VED’s - choices, models & quality

[Hawk]

Pleas,

Excellent contribution, you obviously are not new to the topic you comment on.

Hawk

[Norm]

Pless,
That is a very good explanation of why the tube is tapered. I assumed it was done to make retrofits harder for us, thereby making us go back to Augusta to get more tubes. But, alas, my theory was shot down by the fact that Augusta does not offer more tubes. I built my own insert to fit inside. As you described, I left it a 1/2" short on the pump end to stay away from the cleats and to not interfere with the pump. I machined the other end to accept the sizing insert that comes with the unit. Attached is a pic of the tube that I made. I also posted this on another forum and will gladly share more pics and info if anyone needs help converting theirs. Again thanks for the educated explanation.

[pless]

Norm:
Hey, if you're making your own inside tubes and you're feeling mechanical, what about making one with a bit of the opposite curvature to the curve you're trying to correct.
pless

[Norm]

You know, I am working on that very idea. I used a perfectly round cylinder, which is all that is out there. But there are ways to heat the tube and make an indention in one side. Or use some composite to build up the ID on one side. Then it would simply be a matter of aligning the cylinder in the direction you want. I will let you all know if I figure a way to do that.  

[pless]

The inside of the tube must be very smooth and have fairly constant lengthwise curvature to allow the whole penis to easily reposition.  I think you can "sag" your polycarbonate tube in a household oven at 360 F, maybe constrained between two walls so it doesn't bulge.  

[Norm]

I am thinking it would be easier to control the sag with a heat gun. An oven would create a sag the full length of the tube. The heat gun would allow actually sculpting the sag. This is all theory and supposition, of course.  

[pless]

I've no experience with tight-tube VED therapy, but I suggested that the tube have fairly constant lengthwise curvature so the re-formed, tube-filling penis could easily slide within it.  Irregularly curved tubes don't allow this.  (Geometry allows only straight lines, circles, and helixes to slide along themselves.)

Glass tubes are successfully bent into all shapes over a Bunsen burner, but those tubes have small diameter and thick walls.  I think your tube will deform badly unless heated uniformly.

[Norm]

I don't think you and I are talking about the same thing. I am thinking that a curved tube has no chance of fitting back inside the original that comes with the unit. There is just no slack with an insert that is 1/8" thick. Since no curve will fit, I am thinking that an indentation might work. It would still fit into the unit. And it would force the penis to curve around the smooth indentation to the opposit direction. This all sounds good. In practice? Prolly not. I expect, in practice, all my idea would do is to make the penis follow the indentation on that side. It would likely have no more effect than a straight tube. I think I will just stick to the tight-tube therapy and continue going smaller until I find the size where my penis will fill the tube and have no gap where the curve is.  

[ashtown]

Just to follow up on an earlier comment from Old Man about manual v battery pumps I'd have to agree that battery pumps are not necessary for most users. I bought one last week and I find the manual pump easier to use for subtle adjustments with less risk of damage and it costs less.  

[pless]

I don't think you and I are talking about the same thing. I am thinking that a curved tube has no chance of fitting back inside the original that comes with the unit.

Me too.  Let's forget about the original unit and consider strategies for straightening the Peyronies damaged penis.  Suppose the penis erects with 30 deg right "banana" curvature.  What shape should the tight-fit tube have?  The tube can be straight, like everyone suggests.  The tube can also have some curve to the left, say 15 deg of left "banana" curvature.  Most bent things in the world are fixed by being bent slightly beyond straight, so the 15 deg left tube is at least a logical possibility that deserves investigation.  Alternatively the tube can have a 15 deg right "banana" curvature.  Use this partial correction tube for some weeks or months before beginning a more leftward correction.  In a scientific study of tight-fit VED therapies all these approaches would be investigated.  There has been no such scientific study.  The straight tube was the default because it fit into the standard VED and was available.  Indeed according to Augusta's literature their smaller size cylinders are not meant for tight-fit but for decent fit of narrower penises: link.  I'm not implying that the tight-fit straight tube therapy is incorrect, only that it is a presumption.  We have one penis and finite time and money.  If we're handy like Norm we should use our best mechanical-medical intuitions to craft the VED(s) with which to take our chances.

[ashtown]

Pless, your Penis is not "most bent things" and I'd say it's extremely dangerous to suggest that men start bending their damaged unit in this way without medical evidence to back it up. When you break an arm or your nose you set it straight and not 15 degrees to one side.

