TOPIC: PMMA Ninja Turtle - Retraction Problems for GROWERS

Hello, this is my first time posting. Thank you everyone for providing a community for this. In regards to this particular matter, its definitely seems like sizemic is right. Dr. C is catering to demand. My thought is that after some point, a large enough gain would likely produce the pig in a blanket effect for many people. The question is at what increase would likely cause this? I would imagine .5 to .75 inches is the max for many.

@HC
You mentioned that this was not an issue until the 3rd session. What kind of increase did you get for the first two sessions if you don\'t mind restating? This appears to be a limit for you at least, unless the 30% is the sole culprit.

Has anyone else found that after session one or two, they suddenly had the pig in a blanket effect?

I totally agree with you Hoddle and Miracle the new collagen post- 30% conc. feels firm and rough so it will be better to use a lower conc. i.e. between 10%-20% .

If we look at the korean doctors and what they use for a conc. :-

- Only 20% PMMA Artecoll mixed with 70% crossed-linked dextran (LIPEN-10) or Lipen-8 for the shaft .

- But for the Glans they use only 15% PMMA Artecoll mixed with 85% crossed-linked dextran (LIPEN-P). N.B. they could easily make the 10% for the glans but they didn\'t I am sure they found that the 15% gives a better gain and esthetic result for the glans.

So I think these doctors tried many different conc.s of PMMA for the shaft and the glans and I assume they found the right one for each.

When I turtle hard, my Flaccid is similar to HC\'s, although this effect (Turtling) does not happen nearly as often as before I had PMMA. I\'ve contemplated whether or not having a very mild \"buried penis\" (a topic I learned about through my chats with Hoddle) could be contributing to this pig-in-the-blanket & small Flaccid effect, and I will have it addressed in the future. Maybe a combination of some sort of \"tacking\" and/or lipo, and manual PE may improve my Flaccid, since I will probably not undergo lengthening surgery. I will say, however, that the pig-in-the-blanket look sure as hell beats my pre-PMMA Flaccid any day of the week.

As for now, I\'ve conceded well in advance the risk that my Flaccid may occasionally appear as a pig-in-the-blanket, and having smaller-than-average glans lends my penis to that aesthetic.

I\'m wondering if there is any effective treatment behind mitigating/blocking the physiological mechanism that makes a segment of men growers/turtlers. Maybe some kind of botox-like product? Or maybe, as I mentioned previously, a combination of tacking, lipo, manual PE, and in HC\'s case, even lengthening (which I probably wont do). I\'m all ears and will continue following this thread.

hoddle10 wrote: Watch the video at the bottom of this page from 2.00 mins to 3.30 mins. It shows the skin being tacked to the base of the penis. This prevents skin sliding forward and creating the \"pig in blanket\" look.

www.savaperovic.com/penis-enlargement-surgery.html#vdo

It seems to me that 30% is also more mobile, again like fat. This means that when the skin bunches up, the PMMA squeezes into a ball and looks bad. It will be more apparent in uncut guys, as their skin is more mobile, but also true for guys such as yourself who have had a slightly aggressive circ, which causes for the pubic area to move up the shaft.

I don\'t want to cause any controversy, as I know member senior members of the site have so much respect for him and a very good relationship, but I think their is so much wrong with Dr C\'s practice.

Hi Hoddle,


I saw the technique you recommend, however this seems to be extremely aggressive surgery which may not be indispensable in my condition. At least I certainly hope so. Regarding the plasticity of 30% PMMA I am not sure that it actually does \"squeeze into a ball\" as you say. The enlarged \"ball look\" comes from the glans penetrating inside of it, and bloating it outwards at the location of its outer ridge. This gives a circular tennis ball look to my dick which is very embarrassing in public.


I go to coed saunas and nude beaches, so this is what my unit looks like to strangers. I get some weird looks! It is more by virtue of gravity that it does this. If I am laying down and pull my flaccid upwards towards the sky, even if turtling the PMMA goes towards the base and it doesn\'t look like a pig in a blanket. I figured on attacking this problem on 3 fronts.


