TOPIC: Best option right now?? New, well-informed, kinda confused, but too depressed to accept my dick

Read the thread \"Grow your own penis.\" The last post by Herbert West has a link ...

hoddle10 wrote: In the days post procedure I was about 6.25\" Girth and my initial observation or thought, was how the hell am I supposed to get this into a girl? Honestly, I\'m not lying when I say I just couldn\'t believe guys want to be that big as it seemed absurdly unpractical to me. A couple of days after that the swelling went away and it settled at about 5.75\" (I swell a lot for some reason, even after just 4cc of PMMA). It was once the swelling went that I started having doubts about the suitability of HA. For the first time I could really feel the actual material and as much as I wanted to like it, it just didn\'t feel right. It was okay until I got really hard and then the contrast between my real penis and the HA became apparent to the point I knew I\'d feel uncomfortable about a girl touching it. I also tried a condom on and when I rolled it down, it really showed how soft the HA was.

What was your initial Erect Girth before the HA, and was 5.75 where it stayed until you had it removed? A 4.5\" Girth gaining an Inch is different from someone at 5\" gaining a 1/2\" in depth of the filler between the skin and the CC. This may have a bigger impact on the degree of firmness noticable to the touch?

~LL

aleksk wrote: Thanks for sharing. I know you said you won\'t answer any questions, but I assume that refers to your recent PMMA experience as you\'re waiting to see how it will play out.

Could you please answer a question about your dissatisfaction with Voluma/Teosyal as many of us are considering it and most of us don\'t personally know anyone who had it to have a conversation with them?

- It felt wrong in what way? Was it too soft when Erect? Did you try to have sex with it? Was it an obstacle/issue during sex/penetration? Was it prone to movement? Did you notice any difference between Voluma and Teosyal in this respect or any other?

Sure you would expect PMMA to integrate better with the underlying tissue than HA fillers. This is why I spent so much time researching Ellanse. This is why I\'ve said so many times Voluma is stupid in the sense that it just fills and does nothing else. This is why almost all my posts are meant to invite people to research, explore and share thoughts and experiences about other fillers.

I\'ve also suggested your approach before - have very small quantities of a filler like Ellanse at a time until you reach a modest goal. Give it time to do its job, integrate and create new tissue before you go for more.

You could say it is a sensible approach for any filler but especially bio stimulating fillers - not so much the stupid HA gamma of fillers where what you see is what you get. Even fat - how likely it is that 5 cc of fat at a time would result in the complications we see from fat injections? But the stupid \'what you see is what you get\' characteristic of HA fillers is also a big advantage of theirs, in terms of you don\'t have to live a life where suddenly the filler decides to do something nasty and misshape your penis or even give you serious complications. The guy I referred to above says his injector did more than fine - his penis looked good for few weeks and he was very happy. Then the shit happened and now I feel sorry for him because he feels he is screwed for life. He doesn\'t have a recourse. He had a great looking Dick with a decent size and decided PMMA is a marvelous idea based on reading this forum exclusively. Obviously he only did selective reading. And now he\'ll have to live with the contour irregularities for the rest of his life and have every new partner question his shape/size every single time. I\'d rather stay small than live that scenario for the rest of my life.

So, please share if you could your experience with HA fillers and what your dissatisfaction stemmed from.

The \'what is better - HA or PMMA\' debate could not be objectively developed on this forum because we don\'t have a critical mass (or any mass for that matter) of men who have had HA. Hence, I ask you to please share more of your experience with HA.

I\'m pretty sure you were one of the people I told about my HA experience at the time I had it!

I did notice a difference in Teosyal and Voluma. I can\'t remember the exact type of Teosyal I used, but I\'m sure Hunkydory will remember, so I can ask him. I\'d say Teosyal felt more like a graft, perhaps comparable to a mouse mat. It had more rigidity than Voluma. The downside was that it was harder to inject. Voluma came out of the canula much easier. Though I\'m sure a wider canula could be used, but then maybe a stitch would be needed, but I\'m not sure.

In the days post procedure I was about 6.25\" Girth and my initial observation or thought, was how the hell am I supposed to get this into a girl? Honestly, I\'m not lying when I say I just couldn\'t believe guys want to be that big as it seemed absurdly unpractical to me. A couple of days after that the swelling went away and it settled at about 5.75\" (I swell a lot for some reason, even after just 4cc of PMMA). It was once the swelling went that I started having doubts about the suitability of HA. For the first time I could really feel the actual material and as much as I wanted to like it, it just didn\'t feel right. It was okay until I got really hard and then the contrast between my real penis and the HA became apparent to the point I knew I\'d feel uncomfortable about a girl touching it. I also tried a condom on and when I rolled it down, it really showed how soft the HA was.

