|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 15:41:55 GMT -5
I have a post on make me heal asking advice for pmma girth enhancement. The only reply I received was a lash from a dr that states "Don't be stupid or you will ruin your life!" gee doc, thanks alot for the verbal terrorism, I find it outright shameful these doctors can make such reckless suggestions and not back them up with sound medical reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 12:06:44 GMT -5
Of course none of them have diagnosed an infection solely as a result of PMMA, and I have yet to find someone who has. These revelations dd72 reaffirm my belief that American Doctors taint the PMMA option because it affects their bottom line.
Very important data, thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 12:03:39 GMT -5
Dr:Sorry I have NO experience with this for penis useĀ Dd:I understand that dr, I was asking for an opinion. And if you can't give a hypothesis...in your experience.... Does pmma have a large complication rate? Dr:Cannot say for penis use but in buttock use no very low compl. rates. -Miami based dr Didn't quite make out the grammar for the last sentence, was he saying there are low complication rates?
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 11:59:41 GMT -5
A 5" girth is more than sufficient to please most normal women.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 6:50:48 GMT -5
It appears we will launch without being 100% complete. This is because the remaining 10% or so are issues that will not impact the usage of the forum. The remaining 10% has mostly to do with domain management, redirection, and organization.
The rest of the forum (as far as its structure, security settings, etc) is at 99% completion and I hope by Monday or Tuesday to have it open for all. Thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 26, 2011 6:10:02 GMT -5
Hey everyone, Whew!! 131 pages...I just finished going through them all - it's an amazing resource. Also it's great to find a non-commercial space where we can discuss these things. Thanks to all. Lots of things buzzing in my head with all this new info...so where to start? My background: I'm fairly average, but definitely on the smaller side of normal. About 6" EL (+/- depending on horniness) and 4.5" EG. I turtle like crazy though, and my FL ranges from probably like 2" (less??) to 4", without any real reason. I really hate this! I'm not looking to become huge, but would like to be around 5 to 5.5" EG, and prevent the kind of crazy retraction I get now. (I've pretty much accepted that erect length gains are unlikely.) Aesthetics are really important to me, so if I go the PMMA route, I think it would be a smaller dose, with focus on touch-ups later. I have a couple questions after reading the thread that I don't think were addressed - I'd love any responses, especially from the vets. 1) There was a lot of discussion about the feel of the penis early in the thread, relatively soon after the "pioneers" had it done. Could some people who are now at least 6 weeks post-touch up (session 2 or 3) weigh in on how their penis feels now that they have the final results? How palpable are the PMMA threads? Erect vs flaccid? 2) I don't totally understand why the FDA has approved PMMA for the face, but not the penis? Is this because of the patent held by the current company, or did the FDA raise specific objections to PMMA use elsewhere? 3) Thread discussed why Viagra might not be a good idea during the procedure, but what about taking one right afterwards (or mid-procedure, so it kicks in right afterwards)? Having an erection for a few hours post-op might help guys massage where necessary and ensure even distribution? Any thoughts (or experiences)? I'll leave it at that for now (but more to come!). I'm also hoping to contact some of the doctors whose names I've seen in the various studies posted here, in order to get a clearer sense of their ideas about PMMA specifically in the penis. Will definitely post back. Best to all. Glad to have you here, and congrats for completing the entire thread, it is most definitely a crucial read for those considering this method. As for your questions: 1. I'm 6 weeks out in a few days and well, everything seems natural as far as the "feel" of it is concerned. The flaccid behaves like a flaccid, and it becomes very firm when erect. It is more palpable in the flaccid - kind of like a cartilage-ish implant feel, although I suspect it would be undetectable to someone who doesn't know you have it when being touched. I don't think you can actually feel the PMMA beads. I think when anyone has described feeling what they thought were the beads may in fact have been feeling contour ridges in the collagen formation...since afterall, PMMA beads are about 40 microns in size and I'd be shocked if anyone could point them out. 2. Hard to say why but I theorize that by "adding penile application" to their patent would have only complicated/burdened the patent process (since as we all know that phalloplasty is quite taboo), so sticking with the more conservative "facial" approach might have been wiser. This is purely a theory, as to the actual reason why, I'm not sure anyone here knows. 3. My understanding is if you plan to have a procedure done, better safe than sorry. Definitely consult Dr. C regarding this, but I'm pretty certain he would be against it, until AT LEAST after your appointment. Do NOT self-medicate/prescribe under any circumstances on or around this procedure's date should you decide to get it done. As for other doctors found on this forum, anticipate a generally negative feedback, since I doubt a FFT doctor will speak highly of Alloderm, or a Belladerm doctor speak highly of Dermal Fat Grafts, or that a Scaffold doctor would speak highly of the silicone implant. In the end, their practices are also businesses so keep that in mind. Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 25, 2011 13:25:28 GMT -5
sparticusMy only understanding is the quality of the parts being used (so in theory the brand names should last longer and work more effectively). I'm going to invest into a $30 ADS, I find that traction shouldn't have to be so expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 25, 2011 13:23:48 GMT -5
I agree with Sparticus,
The Doctor's criminal acts put a serious doubt & damper on his methods. I would tread with caution when using any of the listed aspects of obtaining length in this respect.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 25, 2011 7:19:31 GMT -5
idmA recent copy of an email correspondence between you and another member suggested that you were "retired" from forum activity, but this seems to be untrue (at least I hope) lol. The new PhalloBoards is coming up soon and we'd hope to have you there, even if it means once every few months, to get a perspective much desired by the community. Whatever the case, good luck with your progress on the PMMA.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 14:56:38 GMT -5
@eq
Did learning of your SO's ideal bother you? motivate you? or left you unchanged?
