Quote from: KiloKAHN on August 15, 2014, 05:20:12 PM5 cm makes quite a noticeable difference between two people standing next to each other. If you can end up recovering better by lengthening 3 cm less on one segment then that would be a worthy trade off.
Yes,I agree with you.
Quote from: 123 on August 15, 2014, 10:10:56 AMyou're saying 10cm is no problem at all
No, what did I say? I said it's not a problem, if you do agressive PT and also noted that it could affect your lower limb proportions. If someone decides he looks fine on a mockup with 10cm, and also understands he'd have to stretch a lot, then what's the reason you're telling him it's 'not safe'? The thing is you're the one that actually spreads nonsense.
Quote5 cm makes quite a noticeable difference between two people standing next to each other5cm are quite hard to notice for yourself. I'd say you should go at least for 7-7.5cm or 3 inches, that should be something, else you'll most likely regret it. And you don't end up recovering better doing less lengthening, you end up recovering faster - there's a difference.
Quote from: exclide on August 15, 2014, 06:42:55 PMNo, what did I say? I said it's not a problem, if you do agressive PT and also noted that it could affect your lower limb proportions. If someone decides he looks fine on a mockup with 10cm, and also understands he'd have to stretch a lot, then what's the reason you're telling him it's 'not safe'? The thing is you're the one that actually spreads nonsense.
5cm are quite hard to notice for yourself. I'd say you should go at least for 7-7.5cm or 3 inches, that should be something, else you'll most likely regret it. And you don't end up recovering better doing less lengthening, you end up recovering faster - there's a difference.
I hope you do realise that height is subjective. For some people 5 cm can make a huge difference. I useto wear 5cm lifts and i realised how much difference it made and even some people noticed that i appeared taller! I have seen several members who were very satisfied around 5 cm and decided to end distraction.
Another thing is that you should not be over confident that 10 cm in one segment is safe and encourage people to lengthen that much. You don't have any studies to back this up as well. People can face serious complications while trying to achieve this much such as nerve damage,early arthritis and joint stiffness. Some people may lose their athletic ability as well.
Yea some individuals are naturally able to go that distance while others cannot. They can face complications and difficulties even early on their distraction.
It is common sense that the less you lengthen then less chances of complications and faster recovery. This should not be hard to comprehend.
Well you can lengthen as much as you want and no one is stopping you from lengthening 10, 15 , 20 cm in one segment but you should not encourage people to do the same.
Quote from: exclide on August 15, 2014, 06:42:55 PMAnd you don't end up recovering better doing less lengthening, you end up recovering faster - there's a difference.
This statement is most likely completely false, i understand that you want to believe that it is true to justify the ammount you lengthened, but lets get realistic here.
The one source you posted did not mention anything about the actual ammount of cm the patients where lengthening. The claim that they didnt found any correlation of recovered muscle strenght to the ammount lengthened wouldnt be surprising if the patients in the test had a lengthening range of 3-6 cm for example. We dont know if any of them went beyond the mentioned safe limit or how much it varied between patients.
Also this test does not take into account how active or athletic the patients where before the LL process, if they where all average joes who werent active in sports, which is likely for at least some of them considering the age range varied from 13-57, then it wouldnt be that hard to reach their previous ability since they never pushed their limits previously either.
However someone who is very athletic and has pushed his body as much as he/she can before LL surgery would most likely notice that that previous level of athleticism is not reachable after doing LL, at least not if the lengthened ammount is over the safe limit. How much of a difference depends on the individual.
Finally these tests (the dynamometer and the leg extensor) do not test the patients agility and mobility of the legs after LL, which woud certainly be affected since we change the biomechanics of the legs by lengthening them (femur LL changes the mechanical axis, and also the femur-tibia ratio would change unless you lengthened them both specifically to keep the ratio, which would be very hard to do if you did 10 cm on tibias..
Quote from: exclide on August 15, 2014, 06:42:55 PMNo, what did I say? I said it's not a problem, if you do agressive PT and also noted that it could affect your lower limb proportions. If someone decides he looks fine on a mockup with 10cm, and also understands he'd have to stretch a lot, then what's the reason you're telling him it's 'not safe'? The thing is you're the one that actually spreads nonsense.
5cm are quite hard to notice for yourself. I'd say you should go at least for 7-7.5cm or 3 inches, that should be something, else you'll most likely regret it. And you don't end up recovering better doing less lengthening, you end up recovering faster - there's a difference.
Ahh, you're the guy who claimed that people naturally have shorter wingspan than height without providing source and when you were asked to post one of the many studies who proof that (which is not true, but you claimed that) you went silent.
And it doesn't matter that you say "you should go at least for 7-7.5cm or 3 inches" because you have completely no clue about orthopedics and you are not a doctor. Stop giving false hopes to future LL-patients and stop encouraging them to do dangerous things!
You're definitely a complete retard, if I would be running this forum you would have been banned a long time ago.
