Sorry I’ve been slow to reply again. Still dealing with…stuff.
Tried to include the most relevant and important points here. Tell me if I missed anything.
Discovernew wrote:That being said, it is totally possible that the median ICI remains the same after 48 weeks, even if some patients got larger penises after VED. The Median is not the same as the average. It is likely, based on the numbers they provide, that the average penis size grew, but the median didn't.
Median means the middle person. If you want to measure the median height of a student classroom for example. Lets say there are 21 students. There are the 10 tallest, 10 shortest, and 1 in the middle. The 1 in the middle is the median. If the tallest guy in the class is 6 feet, or 7 feet, does not change anything, as long as the one in the middle stays the same. Same for the shortest, does not change anything.
An average is different, if the tallest guy is 8 feet tall or 6 feet tall, it will completely change the average. This does not happen in the median calculation. The reason median is used, is to eliminate outliars.
I hope that makes sense.
I don’t understand this. Honest question - how would a median remaining the same not prove exactly what your argument here intended to prove? That if a bunch of men get an implant and used a VED post-surgery, their median or mean or mode or whatever other term I don’t fully understand remaining the same means the VED did not lead to the advertised result of changing the size of their penis in any way?
I can tell you the list of reasons why the particular methods used in this study did increase their sizes but not by very much. First reason:
2435tjklAS wrote:”In this prospective study we report our results regarding penile dimensions and patient satisfaction outcomes after 1 year of follow-up from AMS™LGX700® penile prosthesis implant with 6 months of vacuum erectile device therapy (Antonini et al., 2020).”
The patients were told to use a VED for 5 minutes twice a day. More noteworthy is they were told to do this for only the first 6 months (yet measured after a year? I guess the last 6 months patients only cycled when being erect was required?), which is not an adequate time frame compared to a year or longer. I was implanted on November 2nd, 2021. 8.75” long the day before surgery. Five months and 20 days later on April 22nd, 2022 I took a measurement pic of a tiny bit over 8.5”. Full disclosure is that I later learned my results were exaggerated from unknowingly bending over to some degree when standing up as straight as I did before surgery would have been below 8.5”. Had I used a VED for the first 6 months and for the following 6 months only inflated before sex, I would have cycled 0 times, lol. If I inflated for masturbation it would be much more cycling, but I wouldn’t expect similar results to what happened from my exercise minimum of 30 minutes or so every day for an entire year.
So, after 6 months of much more aggressive methods
I lost length. After approximately 11 months I had gained about .25” (.635 cms) from only inflation with zero arousal. When measured while watching porn like I did to reach the 8.75” starting number, I had gained .75” (1.7cms). My stretched flaccid length is a measurement I cannot intentionally or unintentionally fake or exaggerate like my erect length and I have proof of it also increasing by .75"
Second reason: the range of their preop ICI and 48-weeks follow-up did increase.
2435tjklAS wrote:“The final ones do increase their range from before. ICI started 17cm with range between 11–19, and 48 weeks still reported 17cm length, but the range increased up to 13–23”
2435tjklAS wrote:So, why did ICI size stay the same after 48-weeks? Because it didn't. The ranges prove that at least one patient increased their length by at least 2cms. Another patient increased their length by at least 4cms. For girth, one patient 1cm increase, another 1 patient 1cm more also, which is less than I would expect and I don’t know why it happened.
Third reason: The median baseline length for these men pre-surgery was 14cm. After 6 months of VED usage and 6 more months of who the heck even knows what they did their size increased to 17cm (over 1 inch). This mean the study did not prove LGX makes men's dicks inherently and physiologically bigger than they were before. but it sure as shit proved it made their dicks much bigger now every time they use them.
Discovernew wrote:That being said, another weakness in this study is that there is no control group. We simply do not know what would happen if a bunch of other guys were doing the same study cycling the same amount of time, but without VED. So we cannot compare the difference.
These are solid reasons we can thank newbie for mentioning. But they do happen to be irrelevant for this particular study.
We have far more data than needed for there to even be a control group. Hundreds of men on FrankTalk proved that if they only cycled for 5-15 minutes twice a day like with zero VED usage like their doctors told them to, they would have significantly lost size. The patients in this study did the exact same but additionally used a VED for 10 minutes daily.
And yes I made up these results but they are based provable data - the findings for the control group would have reported something like this:

FrankTalk is your control group.
Discovernew wrote:Also we cannot compare to another group with a non-length expanding implant (non-LGX). Again, this is another weakness in the study.
No one is attempting to compare the results of VED usage to every other implant that exists. The study and our entire discussion is only about the LGX. Not a relevant weakness.
Discovernew wrote:Since this is likely an AMS sponsored study, it would seem logical that they want to show the best results possible in order to sell their device.
Turns out, your assumptions is wrong (sorry for saying the “W” word

)
Here’s what’s right:

IJIR is far too reputable to publish a study funded by Boston Scientific and not telling us about it. They fact that they did not is proof the company who makes this product did not pay a dime.
Additionally, I do understand your point that who funded medical studies can contribute to the results but I do not believe it be true about this particular topic regarding penile implants. If it’s some expensive and unproven and ineffective product few doctors would recommend or let alone base their entire specialist careers off of it’s not the same as the studies “proving” the effectiveness of a device I wasted $10,000 on buying. When I asked my neurologist if there’s any truth to NeuroOptimal being an effective neurofeedback device that will improve my brain’s abilities, he stared me dead in the face and couldn’t say a single word. Because it’s shit that at best has a placebo effect rather than real results. Implants are much different.
Discovernew wrote:I hope the above helps. Just a heads up, if you plan to continue the whole "you are wrong" and similar, i don't have any interest in replying.
Cheers
On a personal level I want to clarify that regardless of how any of my writings might sound or what they seem to imply of me being hostile or critical of your directly or personally…can people understand my brain is not capable of knowing or remembering a single thing about absolutely anyone here? That includes you, Discovernew. I “know” you’re a guy. I know you got an implant. I know you are respected here for consistently posting or commenting valuable information to the community. That is all I know. I can assume more about you than others because of the mutual time spent in this discussion. I told you directly your discovery and questions that no one else even noticed of the pre-op ICI numbers being the same as the post-surgery mean numbers was great, intelligent and analytical that led to me finding the answers that I first admitted were over my head. And I respect for your that. For 99% of other members here if I ever replied or messaged them before I no longer have a clue that we’ve talked and what we talked about or recall their username. Plus, if I read your posts or comments on other topics in the future I'm unlikely to even look at your username because the text is important to me rather than who wrote them since the author wouldn't mean anything to me. Taking what I say on FrankTalk personally is not fair or reasonable with regards to my natural communications that are medically disabled giving me no idea who any of you are.