TOPIC: A Fascinating Alternative to Phalloplasty

Since this treatment has now been available for over three years, I’m curious whether any documented case reports exist showing patients who achieved meaningful additional growth from continued long-term use. The webinar mentioned more than 800 patients, with a large percentage opting to keep going. If the results reported in the study (roughly 1 Inch in length and 0.6 inches in Girth after six months) are representative, it seems like we’d be seeing some standout long-term cases highlighted, especially as marketing material, given how impactful those kinds of gains would be.

Does the absence of such visible long-term examples suggest we should approach the real-world effectiveness with some skepticism? My family doctor pointed out several limitations in the original study, such as the small sample size, reliance on self-reported measurements, and its appearance in a lower-impact journal. He advised me not to treat the findings as conclusive proof.

I’m bringing this up not as criticism, but as a starting point for an honest discussion about how to view the treatment and its supporting evidence. Much of the marketing seems anchored in the P-Long study, yet issues like inconsistent measurement methods (for example, bone-pressed length or temporary swelling from pumping) could influence the reliability of the results.

That said, I’m genuinely empathetic toward Dr. Brandeis and understand the challenges involved in publishing one’s own research. His contributions to this space are worth recognizing, even if there are areas that invite scrutiny. What stands out to me is the lack of clear “outlier” cases backed by indisputable photographic evidence. In the study, the top gains after six months were around 1.44 inches in length and 0.75 inches in Girth, volumetrically significant enough that strong before-and-after photos would be very compelling, and would be in my opinion much more effective than any webinar when it comes to marketing the treatment.

Any thoughts on that?

@Renz , there was actually a separate thread where comments were made that may respond to some of your inquiries (see that Topic here).

And I do agree, I think in a world where medical male enhancement remains arguably experimental due to its lack of standardizations and broader acceptance by mainstream medicine, as well as the pseudo-science that often accompanies manual penis enlargement (PE) exercises (like pumping, stretching, etcetera) -- it takes ambition, vision, and bravery to institute a study that marries the aforementioned modalities of PE.

In reality, we live in a world where Research & Development (R&D) are severely lacking, and most advancements & innovations are being made inside perhaps a few dozen Clinics from around the world. So in that sense alone, I feel this endeavor is the very thing members of this community would hope for, and for that I'm personally supportive of. In fact, Dr. Brandeis has been seemingly open to constructive critiques, and I'm sure as more Providers get feedback, he might find the current protocol (as it stands) remains optimal, or he may modify it in ways that maximize its potential.

Hello Renz,
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote and have acknowledged most of it in previous posts.
I agree that there needs to be higher-level research on this subject, but it seems that I am the only researcher working, presenting and publishing on a natural solution that does not involve silicone implants or fillers. The NIH does not award grants for this type of research. Academics at universities don't do research studies on penile enhancement. Men are reluctant to post pictures of their penises on websites.
It is an interesting scientific question that has puzzled men for thousands of years.
I am doing the best I can to provide a natural solution that is safe and effective. And I am trying to be open and transparent about the data that I have from my office and from our national survey. I can't do much more.
Respectfully,
Judson Brandeis MD

I’m going to give @P-Long another go . I’m curious how important is it to break the exercises up into two sessions as opposed to one longer session. Two just seems like a steeper climb day in and day out.

There is no official p long provider in my area any more so I’m just going to do the prp shots with a local provider and the rest is rather straight forward.