Perhaps you could build this and try it on yourself if you are so convinced by the logic but first of all I'd suggest you actually get some personal experience using a proper medical grade VED. Many men on this forum have already seen good results using one and some are now completely free of Peyronies symptoms after using one for several months. I'm hoping to be one of them.

In case my comments above are misinterpreted as an attack this is not the case. I merely think that it is inadvisable to promote homemade untested treatments of a mechanical nature that might lead to some very bad results. Somebody could take this idea and do some irreparable damage. This is one of the reasons why medical treatments have to go through such strenuous testing before they are given official approval.  

[pless]

ashtown: What you overlook is that there is no published "medical evidence" for the tight-fit VED therapy for Peyronies.  The only published study for VED for Peyronies is Raheem et al. 2010 which used an oversized 1-cylinder unit.  Where exactly is the "medical evidence" for the 3-cylinder protocol?  Old Man has referred to a 1000+ man clinical study in Alabama.  Has there ever been even a 100 man clinical study for any aspect of Peyronies disease reported anywhere?

Consider how the protocol for a clinical trial is arrived at.  A group of doctors pool their intuitions based on theory and experience, including experimental experience.  Experimenting means trying things.  Sorry to say, we are in the early "trial and error" phase now.  

I'm not "convinced by the logic" of overbending to correct a Peyronies bent penis.  I simply called it a "logical possibility".  Obviously someone trying it would quit it when there are signs of harm or when straightness is reached.  

Incidentally, setting a broken bone is not an example of bending something into shape.

[Hawk]

I have been meaning to jump in on this conversation for days but due to the high posting over the last few days I have not had time.  I want to say more than I have time to say but here are the basics.  Pless makes several valid points even if he challenges what many people accept as true.  That does not mean I agree with everything he said but here are the facts.  Most of what we do has little or no real sound clinical findings.  Most of our attempts to treat the Peyronies Disease and its symptoms come from applying the best deductive logic we can muster and using anecdotal evidence.  I refer everyone to reading this link in its entirety and reading it every few months until it is embedded in our minds. Peyronie Disease Society Evaluating Clinica Trials

I will take traction for an example since that is my main treatment of choice.  We have one study on traction with a very very small sample of participants.  There was no way to make this a blinded study so the researcher and the participants knew they got traction.  One could additionally argue that the doctor conducting the study had a vested interest in the outcome which casts more skepticism on the outcome.  What we know is that men wearing traction are reported to see improvement at a given tension for a given number of hours.  There was no control group using:
1. less tension and more hours
2. Same tension and less hours
3. Greater tension and less hours

There are scores of other variables not tested like traction and VED use combined, traction with hyerthermia, on, and on.  So, even if we accept that the study had no bias, and that it was large enough to be accurate, we still have no idea if the approach used in the study was the best or the worst approach to using traction because it was not compared to any other use of traction.  There is also no reason to think that even a skilled urologist could guess whether these other variations would increase or decrease the results.

We run into the same issues with the VED, supplements, Hyperthermia, etc.  There are just too few studies, providing too little information.  If we accept the VED helps, (and I think it does), we still cannot be sure if one protocol works better or worse than another.  How would we know?  Where is that data to establish that another protocol worked better or worse?

_______________________________________________

Because of the above issues, much that follows is only one man's logical deduction.  Keep in mind however, if anyone claims to know differently, they must produce evidence or they are just offering another opinion.

Now on a different topic brought up by Pless.  Bending past 0 degrees (straight).  First off a flaccid penis can be bent at will including bunched up in jockey shorts.  Lets say an erect penis has a 30 degree left curve. Inflating that flaccid penis in a 15 degree right curve tube until the first indication of slight discomfort can be no more dangerous than telling a man with a 90 degree left curve to bend and inflate it in a 0 degree tube. The last man is bending his penis away from its scarred deformity by 90 degrees.  The first man is bending away from the scar by only 45 degrees and if anything, he is therefore placing less stress on the scar tissue assuming they pump to the same degree of inflation.  

Presumably, the point of the VED is to stretch scar tissue until the first indication of slight discomfort.  Just because the first man's penis is placed in a 15 degree right-curve tube does not mean that you would stretch that scar tissue any more.  You would still pump until that same scar tissue was stretched only to the point before any discomfort.   The straight tube or the 15 degree tube serve one purpose in my mind.  That purpose is to keep any stretch off of the long side of the penis.  A fat tube allows the penis to curve and stretches both sides to some degree.  

[pless]

Thank you Hawk for adding your knowledge to the discussion.