- First get extra flaccid length through a ligament cut. I think I must have gained around one inch flaccid length. However, this didn\'t fix the problem, only it extends the tennis ball one inch further away from my pelvis.
Aesthetic Gain = ZERO.

- Second get a glans enhancement in Seoul with PMMA injections. Costs will be high adding travel and treatments, but also useful for aesthetic gains erect, my glans looking more natural instead of smaller than the shaft.
Aesthetic Risk = A LARGER TENNIS BALL ???

- Third to ask Dr C during my 4th PMMA session in June to do whatever he can think of to fix the problem, relying upon his knowledge of PMMA, penile dynamics and techniques to anchor the collagen to my base and possibly prevent this weight shifting to the tip.
Aesthetic Risk = UNKNOWN.


I think that possibly, due to the total mass of PMMA over 3 sessions and especially the thickness required to cover up my earlier corrected clumps, added to this my failure to properly keep the product at the base after my last session by the correct massaging technique, I wound up with a lopsided end result with most of the PMMA at the upper 2/3 of my unit. This made it imbalanced in terms of having a lot of mass per square inch of grip on the inner surfaces, causing it to slide in the direction of gravity?


It is the conjunction of many factors, including my webbing due to poor circumcision, which must be taken into account. Yes, or course Dr C cannot have already established a fully comprehensive checklist of all the potential ramifications of every combination of earlier protocols, pre-existing conditions, etc. How would this be possible? Only by experimentation. And as pioneers in phalloplasty this can only be done by trial and error. I don\'t mind being in the error column, as a volunteer in this process, as long as it is a temporary situation which can be corrected over time.


While I understand that you have chosen to wait until the procedure is perfected, and reliably certain as to its results after being bullet-proofed by more daring members here, nobody is forcing anyone to get PMMA injected into their unit. Dr C does his very best to undertake everything in his power to remedy and problems, to this I can attest. Every single issue I had with my 2nd session was totally resolved to my entire satisfaction, and I remain confident that he and Wade will be able to figure out some way of improving my current condition of excessive turtling, by possible softening the tissues of my upper shaft and by adding thickness to the lower shaft, perhaps widening at the base?


I didn\'t mean to start this thread to panic anyone about PMMA. That is why I chose a HUMOROUS title, calling my new unit a NINJA TURTLE. I am happier now, despite this flaccid result I really hoped to avoid, because my erect result is quite outstanding and that\'s what matters most: improving one\'s love life is nothing to sneeze at. For this and although I sincerely hope for there to be a remedy, even were I to remain \"as is\" for the rest of my days, I thank Dr C and commend him for bringing significant progress to phalloplasty.

HC

miracle7.5x6 wrote: @HC
I will be in contact with Wade shortly to discuss my concerns which include the palpability and unnatural texture of the 30% PMMA. I will let you know what he has to offer afterwards. I imagine that the doctor can soften hardened areas using the cannula to break up clusters of beads and then cover with 10% to mask the artificial feel of the underlying product. Either way, no more 30% for this man. 10% all the way.

Hi Miracle,


It is good to see an intermittent ADMINISTRATOR of this forum and current MODERATOR take up these issues with Doctor Luis Casavantes. He is a very responsible individual and he shall surely take to addressing these issues and our concerns, integrating any knowledge thus derived into his treatment orientations.


Aside from clumps which were detectable, in my first two sessions I had no PMMA that was detectible to the touch (my personal assessment of shaft texture) either with 10% New Plastic aka Linnea-Safe or with 20% Metacryl (this however did clump). The 30% Linnea-Safe gives a general impression - regularly and evenly spread on the upper end of the shaft - similar to my previous rubbery clumps, which were only in certain areas. The rubbery feel is all around the circumference of the shaft, and I have noticed that it has slightly diminished over six months: it was at its hardest one month after injection.


I guess the similarity between the texture of clumps and higher concentrations of PMMA makes sense. Clumps are a clustering of PMMA, making the localized concentration in one small area greater than it ought to be, had it been properly dispersed around the entire surface of the shaft. Hence, the greater the concentration, the more rubbery the tactile impression. As a consequence, your unit feels more artificially enhanced and less natural, the more plastic beads are present in proportion to the collagen, almost giving the impression of a buried plastic dildo.