It seems to me,no one do 10 cm on tiibas in this forum.Somebody can maybe say we are talkin bs 
Quote from: 123 on August 15, 2014, 07:47:19 PM
You're definitely a complete retard, if I would be running this forum you would have been banned a long time ago.
That was the best thing about the old "old forum " who went to China.
He banned everyone writing nonsense.
He was also totally against all Indian doctors and everyone else who operated in poor countries.
Today we can see he was right to do it.
Quote from: TheRisingShorty on August 15, 2014, 07:06:40 PMI hope you do realise that height is subjective. For some people 5 cm can make a huge difference
I did 5cm on tibs and ended up realising it was for nothing. You adapt to such tiny increase very fast and soon you question yourself did you actually even lengthen that 5cm.
QuoteYou don't have any studies to back this up as well. People can face serious complications while trying to achieve this much such as nerve damage,early arthritis and joint stiffness.You don't have any studies to back up that it's actually not safe and why it isn't. You're all just speculating all over and that's what I hate. Everyone can make claims - it's not hard, but you actually have to give them some value.
QuoteIt is common sense that the less you lengthen then less chances of complications and faster recovery. This should not be hard to comprehend.And where exactly did I try to argue with that? Point me out.
Quote from: Wannabegiant on August 15, 2014, 07:11:44 PMi understand that you want to believe that it is true to justify the ammount you lengthened, but lets get realistic here.
Haha, this has nothing to do with me, I don't need to 'justify' my amount lengthened, as it was completely complications free.
QuoteThe one source you posted did not mention anything about the actual ammount of cm the patients where lengtheningHere you http://www.archives-pmr.org/article/S0003-9993%2809%2900967-8/pdf
In this series of patients, the range in percentage lengthening was between 5% and 18%
QuoteAlso this test does not take into account how active or athletic the patients where before the LL process
Finally these tests (the dynamometer and the leg extensor) do not test the patients agility and mobility of the legs after LLDude, I don't understand why YOU don't show me a research which shows correlation between amount lengthened and muscle strength/athletic ability. I'm still waiting for it. Or is everyone supposed to take your word for it?
Quote from: 123 on August 15, 2014, 07:47:19 PMYou're definitely a complete retard, if I would be running this forum you would have been banned a long time ago.
Hey Apo, why did you change your nickname?
Quoteclaimed that people naturally have shorter wingspan than height without providing sourceHere you go, np: http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/37/1/157.full
Figure 1–
Bland–Altman comparisons a, b) between measured height (H) and height estimated from arm span (AS) to height fixed ratio calculated from our population data for each sex (1.01 for females (a, c, e) and 1.02 for males (b, d, f)), c, d) between H and height estimated from AS regression equation with correction for age and e, f) between measured height and height estimated from the identity document height (H-ID) regression equation with correction for age. —: bias; bias confidence limits (±2 sem) are not represented on the diagrams because of their very small magnitudes. ---: limits of agreement (±2 sd). Estimated heights calculated from AS and H-ID regression equations, taking age into account, show good correction of bias. Variance for estimation from H-ID is significantly lower than for estimation from arm span (p<0.001).
http://www.josonline.org/pdf/v9i1p19.pdf
Another graph showing clearly that people can have AS shorter than their height.
Kinda funny how I'm the only one who cares to back up statements with actual data, I guess everyone else thinks that anything coming from their mouth is true by default.
Quote from: exclide on August 16, 2014, 06:24:00 AMBland–Altman comparisons a, b) between measured height (H) and height estimated from arm span (AS) to height fixed ratio calculated from our population data for each sex (1.01 for females (a, c, e) and 1.02 for males (b, d, f)), c, d)
Like I said, you are not a very clever man, so you clearly didn't understand this study, you just picked out a few graphs without explaining the context.
Table 1
Various physical measurements of the women in the study (n=505)
Physical measurements Mean Standard deviation Range
Age (Years) 29.66
Sitting height (cm) 79.35
Standing height (cm) 156.88
Leg length (cm) 77.53
Arm span (cm) 159.14
(http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/37/1/157.full)
And maybe you should google what linear regression is because you also didn't understand that and please don't try to make yourself look intelligent with studies because you're clearly not.
There is a reason you were banned from old forum and the reason was that you talk nonsense.
And finally LL was a waste on you, you are still, lets put kindly, an unlikeable person, your life would be still miserable even if you were 195cm. Once a loser always a loser.
Oh, Mr. Clever Man doesn't know difference between average and standart deviation. With the same logic you can tell me that all people are 5'9 tall, because that's the average around the world! Well I'm not trying to seem intelligent, but you definitely don't seem to be either.
QuoteAnd finally LL was a waste on you, you are still, lets put kindly, an unlikeable person, your life would be still miserable even if you were 195cm. Once a loser always a loser.That actually made me giggle. I'll probably stop right there, as this... 'discussion' isn't going anywhere. If you find studies that confirm correlation between amount lengthened and athletic ability/muscle strength, let me know!
You must be logged in to post a reply.