from other members.
According to Dr. C's office, there is a correlation with smoothness & other aesthetics when the concentration goes up.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272758906- Mustang2020
-
- Offline
- Moderator
-
- Posts: 1795
- Thanks: 18
I think we, including Dr C' office are still learning this PMMA thing and in a couple more years we should have enough data to be able to be more aggressive with the concentration and the amount of CC's injected. But I have to say it is better to take easy till we know more facts.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1273132173I can confirm attrition after the 10 week mark. My first round with mainly low, possibly mixed concentrations - I expect to know what was used when I go in for my 2nd round - did diminish in Girth. The base was quite large and is now less wide, the shaft is also thinner. I lost approximately one third of the gains made, which is still an honorable premium which I would have fully appreciated had it been all I had gotten, but the early gains got me "addicted" and it was too grand having a hefty wanger that the ladies said they LOVED. Since it slimmed down, one said that she wouldn't mind if it got thicker again like last fall... So I'm off to round two as soon as I can travel the 5700 miles to see Dr C.
Cheers,
HC
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272753346Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272754114- Skeptical_One
-
- Offline
- General
-
- Posts: 4979
- Thanks: 613
Not many, but I do recall some having modest gains with the 10%. But I think you are right with 10% not being as successful on 2nd rounds.hoddle10 wrote:I don't think we've seen many members have decent gains when 10% is used for the second session, which suggests there aren't enough beads to stimulate a sufficient reaction. On second sessions some PMMA must be being injected into the new PMMA tissue formed after the intial injection and also the surface area will be greater. I think this is why often second sessions when using 10% yield poor gains.Skeptical One wrote: In my experience, 20% yielded more than 10%, but the explanation as to why is not as entirely clear since I've seen some decent gains with 10% from other members.
According to Dr. C's office, there is a correlation with smoothness & other aesthetics when the concentration goes up.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272749513- Skeptical_One
-
- Offline
- General
-
- Posts: 4979
- Thanks: 613
According to Dr. C's office, there is a correlation with smoothness & other aesthetics when the concentration goes up.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Re: Measurable/Qualitative diff's b/w 10% and 20%?
14 years 4 months ago #1272801234Thank you for your advice about waiting 6 months. I will be watching closely your your and others' results to see how typical attrition is, and at what percentage. Hopefully, final gains will reveal themselves to be typically stabilized by 3rd month or earlier. We have already seen 2 members for which this was not the case, and fluctuations occurred after 3 months, if I am correct.
I found this post by Supa on the old boards, and used it to pre-calculate that it would be best for me to re-apply 20 cc's at 10% to reach my goal of b/w 5.75 and 6.0.
Supa:
"A basic mathematical approach to justabitmore's conjecture.
Let's assume that the penis is a right circular cylinder. Then the volume of the erected penis is given by:
V = (1/4pi) x (erected length) x (Girth) x (Girth).
By applying the above formula it can be shown that Bill enjoys an increase in volume of 56% whereas Bob's volume increases by 21%."
I was a C student in math, so I'll just give it a shot at the risk of looking very dumb.
Pre-R1:
V =.25(3.14) x 7 x 5 x 5
V = 137.38
Currently 6 at base; 5.4 to 5.7 shaft measurements, depending on where along the shaft:
Forecasted Final Results (fool's bet, I know):
V = .25(3.14) x 7 x 5.5 x 5.5
V = 166.22
Gain from R1 (predicted): V = 28.84
I then calculated what increase in volume I would need to obtain 5.85 (safer than shooting for 5.75):
Desired Gain in Volume = 166.22 (current vol.) + G (gained vol. needed) = .25(3.14) x 7 x 5.8 x 5.85
G = 22.88
So, if R1 at 20 cc's of 10% brought me volume of 28.84, then should I be able to obtain 5.75 - 6.0 with a similar volume and 10% solution?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.