So I agree that even if it winds up costing more with extra sessions and although one must wait longer to achieve a desired final result, 10% all the way would be the way I would proceed if I were to do so again. My PERFECT 1st session results with 10% lulled me into too much confidence about PMMA in any concentration. Had I known that it would be less natural to the touch, I would have stayed away from the higher concentration levels. And I concur that our collective experience here seems to currently point towards the neighborhood of a 15% concentration to give gains while retaining a perfectly \"original\" feel.


Thanks for taking such concerns to Tijuana and hopefully Dr C will have a few weeks to consider what remedies can be brought to guys with issues like mine, so that when I arrive he already has an idea of what might be done during a follow-up session?


HC

hoddle10 wrote: Obviously it isn\'t my business and I know you have a great relationship with Dr C and Wade, but I really hope they don\'t charge you for any further procedure. My big issue with them is they aren\'t anywhere near conservative enough given the experimental nature of the procedure and ultimately it\'s the patients that pay, often both physically and financially. It\'s damn expensive to keep flying to Mexico, staying in hotels and paying for more PMMA. That\'s not to mention the massive inconvenience. I\'m not in anyway doubting Dr C\'s integrity, as by all reports he\'s a really great guy and clearly a very skilled practitioner, but as I\'ve said many time there are some issues that I strongly feel they need to sort out and the 30% thing is just the latest.

Hi Hoddle,


I guess how you look at the financial aspects of \"issues\" with PMMA is a matter of perspective. I went in understanding that this is experimental and even exploratory Phalloplasty, but I didn\'t expect some kind of protocol whereby Dr C would give me years of treatments for free just to gather up case studies whereby he could make this entire development bullet-proof for future patients to the financial benefit of other practitioners.


Given my issues with my 2nd session\'s clumping, Dr C gave me a break on those costs, taking on some himself. However, I don\'t know what he would consider this time, given that my current issue might be attributed to my incorrect massaging of the PMMA towards the base. Yet I was not told clearly that I was to press downwards towards the pelvis to prevent it from massing at the tip. I was only told to make sure it is evenly distributed to prevent clump formation, and given my prior issues I only did that, make sure it was all smooth all around the surface.


Futhermore, I expect that Dr C will not only need to spend hours puncturing my shaft and breaking down the collagen with a canula, but also use quite a bit of costly 10% Linnea-Safe to fix my problems. While I agree that if this were a more routine procedure gone bad, that he ought to assume corrective measure more fully.


However, it is very hard to know what happened to bring this about. I had bad webbing and irregular skin tension on my shaft. I had clumps which needed to be covered up and buried in enough material. I am short plus tend to get bad retraction. I also wanted Girth. That is quite a combination of demands and constraints which make for a difficult solution to meet each requirement, while the incumbent risks of every combination of variables are not yet properly assessed for this relatively new procedure.


So I will pay whatever is necessary to HOPEFULLY correct as may be my problem, and Dr C shall do what he considers appropriate the time come, in terms of intervention and payment. I trust that he is committed, and think that degloving is not something indispensable unless pain prevents patients from waiting for a less extreme solution. And, of course, I won\'t be upset if it costs me less rather than more to fix. My attempt at correcting it with a ligament cut in Russia cost me already a bundle.


HC

Sizemic wrote: Didn\'t Dr C switch to 30% based on our own demands here? Everyone was so concerned that 20% was causing issues and that he wasn\'t mixing it right, or that it wasn\'t supposed to be mixed in the first place. 30% was all the rage even 6 months ago. Everyone seemed to praise it. Not only that but there were a lot of members unhappy with 10% saying they gained very very little. Myself included which I gained nothing from a full session in Round 3 of 10%. 10% seemed to produce results for the first round, but following rounds I remember a few complaints of no gains.

I\'m not sure having 10% rounds is the way to go either... not unless people actually like spending $2000+ on only 0\" - 0.25\" gains per session.

Hi Sizemic,


Great to see you here, it\'s been a while!