Presumably, the point of the VED is to stretch scar tissue until the first indication of slight discomfort.  Just because the first man's penis is placed in a 15 degree right-curve tube does not mean that you would stretch that scar tissue any more.  You would still pump until that same scar tissue was stretched only to the point before any discomfort.   The straight tube or the 15 degree tube serve one purpose in my mind.  That purpose is to keep any stretch off of the long side of the penis.  A fat tube allows the penis to curve and stretches both sides to some degree.

Doesn't your description actually make a case against the need for the snug-tube 3-cylinder VED method?  The (laterally) curved penis has a long side and a short side.  The VED can apply tension to both sides.  You imply ("keep any stretch off of the long side") that the amount of tension required to effectively stretch the scar tissue on the short side could be undesirably great for the unscarred long side.  One problem with this account is that the short side usually isn't scar from end to end, so whatever tension is applied to the scar involves equal tension being applied to the unscarred part of the short side.  Ignoring that, you should be satisfied with any tube that constrains the penis so its long side doesn't receive the full tension applied to the short side.  An erection with 30 deg curvature would, unless very thin or very short, be constrained from reaching its full 30 deg curvature in the standard 1-cylinder VED.  So its long side would be protected from the full tension.  

[pless]

One further thought on Hawk's description of the straightening mechanism.  Maybe "keep any stretch off of the long side" implies that there is a danger of stretching the unscarred tissue more than the scarred tissue, so making the curvature worse.  On this account the straight snug-tube (3-cylinder) VED method is challenged again.  Even if constrained in a straight tube, the long (unscarred) side of the penis can then stretch more than the short (scarred) side, putting the penis into shear.  In the tube the glans would sit cocked toward the short side.  Removed from the tube the penis would curve as before.  On this account a tube curved opposite to the erection curve works better than a straight tube by reducing the possibility of shear.  

[Norm]

I have to agree with pless on his thinking. He was merely posing an idea, which is why we are all here. I did not feel like he was recommending that I bend my penis the opposite direction. He was just thinking out loud, so to speak. Our penis, unlike the bone it was compared to, is not completely rigid and able to be "set" back in the straight position. Fully erect, I would liken it more to a spring. It has some latitude of movement and bend. And the method for straightening spring steel is like pless posed, over bend it the opposite direction. So I certainly see the logic in his thinking and I plan to work on that idea. Has there been any clinical study to support this thinking? Nope! But most of what we are all trying has not been medically validated anyway. We are all our own guinea pigs and share our successes and failures because the medical community is not taking our penises nearly as seriously as we are. Pless, I think the only way our idea could work would be if each man could custom make his own tube for his situation. We are not all banana. We are not all curved midway or curved at the base. So each tube would have to be fitted. With that in mind, I think we are going to have to settle for "straight" tubes. I really think that over bending in the opposite direction would achieve faster results, but I don't see it as practical for what we have to work with now.  

[pless]

Norm, thanks for reading my "logical possibility" post correctly.  If you also read the three posts before yours they contain possible support for the overcorrection tube.  More important though is their basis for skepticism about the snug-fit 3-cylinder method altogether.  The snug-fit method rests on a novel theory of molding the penis while pumped.  

VED therapy is simpler, and cheaper, with 1 tube than with 3.  What's the success percentage for the ideal 3-cylinder therapy and what's the success percentage for the ideal 1-cylinder therapy?  Anecdotal reports don't help here.  To get two answers worth comparing there needs to be a well controlled study involving the two methods (or separate studies with identical controls).  

If there's only the one published study -- Raheem et al. 2010 -- then I feel I know nothing about any VED therapy, since I don't respect that study (see my May post in another strand).  But one might yet wonder why the 3-cylinder therapy was entirely overlooked in that study.  I fear some people trust the 3-cylinder method because Augusta makes a 3-cylinder unit without realizing that they make it for a different purpose.

We are all our own guinea pigs and share our successes and failures because the medical community is not taking our penises nearly as seriously as we are.

Well said.  It's worth our care and dare and expense.  But we might someday have to make it less than our life's work.

[LWillisjr]

VED therapy is simpler, and cheaper, with 1 tube than with 3.  What's the success percentage for the ideal 3-cylinder therapy and what's the success percentage for the ideal 1-cylinder therapy?  Anecdotal reports don't help here.  To get two answers worth comparing there needs to be a well controlled study involving the two methods (or separate studies with identical controls).  

You are correct. But I guess it will be quite some time before a study comparing the two methods is completed, if ever. I only know that the 3-cylinder therapy has proven effective for a number of men on this forum. And the difference in price is only a few hundred dollars. I think I would spend the extra $ and time to follow a method that has some proven results.

