From what some reported linnea safe may be better to prevent early clumping of the beads (less risk of nodules short term).
This is my understanding of what hunkchunk reported. He had linnea safe, then metacrill and then he went back to linnea safe for this kind of reasons.
I recall he is not the only one in this case but I\'m not sure. Many are happy with Metacrill anyway.
Concerning the quality of the products (size of beads etc), I don\'t know which one is better. I\'ve read a specialist (prof lemperle I think) said it doesn\'t matter that much when not injected directly into the skin (which is the case in the penis), he also says recent versions of both products present good quality.
He might have some kind of interest in this though, as the inventor of PMMA bioplasty, and artefill creator.
My take is that none of the two is really better than the other, it\'s what Dr C says (again from what I remember reading).
hey bro! I just had my procedure today. I went with the metacril. I spoke to wade in detail about the difference in price. He simply stated that the reason for the 250 dollars more for the linnea safe is simply because of the differences in import costs. Compostionally it is identical to metacril