I think you make a very good point. Dr C is partly \"demand driven\". But this isn\'t because he is sold out or not serious about his own take on things, but because he is learning about PMMA along with us, in a form of joint collaboration between the practitioner and his patients.


And you are right about the widespread praise in PhalloBoards where 30% was touted as God\'s gift to Phalloplasty. This is primarily why I chose it, when Dr C presented to me two cases of syringes of Linnea-Safe, one with 10% concentration and one with 30% concentration. It was MY CHOICE to go with 30% and I quoted the positive feedback here to justify it. So any regret should be mine alone.


Regarding gains, I cannot say if they aren\'t better. I think maybe one could go for later sessions with a blending of a syringe of 30% with one of 10% instead of a dilution of 30% by adding another carrier. I think that maybe it is the latter which may be a cause of problems? But I may be wrong.


If folks are worried about the total costs of achieving a desired result, they might prefer to have PMMA done with a different pricing protocol, such as the place in Europe which reportedly guarantees target results for a fixed cost up front, no matter how many sessions you have. However, I don\'t know if they let the patient choose which concentration he prefers, a courtesy extended to us by Dr C.


Hunk Chunk
PS. Stats and CC\'s are in my progress report

I am wondering, and YES, I am one crazy wacky dude, granted. I am wondering if - prior to a corrective low concentration PMMA session - one can help chemically break down the rubbery texture of 30% PMMA. This would be similar to using a Meat Tenderizer but it would be applied in this instance to a \"Tube Steak\".


I would be laughing were I not actually seriously considering this option. I am staring at 3 bottles of DMSO in my medicine cabinet, and know that others here involved in aggressive stretching are experimenting with it to break down their tissues in hopes or stretching their collagen further.


For those unfamiliar with this product, illegal for sale even by medical prescription in the country I live in, it is used by people afflicted with deep joint problems and severe arthritis, as a carrier for surface treatments enabling them to penetrated deep into one\'s tissues.


A pharmacist in Yuma Arizona warned me against ever using DMSO for anything, saying they used it in forensic science to dissolve parts of cadavers. So it is indeed a very dangerous substance which I do not recommend anyone ever apply to any part of their anatomy.


I have a pot of 75% DMSO, which interestingly is mixed with 25% Aloe Vera Gel. That plant is known for its healing properties, and this was probably added to help one\'s tissues recover from attack by the destructive action of DMSO.


At one time, two years ago, I had thought of using DMSO as a carrier for DHT cream applied to my unit in hopes of stimulating growth. That is why I have it at home now. However, I went in for PMMA in Tijuana and abandoned my quest for chemical Phallotherapy.


Yet, given the somewhat less than natural results of 30% PMMA concentrations in terms of implant texture, I am wondering if it might not be a means of chemically doing what Dr C does with his canula, namely breaking down the tissues in the enhanced collagen areas?


Issues:

- would it even break down the collagen at all?

- could it damage deeper functional tissues inside the shaft?

- can it be carried by the bloodstream and cause damage elsewhere?
* Note: there is a lot of bloodflow down there...

- reducing the collagen won\'t remove the PMMA beads, hence useless?


Anything experimental with a large number of unknowns entails risk. However, these can be evaluated and weighed against potential benefits, and estimated in such a way as to transform them into calculated risks. It is important then to ensure that no serious health risks could ensue, in the short or long term. Also one must note at least a decent probability of benefits before engaging in a process, unless totally innocuous.


I guess that once it turns wrong, Phalloplasty can tend to bring some of us to consider our Dick as little more than a LAB RAT, which must be subjected to anything possibly leading to a medical solution to our problem - Size. For those of us who sought a less harsh an intervention instead of major surgery to ensure enhancement rather than an implant, we can add another potential induced problem - Artificiality.


The ultimate Phalloplasty quest?