[pless]

I think I would spend the extra $ and time to follow a method that has some proven results.

lwillisjr: For straightening the Peyronies penis, the only VED method with officially proven results, meaning positive results published in a reputable medical journal, is the 1-cylinder method.  See Raheem et al., 2010.

A reason for doubting the 1-cylinder method's efficacy is contained in Hawk's injunction: "keep any stretch off of the long side."  The single loose-fit cylinder would be bad if the unscarred tunica would stretch more than the scarred tunica stretches, or if the unscarred tunica would become damaged before the scarred tunica stretched.  These are two hypotheses about the tunica.  Are we sure of either?  

As much as I dislike the Raheem et al. paper, their study did find straightening from use of the loose-fit cylinder and our hypotheses must square with this finding.  Figure 3 of the paper is infuriating for indicating how much change occurred for each of the men, without indicating their initial curvatures.  It is possible that the very curved penises included in the study, which would be partly constrained even in the large cylinder, are the ones that straightened.  It is possible that the less curved penises, which would be free in the large cylinder, are the few that worsened.  Until we rule out those possibilities, Hawk's injunction is consistent with Raheem et al.'s findings.  Now a cautious interpretation of Raheem et al. suggests use of a not-very-loose-fitting cylinder.  No support for the snug cylinder of the 3-cylinder method can be gotten from Raheem et al.

[Hawk]

Pless,

I have to remind you that while your assessment of the existing published studies may be correct, we would all be worse off if we only followed treatments with properly conducted, published trials.  There are many men here that have improved from the triple cylinder VED.  It could be argued that they could have improved as well or better with a single cylinder.  It could even be argued they would have spontaneously improved with no treatment since individual accounts are only anecdotal evidence.  Sometime one has to go with anecdotal evidence when: it comes from a trusted source, it is the only evidence available, it conforms to some rule of logic.  On the last point, what may see logical or illogical to an untrained professional seems to be the opposite to an educated expert.  

What I do know is that with all due respect to urologists, the peyronies patient community led the way in what I consider the 2 most successful treatments.  Just 7 or 8 years ago there was not a doctor on the planet that did not mock the idea of a VED or an extender (traction) to regain size and correct penile deformity.  Patients tenaciously tried these devices and reported positive result however.  Even on forums members often labeled men posting about improvement as shills selling the devices for manufactures.  After a time a few urologists actually took a look at the possibility of benefit.  The result was a confirmation of what we already thought was true.  You have to smile when they publish their findings and act like they are leading the community rather than following it.  I could cite other similar issues.  What makes me want to scream is when they dismiss anything patients suggest with "there is no clinical proof".  It is as if to say "you are an idiot.  It is not proven therefore it is NOT!"   They then prescribe colchcine, verapamil creams (even injections) and other things that have no clinical evidence much less clinical proof.  It is almost a mentality that if they control it it is good.  If they don't, it is bad.  This is a generalization and does not apply to all doctors but it does apply to many.

To me it is clear that VED usage helps.  It may be blood flow and oxygenation or it may be stretching or a combination.  It is a guess at best.  It also seems clear that controlled stretching is the only thing a triple cylinder could possibly provide that a single cylinder cannot provide. Logically, it makes no sense to me that a man that gets normal erections needs a VED for oxygen.  It also makes no sense to me that stretching 20 minutes a day can reshape a deformity.  I don't think 20 minutes of traction would work.  On the other hand, I am convinced with 7 years of posted accounts that the VED works.  The triple cylinder VED also works.  Which one works best?  Opinions and theories may abound on that issue but I don't think anyone has shown evidence to support those opinions and I don't think they will any time soon.  You pick what makes enough sense to you that you will stick with it and you proceed and hopefuly keep the community updated on the results.

[pless]

It also seems clear that controlled stretching is the only thing a triple cylinder could possibly provide that a single cylinder cannot provide.

Actually there's one other thing the snug cylinder VED does.  It applies two-sided pressure to the tunica -- from the corpus Cavernosum within and from the plastic without.  Might that be theraputic?  I have no idea.

The 3-cylinder protocol is a hybrid including snug and loose cylinders, so, unless the snug cylinder is anti-theraputic, the three cylinders can achieve whatever the one (loose) cylinder can achieve.  But three costs much more than one and might take much more time and these factors do matter to many men.  So we should at least try to improve our understandings in order to make a better guess.