I did think that the problem could have been that I had too much, so I started again and this time just went up by 0.4\". I think it was slightly better, but again it still just didn\'t have the rigidity. I think part of the problem is because I have visible scars from other procedures I don\'t want anything in my penis that may cause sexual partners to think it\'s not natural. So maybe I\'m harder to please than others who have had HA are.

So far I\'d say PMMA feels much better. I don\'t want to say much about my approach as I\'m super cautious and don\'t want to tempt fate. But at the moment, my current thinking is that if you approach it a bit at time, you are unlikely to have aesthetic issues. I really hate saying this as I don\'t want it to come back to bite me on the ass, but I can\'t see someone running into the issues the guy you mentioned has, if one takes a similarly cautious approach. The trouble is, I can\'t see many being prepared to do so, maybe only those who have been scarred in the past.

A jig-saw piece would never give, in the slightest, an idea of the complete picture. The paragraph from which you quoted needs to be examined in its entirety to understand the context, scope and intention of the writer otherwise that little portion is completely misconstrued and lends to mischief.

I was urging the author of the thread to do thorough research, mindful of \"between the lines\" sentiments and motives (remember that at one stage skeptical one himself was even accused of being Dr C!) and that all the parameters in your first paragraph can be reviewed at any point along the process of a research. Hence, I was for PMMA (grateful that I didn\'t fall victim to Dr Loria), later for HA and now back in favour of PMMA. It is still a fact that all the HA recipients have not been able to give direct answers to questions of firmness and moveability. Your statistical chart is subjective and inconclusive. Dr Oates is honest and open, yet he also did not answer the questions conclusively but is introducing Teosyal or something like that. Only guys who\'ve done PMMA have answered so far.

I\'m still urging the brother to do deep research for his own sake and not be distracted by some of our show-off intelectual dissertations.

I have just read hoddle10\'s post and to be sure, established conclusions cannot be superimposed on by a few events or raw data that have not been correlated or drawn unto a reliable graph from which analysis can be done, first by intrapolation then extrapolation. In other words, though HA has been around long, there is suspiciously little data to go on. The simple \"dishonesty\" in answering questions about it is enough discouragement for me.

I again urge this brother to arrive at his own conclusions by researching the board then ask for advice once fortified with knowledge ...

Personally I don\'t think there can be much doubt that PMMA is a superior filler to any of the HA products currently offered for PE purposes. However, as @aleksk points out, one can end up with permanent issues that may be difficult to fix. So in my opinion, the best option is PMMA, but with a very cautious approach.

I wasn\'t going to mention this and wont answer any questions or start a progress thread until I\'m done, but after years of contemplating it, I\'ve recently had PMMA. I tried Voluma and Teosyal, but they just didn\'t offer the rigidity I was looking for. Though I must say the injector did a fantastic job and aesthetically the result was great. It took me a few weeks to finally accept I was going to have to dissolve it, as it looked great and I really wanted to believe I\'d found the solution. Once it was gone I knew I\'d pretty much exhausted my options and concluded that, given I wasn\'t going to get over my penis sized insecurities, PMMA was my only hope. At the same time our old friend Hunky Dory reached the same conclusion. He dissolved his HA and soon headed down to Mexico to get PMMA. I left it a few months longer, but after hearing him say how much better it felt than HA, it was the final push I needed. However, like @aleksk points out, just because the filler is superior for the job, doesn\'t mean it will give a superior result, which is proven by the complications many have reported. With that in mind I had just 4cc injected. According to Dr C I set the record for the lowest amount in any session!

As I said above, I\'m not going to answer questions etc at the moment or start of progress report, as I\'d rather do it when I\'m finished. I am keeping a log so my final report wont be without real time detail. The only reason I have even mentioned it, despite not planning on doing so, is simply to point out that though we often group procedures by name, the great variance in how these procedures can be approached mean that we can\'t see all PMMA or HA procedures as the same. I refuse to believe that post op protocol or risk of complications for my 4cc of 10%cc is anywhere near that of a guy who has 25 cc or 30% injected. In my honest opinion, the popularity in recent years of 30% PMMA and the large volumes injected are the only reason people even consider things like HA. Nearly all the complications we\'ve seen are to do with nodules, lumps and ridges. In over 5 years of progress reports we are yet to see any violent reactions with red skin, burning and puss etc, that we (those of us who were there in the early days of PB\'s) were all scared about the possibility of when PMMA was first discussed. I always said that we needed at least 5 years of progress before we could really comment on the safety of the procedure. Now we have that and personally I think the evidence we have amassed quite clearly points that the most important thing is to approach the procedure in a way that limits the possibility of lumps/nodules etc. I just don\'t think most guys have the restraint to do that and also most would want bigger gains than is perhaps possible via a slow and conservative approach.