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 13:47:35 GMT -5
We also have a lot of lurkers on this forum who don't have member accounts. That's too bad, more votes would be neat. The new forum will probably encourage more to sign up (it's free) since you will need a member's account to view pictures. A few more days till PhalloBoards Version 2.0! --- As for me, no current SO for S.O. but that doesn't upset me. I know what I'm capable of I'm just experiencing some "downtime" right now Wouldn't it be awesome if all the ladies suggested the 3-4" EG was ideal? We'd all feel like kings! Well some of us at least lol.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 13:13:18 GMT -5
sparticusGlad to see you posting again! I got your PM and plan to write back, sorry for the delay I tend to get a lot of PMs/Emails and can lose track. Dr. Klein alleges that someone else has "ties" to an "industry?" Wow, not sure what to say about that. I know that Arnold Klein's background doesn't necessarily negate his opinion, but it certainly cheapens it. I just find that the American Cosmetic-Medical community seem to be mostly in agreement with their distrust (i.e. ignorance) of PMMA, whereas the opposite is true abroad. Such polarity is indicative of competing agendas versus pure scientific objectivity (which is unfortunate). One thing is for certain, PMMA serves to be a major threat to the temporary-filler markets and Cosmetic Surgeons in the U.S. IF the product is demonstrated to possess a high degree of success (assuming quality grade product and physician). It is apparent the American market cannot use PMMA cost-effectively and therefore is better off de-legitimizing the product...think of it this way: Suppose multiple studies come out showing that years of improvement & innovation has made PMMA an excellent permanent filler for bodily application. Also suppose that the American patent on PMMA is still active and as a consequence, the prices per "cc" are simply too high for American doctors to use in their own clinics. Then suppose a patient comes to a Cosmetic Surgeon in Miami or LA and asks why he or she shouldn't consider PMMA versus the temporary fillers the Miami/LA doctor is providing. What do you suppose the doctor(s) would say? Granted, this is entirely hypothetical but it certainly makes you wonder.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 12:57:34 GMT -5
To all the members who have shared and plan to share links regarding PMMA, please be sure to add a copy of that link to the RESOURCES ONLY forum if you can, thanks! Also, this thread will be locked shortly in anticipation for Heard of PMMA (Medical Grade) OR Dr Casavantes [PART 2] at the new forum. A few days or less.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 12:46:41 GMT -5
I think we need to remember that when the Dr's oppossed to PMMA suggest complications are difficult to treat, they mean that there is no simple course of durgs or injections that can consistently deal with the problem. They talk as if surgical intervention is the end of the world. But in the PE industry surgcial intervention is par for the course! If you have serious problems with any of the current PE surgery techniques, it leads to further surgery. You simply can not compare injecting PMMA into the face, with injecting it into the penis. All our members need to understand that there is a risk with any type of penis enlargement. Unfortunately we aren't in a position to compare PMMA injections against "safer", non permanent injectables, such as Restylane or Juverderm. For us guys seeking a lager penis, we need to compare PMMA to Alloderm, Dermal grafts, FFT, liquid silicone or solid silicone. And if problems occur with any of these, then surgical intervention is inevitable. And from what we've read so far, the chances of problems with PMMA seem to be far lower than the chances of running into a problems from going under the surgeons knife. I'd say about 1/4 of the members here have had bad surgical experiences in the past. If we had a good temporary filler option, then of course the concerns expressed by those Dr's at RealSelf would be much more significant to us. All our members need to realise that there is no safe, sure fire way, to enlarge your penis. Once you are aware of that and have decided that you are prepared to take the risk, then you need to compare the different methods available. Hence PMMA's safety should be compared with other PE methods and not non permament injectables for the face. What he said.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Jun 24, 2011 10:35:55 GMT -5
The article concludes: The soft tissue augmenting agent Artecoll has proven to be a safe, effective, and long-lasting solution for dermal contour deficiencies. It is widely recommended by physicians and sought after by patients. In experienced hands, it is associated with a very low incidence of adverse effects; indeed it has been argued that it has the lowest reported incidence of side effects among long-lasting injectable fillers. The main concern about its use is reports of granuloma formation as a late complication. Although the rate of granuloma formation has decreased significantly due to product evolution from Arteplast to Artecoll, and now to ArteFill, it remains a concern that needs to be addressed.
From this large group of case observations, we believe that these rare granulomas are nonpermanentand most will resolve. If treatment is indicated because the granuloma is associated with erythema, swelling, or induration or due to patient insistence, we recommend that it be treated as minimally as possible. Support of the affected individual through the process of resolution should be the primary aim of treatmentThis is with Artecoll, I wonder if the Brazilian products are any better/worse (i.e. New Plastic)
|
|