It also makes no sense to me that stretching 20 minutes a day can reshape a deformity.  I don't think 20 minutes of traction would work.

Stretching a balloon makes it easier to blow up.  That is, the 1-dimensional action provides 2-dimensional relief.  It is on this thinking that traction is supposed to increase girth while obviously stretching length.  But a balloon is a fully elastic, rubber material.  The tunica has an elastic component PLUS a fibrous component.  The fibrous component provides a stop to the elasticity -- a length stop and a girth stop.  Likewise the scars have a fibrous component.  Might it be that 20 minutes a day of VED is (much?) more effective than 20 minutes a day of traction because the VED stretches the scars 2-dimensionally rather than 1-dimensionally?



   

[Hawk]

Actually there's one other thing the snug cylinder VED does.  It applies two-sided pressure to the tunica -- from the corpus Cavernosum within and from the plastic without.  Might that be theraputic?  I have no idea.

Never having had my penis in a 3 cylinder VED, I speculate that once you expand in girth and touch the tube, pressure no longer increases in the CC only on the corpus spongiosum.  I can't envision really being pressed against the tube walls with pressure.  Maybe those that use the 3 tube can comment.

Stretching a balloon makes it easier to blow up.  That is, the 1-dimensional action provides 2-dimensional relief.  It is on this thinking that traction is supposed to increase girth while obviously stretching length.  But a balloon is a fully elastic, rubber material.  The tunica has an elastic component PLUS a fibrous component.  The fibrous component provides a stop to the elasticity -- a length stop and a girth stop.  Likewise the scars have a fibrous component.  Might it be that 20 minutes a day of VED is (much?) more effective than 20 minutes a day of traction because the VED stretches the scars 2-dimensionally rather than 1-dimensionally?

I have always concluded that traction has to focus tension on the shortest runs of fibers leaving the longer runs slack.  It is interesting however that I am sure you could put a healthy penis under traction and presumably stretch all tissue/fiber runs to maximum capacity and then still expand in girth while under traction.  That makes me stop and scratch my head a bit. First to calculate if it is true and next to calculate the dynamics if it is true

PS: There is no doubt that traction increases girth and length.

[pless]

It's just statics, not dynamics.  When the penis expands to its full size in the large cylinder the interior pressure (from blood) is matched by the encircling tension of the tunica at its fibrous stop.  When the penis expands to its not quite full size in the small cylinder there is a similar interior pressure (from blood) matched by the encircling elastic tension of the tunica, not yet at its fibrous stop, plus the force of the walls.  In each case physics demands a balance.  In the first case the tunica is pressed from inside, while in the second case it is pressed from inside and outside.  Again, I have no idea whether the squeeze is good or bad.

While in traction, the healthy penis is stretched lengthwise while actually slightly shrunk in girth. This means that the fibrous components which lay every whichway in the healthy tunica lay more nearly longitudinal when in traction.  So while a fiber that is exactly circumferential in the tunica receives no tension from the traction, a fiber which is between circumferential and longitudinal can receive tension from the traction.  This explains why traction has some effect increasing erect girth for the healthy penis, but the proportion of increase is less than it is for erect length.  (Penis enlargement by traction changes the proportions of ones erect penis; penis enlargement by VED, if it worked at all, would more or less preserve ones erection proportions.)  These considerations on healthy tunica probably don't apply to scar, and the goal of traction or VED with Peyronies isn't to expand scar but to break it.      

[Hawk]

These considerations on healthy tunica probably don't apply to scar, and the goal of traction or VED with Peyronies isn't to expand scar but to break it.    

I don't think so!

The goal is to stretch scar tissue much like burn victims stretch scar tissue that limits their movement due to contraction.  

[pless]

The goal is to stretch scar tissue much like burn victims stretch scar tissue that limits their movement due to contraction.

Golly, if the scar is brought to the right size and shape for the erection doesn't it make a queer lump in the flaccid penis?  

[ashtown]

"Never having had my penis in a 3 cylinder VED, I speculate that once you expand in girth and touch the tube, pressure no longer increases in the CC only on the corpus spongiosum.  I can't envision really being pressed against the tube walls with pressure.  Maybe those that use the 3 tube can comment."

I've on been using a 3 cylinder VED for a very short time, having started the 26 week protocol just one week ago and so far I've only used the smallest tube so it would be more useful if others with greater experience added their thoughts. All I can say from my limited experience is that if I pump very lightly the penis will expand in girth at first so it gently touches the walls of the VED and then it starts to lengthen.