Size + Proportion + Functionality + Stealth Natural Looking and Natural Feeling Result


HC

interested1 wrote: Hello, this is my first time posting. Thank you everyone for providing a community for this. In regards to this particular matter, its definitely seems like sizemic is right. Dr. C is catering to demand. My thought is that after some point, a large enough gain would likely produce the pig in a blanket effect for many people. The question is at what increase would likely cause this? I would imagine .5 to .75 inches is the max for many. @HC You mentioned that this was not an issue until the 3rd session. What kind of increase did you get for the first two sessions if you don\'t mind restating? This appears to be a limit for you at least, unless the 30% is the sole culprit. Has anyone else found that after session one or two, they suddenly had the pig in a blanket effect?

Hi interested1,


Welcome to PhalloBoards, it is an honor to greet you and have the privilege of your very first posting. You will certainly find that this is a great community given that we are all \"brothers\" united by a quest which society has made taboo: our Manhood.


First, let me reassure you. The \"pig in a blanket\" effect is one which scared me a lot when I first saw a photo, as it looks very unnatural. However, actually having one of your own isn\'t so alarming, because it is not always a constant appearance. At times I can have a less retracting Flaccid which looks fairly natural. During erections there is zero such effect, with it looking rather Majestic thanks to PMMA. So things aren\'t as somber as they may seem from those photos.


Also, I expect that this is not an issue for people such as Miracle who never retract and who have a Flaccid which is actually almost as long as their Erect state. They are what are called \"Showers\" meaning that they show their ultimate size when in Flaccid state. My condition is due to me being a \"Grower\". In example of a Grower, you can follow EssexBoy\'s progress report. He goes from a Flaccid 3\" long to a very long 8\" when Erect. I would definitely discourage him from getting too much PMMA at too high a concentration. Although with a similar length to Miracle, he could wind up with a pig in a blanket.


Regarding what causes this, it is the combination of severe retraction and rigidity of the outer layer of collagen. That rigidity is a combination of the thickness of the layer and of its tensile resistance due to PMMA concentration. A thick layer of high concentration PMMA will be more rigid than a thin layer of low concentration PMMA. At some point to be calculated, a thick layer of low concentration PMMA might equal the rigidity of a thin layer of high concentration PMMA. FWIW.


Hunk Chunk

HunkChunk wrote:


Issues:

- would it even break down the collagen at all?

- could it damage deeper functional tissues inside the shaft?

- can it be carried by the bloodstream and cause damage elsewhere?
* Note: there is a lot of bloodflow down there...

- reducing the collagen won\'t remove the PMMA beads, hence useless?





HC

I want to stress I\'m not advocating the use of DMSO, as I\'m not an expert and don\'t want to encourage anyone to do anything that is potentially harmful. However, I\'ve long suspected that it could be of benefit to guys who have issues with PMMA.

I\'ve used it for several months at a time and never had any issues. So from my own experience and many guys on Thundersplace etc, it does seem safe if used responsibly (ie clean etc). But, again I stress I\'m not advocating it or claiming I know for sure it\'s safe. I\'m just saying that I have no worries about using it on myself and I\'m the kind of guy that freaks out about possible side effects.

In my experience it doesn\'t seem to dissolve scar tissue, as others have suggested, but it without doubt significantly softened it, which resulted the scar becoming much flatter and more natural feeling.

As regards PMMA, I think there is the possibility that it would soften the surrounding collagen and thus make massaging and re-moulding much more effective. You\'d need to try it for a month at least and do it twice a day. By massaging the soft PMMA you should be changing the distribution of the beads, which I believe is responsible for the clumping.


By the way, tacking can be done without degloving the penis. In the video the penis was degloved to insert the PLGA scaffolds, so they did the taking like that. But

Hi Skeptical One,


Thanks for sharing your musings about this problem we both share in common. You went for thicker gains than me at first, so you pretty much beat me to the punch, but I seem to have caught up with you at least in terms of this undesired effect LOL. You can count on me to go the extra mile to find a solution as quickly as possible, because it is important that we all here find some answers to what ought to be both preventable and curable.


I don\'t know just how much of a buried penis syndrome we might have, but I also turtle hard, my world record was a 1\" Flaccid just prior to my 2nd PMMA Session, as if my unit knew the hardship that was awaiting it. Or possibly this was a sign that my unit was going to react very violently to that PMMA session, causing the extreme swelling that made the PMMA clump in large clusters?