Thanks everyone....there\'s not as much info out there about HA when compared to PMMA.

I definitely want to do something about Girth but not sure what exactly.

PMMA with Dr Nemekova could be an option as Prague is not to far to travel from the UK.

Some months back, after reading some of the more \"terrible\" reports about it, I was scared stiff about PMMA. Now, I begin to see it as the \"ultimate\" option.

I wish guys could be more forthright in their reports, it took quite a while before the issue of \"hardness and moveability\" of HA started to be questioned.

This author should do quite some research for himself and remember that there could be some sentiments leaning towards some procedures, especially where commerce and maybe finance are underlying concerns.

When I just joined here, some members called me a \"shithead newbie\" because of the questions I asked. But I\'ve learnt to read deeply through the threads and posts, sieving through the facts, the humour, the trivialties and sometimes outright shit! Coming to the conclusion in my first paragraph was due to researching like finding short-cuts in Fourier Series or Laplace Transforms for an upcoming exam. Good for me, otherwise I could already have gone to Dr Oates and later regretted the \"hardness and moveability\" factors now coming up.

Cheers my brother, and the best of luck ...

Skeptical One wrote:
Those are significant trade-offs.

I\'d take PMMA over any current option, including HA. HA has two major problems: it\'s not permanent, meaning you\'ll have to continuously top-off to retain size. And secondly, it doesn\'t nearly have the same palpable realness that your actual penis has...many describe as soft & squishy. If neither of these two factors are an issue for you, then sure HA is a good option. Otherwise I\'d stick to the tried & true PMMA.

Yes, they are. I have been searching for descriptions of Erection quality and am having a hard time finding them. In another thread member said his was a little softer but he was satisfied... I thought I saw one other person who also said they were satisfied, but I can\'t recall who it was. if I read \"many\" descriptions that called it \"soft & squishy\" I would probably change my thoughts on it. I was even considering starting a specific thead on HA and Erection quality to collect direct reports from those who have had it.

I am somewhat interested in PMMA. I take it there may be a little more risk with PMMA? I also wish it were available as an option in the US.

~LL

ll wrote: @buffdawg Actually I should have said trade-off, singular, because there\'s only one aside from the expense and temporary nature that I already mentioned--and that would be the hardness factor. As discussed in other threads it\'s possible that outer layer might not be 100 percent as hard as an Erection without filler under the skin.

~LL

Those are significant trade-offs.

I\'d take PMMA over any current option, including HA. HA has two major problems: it\'s not permanent, meaning you\'ll have to continuously top-off to retain size. And secondly, it doesn\'t nearly have the same palpable realness that your actual penis has...many describe as soft & squishy. If neither of these two factors are an issue for you, then sure HA is a good option. Otherwise I\'d stick to the tried & true PMMA.

buffdawg wrote: what are these other trade offs you speak of LL??

@buffdawg Actually I should have said trade-off, singular, because there\'s only one aside from the expense and temporary nature that I already mentioned--and that would be the hardness factor. As discussed in other threads it\'s possible that outer layer might not be 100 percent as hard as an Erection without filler under the skin.

~LL

popopo wrote: What does HA stand for? Thanks.

See this thread for a starter:

phalloboards.websitetoolbox.com/post/ha-...ty-8050915?&trail=15

\"Franklin Keuhhas seems caring\" lol
That\'s the funniest thing I\'ve heard all day

Thanks for your reply. I\'m too afraid to try extenders and pumps again right now and I\'d probably only gain what I lost at best and even though that would still be awesome, the chance of further damage is too big. On the other hand, surgery is probably even a bigger risk. May I ask what HA injections are? What does HA stand for? Thanks.

what are these other trade offs you speak of LL??

Sorry that this has you down, and that manual PE caused issues. Obviously you do not want surgery which would risk further issues. I\'ve personally come to the conclusion that the safest way to get some Girth at present is HA injections if you can find someone good. Problem is it may be expensive and require repeat visits, along with other trade-offs, but if I were going to do something tomorrow that would be my choice. Good luck.

In the meantime you might want to do some research on a good extender. I got some lenght and a small amount of Girth in the past using a combination of extender and reaonable pumping. Never jelq.

Cheers,
LL