When I pump it a bit more the girth presses harder against the cylinder walls as the length simultaneously increases and if I have a good seal at the bottom of the VED with plenty of gel I can feel pressure from every angle on my penis and sometimes the inside of tube starts to fog up a little, which apparently is normal. There is no doubt this could become decidedly painful if I just kept pumping but I find it can be pressed firmly against the sides of the cylinder with the tip of my penis head almost touching the end of the VED before it starts to become uncomfortable now.

I am wary of talking about results at this stage in case they reverse and of course every man's experience will be different but the actual plaque feels longer, thinner and more fleshy than when I started with a more flexible feel. I have basically regained my recently lost length and there has been a clearly visible improvement in angle of upward curvature from around 40 degrees to no more than 20 degrees. On the underside there were two big dents that have become substantially less evident and the hour glass effect on one side at least is certainly less visible. There is still a bit of twist in there but as the other points improve I'm hopeful that this will come into line as well.

This is after just one week of VED usage and it's really far more than I expected at this stage. Only time will tell how it progresses.

NB Instead of holding the pressure for 10 seconds I've been holding it for 30 seconds after building the pressure slowly in intervals over 30 seconds. I then release the pressure and let it rest for 30 seconds before starting again. I do the ten cycles and the whole process including time needed to clean everything takes about 30 minutes a day.  

[Hawk]

The goal is to stretch scar tissue much like burn victims stretch scar tissue that limits their movement due to contraction.

Golly, if the scar is brought to the right size and shape for the erection doesn't it make a queer lump in the flaccid penis?

I don't think so. I for one cannot imagine "breaking scar tissue"  That would represent trauma, some brusing, and also a relatively sudden improvement.  Not one of those indicators are ever reported from normal traction or VED use.

[Norm]

I post this here only because the original postings about this subject are here. It actually has to do with "New Approaches". I believe that a curved VED cylinder could help in straightening my curvature. If the original premise is that forcing the curved penis back to the straight position is beneficial, then I feel that forcing it the opposite direction could be better. Therefore, I have successfully built a curved cylinder VED. My curve is about 70* left. I made a cylinder that is 30* right. By over straightening, I hope to speed up the process of reducing my curvature. I feel it will over stretch the short side while not putting undue force on the long side. And, I am only bending it back to one half of the curve. I am not recommending that any of you try this. I am simply offering myself up as the guinea pig and will share my results with you.
  My reasoning is because with the standard Vitality unit( even with my homemade 1 1/2" sleeve), my penis touches the cylinder in only three places. The base and the tip touch on the left. Midway touches on the right. While somewhat straightened, I still have a curve inside the tube. I cannot see this giving me the benefit that I want. With my curved tube, I touch almost the full length on the right, the long side. The hardest part of building this is curving the cylinder. The rest is some simple mechanics with tools and a drill. I will share this info only after having tried it a while. I have no desire to cause anyone harm, just help.  

[Norm]

I have attached a picture of my new invention. It is a curved cylinder VED. I know there is possible controversy about this approach to therapy, but I have never been one to avoid controversy. I will keep you all posted on my progress with it. After two days' use, I have no ill effects, no soreness, and, of course, no straight pecker either. But I have hope!  

[james1947]

Norm

Admiring you new invention and wish you very big success in using it
Regarding controversy, is just good to hear other people opinion, the end result is important.
I have just one technical question:
How you succeed to bend it so nice?

James

[Norm]

James1947,
It is actually not as nice a bend as I would like. While it is certainly smooth enough, I did not feel like I had a great deal of control over it. I will get better. This is just my first one. To answer your question, I cut about a 12" length to allow some room for error. I capped one end, then filled the tube with sand. Then capped the other end. I heated it with a heat gun. Once it was soft, I just slowly bent it over until I was satisfied. Then I cooled it, emptied the sand, and cut it as I wanted. There are better methods, but that was all that was available to me on short notice. Once my bending tool arrives, I can make exact bends tailored to what I need.  

[james1947]

Norm

Thanks for the information. I hear about this method, but never saw it implemented until now.
Nice job.

James

[GS]

Norm,

Your invention makes all the sense in the world to me.  My VED is the 3 cylinder model; do you think you could bend 3 cylinders of different diameters and make them fit into one another like they do when they are straight?  That might be a challenge.  

GS

[Norm]

GS

That would be quite the challenge. However, if all three slid inside the other very closely, then theoretically, yes, I could bend all three together at the same time. The second part of that problem is, how would you ever get them apart?? Sorry.  