After viewing that extremely distasteful video that Hoddle linked to, showing a poor fellow\'s penis get butchered, I would really prefer avoiding having my tool \"tacked\" to the pelvis. I wish there were a less invasive method of getting the PMMA sheath to stick to the base. Maybe there is. If not I will still very much hesitate to get tacking done, because I went to great lengths to avoid pelvic scars, going to Russia for scrotal ligament cuts. Plus that\'s yet more penile trauma we can all wish to avoid.


It sure would be nice to find a technical workaround for penis retraction. However, it is something which can afflict anyone, apparently. There are cases of severe retraction for \"reasons unknown\" that practically bury one\'s unit inside the pelvis. What causes this has not yet been properly assessed or explained by medical science, and some even believe it is magic:


Penis Snatcher Strikes Fear with Handshake


I remain convinced that it might take several methods in conjuction to come to grips with this problem. One is to improve the suppleness of any additional collagen growth, another to ensure it is somehow anchored to the base, manual PE stretching of tissues, finding a way to encourage some Flaccid bloodflow, and finally perhaps a medication to make one\'s unit less limp? I am thinking of tiny daily doses of Melanotan-II for myself, injected each morning, in order to provide a very slight semi-Flaccid. That way I might better survive the nude beach, while taking care that it isn\'t so much as to give me an equally embarrassing woody.


Cheers,


Hunk Chunk

HunkChunk wrote: Hi Skeptical One,


Thanks for sharing your musings about this problem we both share in common. You went for thicker gains than me at first, so you pretty much beat me to the punch, but I seem to have caught up with you at least in terms of this undesired effect LOL. You can count on me to go the extra mile to find a solution as quickly as possible, because it is important that we all here find some answers to what ought to be both preventable and curable.


I don\'t know just how much of a buried penis syndrome we might have, but I also turtle hard, my world record was a 1\" Flaccid just prior to my 2nd PMMA Session, as if my unit knew the hardship that was awaiting it. Or possibly this was a sign that my unit was going to react very violently to that PMMA session, causing the extreme swelling that made the PMMA clump in large clusters?


After viewing that extremely distasteful video that Hoddle linked to, showing a poor fellow\'s penis get butchered, I would really prefer avoiding having my tool \"tacked\" to the pelvis. I wish there were a less invasive method of getting the PMMA sheath to stick to the base. Maybe there is. If not I will still very much hesitate to get tacking done, because I went to great lengths to avoid pelvic scars, going to Russia for scrotal ligament cuts. Plus that\'s yet more penile trauma we can all wish to avoid.


It sure would be nice to find a technical workaround for penis retraction. However, it is something which can afflict anyone, apparently. There are cases of severe retraction for \"reasons unknown\" that practically bury one\'s unit inside the pelvis. What causes this has not yet been properly assessed or explained by medical science, and some even believe it is magic:


Penis Snatcher Strikes Fear with Handshake


I remain convinced that it might take several methods in conjuction to come to grips with this problem. One is to improve the suppleness of any additional collagen growth, another to ensure it is somehow anchored to the base, manual PE stretching of tissues, finding a way to encourage some Flaccid bloodflow, and finally perhaps a medication to make one\'s unit less limp? I am thinking of tiny daily doses of Melanotan-II for myself, injected each morning, in order to provide a very slight semi-Flaccid. That way I might better survive the nude beach, while taking care that it isn\'t so much as to give me an equally embarrassing woody.


Cheers,


Hunk Chunk

Have you considered PT141 ?

Hi Hoddle,


Thanks for your support in this thread. I am trying to figure out a solution as there are no ready-made ones in a box waiting for me to unwrap them. So I appreciate you relaying to me that quite a few guys have used DMSO there with no adverse effects. I guess none with PMMA have done so before, so I will be pioneering this and discovering the hard way if there is some form of reaction such as a chemical reaction with the plastic beads or maybe their dissolution and melting together?