[Norm]

GS

As an afterthought, I have the single cylinder Vitality unit. I cannot find any way to adapt a curved tube to it. However, my industrial pump that is shown in the picture will fit any cylinder. I can continue to use my Vitality for the straight tube therapy and use my other pump for curved tube therapy. My plan is to construct different size and different curve tubes, all of which will fit my pump. I will no longer be constrained to what can adapt to the Vitality. It is so easy to switch tubes that I can have unlimited sizes and shapes.  

[pless]

I have the single cylinder Vitality unit. I cannot find any way to adapt a curved tube to it.

True, the Vitality pump has an idiosyncratic cleat system which will only fit the Vitality tube.  Your curved tube, unless it is very thick walled, will have OD substantially less than the ID at the open end of the Vitality tube.  So the curved tube can be slid into the straight tube with a simple rubber gasket to make a good seal. The drawback is that you then have a VED apparatus about a foot long.  Awkward, and requiring extra pumping.  You can part fill the unused end of the double tube to avoid the extra pumping.

[Norm]

Pless,

The Vitality is not built to be modified nor copied. That is why it has the taper and the cleats in the cylinder. Had I been building mine to sell, I would have also found something that is difficult to duplicate. Mine is for my own edification. It is not pretty. It is not professional nor medical looking. But it works! That is all I care about. Any man with a few simple shop tools can build this same thing. The Vitality has about a 2 1/4" opening. By the time you take a tube that is 1 7/8" by 1 1"/2 and then curve it, the effective OD is much more than the Vitality ID. It won't go inside. Mine requires two hand operation, unlike the Vitality, but I can prop my encased doo-dah on the bathroom countertop while I pump with one hand, and scratch my head with the other. Necessity and imagination go a long way in solving problems.

[james1947]

Norm

A new question:
What is the cylinder material you have used? I may try find it locally to make a smaller tube VED.

James

[Norm]

James,
Availability will probably make your choice for you. I bought clear PVC. There is also polycarbonate. The dimensions are O.D. 1 13/16" X  I.D. 1 9/16". For simplification you can call it 1 7/8" X 1 1/2". They were close to the same price of $4-$5 per foot in 8' lengths. Both will bend at fairly low temp. Both can be machined. Good luck. I will help all I can.  

[Norm]

PS-
Regular PVC like you use for plumbing is this same size. I went to a hardware store today and bought an end cap that fits my tubing perfectly. And PVC glues to PVC easily. I bought the clear PVC at an industrial dealer because clear is essential. We need to be able to see what is happening to our penis when we apply the vacuum.  

[james1947]

Norm

Thank you for the information. I will try to find here transparent tube, the regular I am using for my house plumbing and the caps, glues are all available.

James

[pless]

The Vitality has about a 2 1/4" opening. By the time you take a tube that is 1 7/8" by 1 1"/2 and then curve it, the effective OD is much more than the Vitality ID.

Norm, you didn't read my suggestion correctly.  

the curved tube can be slid into the straight tube with a simple rubber gasket to make a good seal. The drawback is that you then have a VED apparatus about a foot long.

You slide the curved tube some inches into the straight tube.  My example assumed about 4" but if just 2" then you create a 14" long VED apparatus.  It's the cheapest simplest solution for experimentation, though awkward.

[Norm]

Pless,
I see what you are getting at now. Yes, that would be way too cumbersome. What I have done is working great. It is amazing what you can find at the hardware store. I found a rubber gasket intended to go between the toilet tank and bowl. It is the exact size to slide over the end of my cylinder near my body. That keeps the tube from vacuuming into my pubic bone. Now it is as comfortable to use as the Vitality.
Ps- I have contacted diabetessupplies4less about buying the rubber sizing inserts. They won't respond.  

[pless]

Norm, the original suggestion to try a curved tube for Peyronies correction was mine:

Norm: Hey, if you're making your own inside tubes and you're feeling mechanical, what about making one with a bit of the opposite curvature to the curve you're trying to correct.

After the detailed interchange with Hawk, the curved tube idea is still just a "Hey...", just a "logical possibility" to be checked out.  Your Actron vacuum pump costs about $50, and two-handed operation is a bother.  Other readers pursuing this longshot should consider the really cheap and simple solution involving just the Vitality pump and tube plus a curved tube shoved part way in.

[Hawk]

Norm, the original suggestion to try a curved tube for Peyronies correction was mine:

Thanks for going to the trouble to point that out.  Now we know who to send royalties too if we have any improvement.  Oh, and who to sue if we have a setback.  