At least it is reassuring that it is relatively harmless for natural tissues, so it could help break down the stiffness of the collagen layer which accentuates the pig in the blanket phenomenon. For those who wish to be reassured, I shall be posting in the Russian Adventure thread some photos of not only the trip and the clinic but also of my Flaccid when not totally Turtling. It isn\'t always this bad thank goodness. Only when intimidated, as in when strangers are staring at it LOL.


I forgot to mention that I will also be considering using PT141 (thanks to Miracle suggesting in in his Alpha Male thread) which has been since baptized Bremelanotide for commercial purposes, even if it is only available underground as a \"lab testing product\". It was made from Melanotan-II but removing its pigmentation properties, hoping to exploit its sexual stimulation effects as a targeted Erectile Disfunction ED drug without changing your skin and hair color. I like to have a bit of a tan, and the doses I am considering would be very tame, so I might be able to combine the effects by taking the original drug.


Cheers,


HC

Hi guys,


In response to discussing similar issues of PMMA layering with Miracle and Smartman in Miracle\'s Progress Report, I recently resumed my current thinking about what might be done to address the artificial looking and feeling results of my latest 30% PMMA session. I am pasting them here, as they very much apply to this thread topic:



\"Yes, I think this is so because one doesn\'t want an inner more flexible layer of collagen surrounded by an outer more rigid layer. Otherwise your collagen tends to move up and down the shaft, the inner slide due to the flexible inner layer, the exterior motion being gravity induced by the weight of the rigid outer layer. One ends up feeling like your unit is wrapped with a segment of hose and it looks and feels like an artificial implant surrounding the original thinner organ. It no longer appears to be a simple enhancement.\"


\"One can assume that proceeding the other way around would keep the mass of weight closer to the original shaft contours, with any rigidity of the texture being concealed by an outer layer of softer tissues which feel much more natural. Your unit would feel relatively naturally soft to the touch but would offer increasing resistance as you press down. It would not slide around loosely on the shaft, and would not appear or feel like an artificial implant.\"


\"Due to my inverted inside-out layout of PMMA concentrations, I can only imagine three outcomes. The first is keeping things as they are today, and learning to live with artificial looking and feeling genitalia. Worse things can happen in life, yet it will be very disappointing to never again have natural looking and feeling genitalia.\"


\"The second would be to inject higher than 10% PMMA UNDER the existing layer of collagen? This could present an unsurmountable difficulty in administration. If at all feasible, it may not spread very evenly under so thick a sheath of collagen, causing misshapen deformities and a bumpy shaft. Also, used deeply the canulas might risk puncturing other parts of the anatomy, creating a serious health risk.\"


\"The third involves trying to break down the tissues with aggressive stretching and morning and evening applications of DMSO for the next two months. Once I have weakened the fibers and in effect \"mashed\" the collagen, I would then ask Dr C to inject a final layer of 10% PMMA to the outer surface. This might reduce the hard texture of the rigid outer surface. However, as there will still be residual high concentrations of PMMA beads present, it will probably not achieve the same soft natural feel of 10% PMMA used alone. Finally, my Girth is already at the extreme limit of size for a short 5.5\" BPEL, not to mention a very short retracted Flaccid length, making the addition of yet more thickness at the expense of visual aesthetics.\"


\"Unless over the long term I can gain an Inch or two in Erect and Flaccid length by stretching, it is unlikely that I shall ever achieve a natural looking and feeling result as initially desired, short of degloving and starting it all over again?\"



We can note that the Turtling buried glans effect is actually symptomatic of PMMA collagen layering issues, which involves the rigidity and the adherence of tissues to one another leading to their ability or inability to contract and expand in concert with natural erectile motions.


HC

Interesting thought HC. I always enjoy your well formulated posts.
I wouldn\'t care much about your Flaccid appearance, at least its big and fat when its ready to do the work =]. I have myself am a Grower which is close to 8\" long BPEL, but sometimes Flaccid it looks like a baby\'s penis due to Turtling (cone formed with smaller glans) - tends to shrink more than people with reverse cone shape. I used to be concerned about it all the time but its just not worth it.

Does it really feel artificial? It looks very real to me at least. Are you advocating that the best approach would have been to first do 20% 1-2 sessions then finish with a 10%?