[pless]

I can imagine no unsafety except that due to the use of snug fit VED.  Pulling vacuum until the penis fills a hard tube has not, so far as I know, been mentioned in any published study.  But it is the essence of the 3-cylinder method which has lots of anecdotal support here.  

Using a tube with a slight over-correction curvature can't itself be unsafe.  What's the safety difference between using a straight tube on a 60° right-curving Peyronies penis or using a 15° left-curving tube on a 45° right-curving Peronies penis?  

Whoever uses a tube with slight over-correction curvature will (if he has any brain) terminate therapy, at the latest, when his penis achieves straightness.  

[goodluck]

This thread has not had any activity in some time, but I thought I would make an inquiry about the modified VED with an opposite curve.

For those who have tried it for some time, have you experienced any positive results?.... Or none, or negative results?

[anxious2014]

One further thought on Hawk's description of the straightening mechanism.  Maybe "keep any stretch off of the long side" implies that there is a danger of stretching the unscarred tissue more than the scarred tissue, so making the curvature worse.  On this account the straight snug-tube (3-cylinder) VED method is challenged again.  Even if constrained in a straight tube, the long (unscarred) side of the penis can then stretch more than the short (scarred) side, putting the penis into shear.

What happened to this man, Pless? I thought he made some great points here. Potentially stretching the unscarred side more so than the scarred side and making the curvature worse is something I've become concerned about, and has made me question whether therapy with the snug-fit cylinder is better off on it own vs together with larger cylinders with which there is little to no force provided (penis is not touching the sides of the cylinder), at least when it comes to lesser penis curvatures.  

[anxious2014]

When the penis expands to its full size in the large cylinder the interior pressure (from blood) is matched by the encircling tension of the tunica at its fibrous stop.  When the penis expands to its not quite full size in the small cylinder there is a similar interior pressure (from blood) matched by the encircling elastic tension of the tunica, not yet at its fibrous stop, plus the force of the walls.  In each case physics demands a balance.  In the first case the tunica is pressed from inside, while in the second case it is pressed from inside and outside.  Again, I have no idea whether the squeeze is good or bad.

^This is also a really interesting view...

In any case, I'm thinking hard about using the snug-fit cylinder exclusively. I've been on the 26 week plan for nearly 6 weeks now, and at least anecdotally I've seen and felt improvement after the weeks using the snug-fit cylinder vs the larger cylinder. To me it doesn't seem like the vacuum force alone can help overcome the scarring and provide stretching, inflation, and improve blood flow, and the two larger cylinders don't provide any force outside of vacuum because my curvature is not great enough to push on the side of those cylinders. To note, I do feel as if more blood is pulled into the unscarred regions when I use the larger cylinders, possibly exacerbating the problem as Pless had noted

[Old Man]

anxious2014:

In theory you might think that your idea would work. However, the manufacturer of the three cylinder VEDs did their own internal development study. The result was that over the 26 week period of time the small cylinder held the curved penis in the most straight condition when the vacuum was applied and at least a good portion of the penis is inside the confined space. (NOTE: The B and C cylinder schedule of the protocol provided further expansion as explained in the paragraph below.)

Then once the weekly schedule of the protocol for the A cylinder is completed, the larger B cylinder comes next in line. This provides much more open space in that cylinder to allow the penile shaft to expand to a greater degree. Then once the B schedule is completed and the C cylinder in used, this allows the penis to expand to its fullest and this allows as much or more than a naturally acquired erection.

There has another study done by a research facility in Birmingham, AL using the three cylinder VED some few years ago.
Unfortunately however, that study has never been released for public usage. I have tried many times, unsuccessfully BTW, to acquire a copy of that study. In fact, my requests were never answered. A copy of this study was requested by my personal URO, who also was denied access to it.

However, based on my personal experience with VEDs over the past 20 years, I know that the protocol for the three cylinder VED is a viable one. The problem with most users of the protocol is that they get over anxious when they see their penises expanding further than natural erections. Thus they over pump the vacuum further hoping that the added pressure will cause their penises to expand more, etc. This causes further trauma to their organ and they get discouraged when this happens and blame the VED protocol for their failure to obtain any good results.

So, the bottom line in VED therapy is to use the proper procedure with the VED and wisely use the amount of vacuum pull they apply to their penises. VED therapy does not work for 100% of Peyronies Disease sufferers, but does have a very high rate of success. On this forum, for instance, it seems like that members using the therapy, have some degree of success, but leave the forum and therefore never post their results for the benefit of other members.

Old Man