Clavicle lengthening challenges

Assuming one does it with LON technique and gradually distracts the bone at 1 mm / day like it's done with LL, will the soft tissues in chest, back and neck adapt and stretch as it happens during natural clavicular elongation during puberty?

Basically, the clavicle bones are the only long bones in the body that are attached horizontally and not vertically. It connects to sternum at one end at and at humerus on the other end. There's also scapula bone that is attached to clavicles from behind. So, when lengthening the clavicle bones, scapula should in theory realign with the lengthened clavicle and make room for it to lengthen, although it remains the same size (the scapula bone).

Only Eppley does this procedure in the USA using sliding technique where he cuts the bones and stretches it for about 2 cm and then fixing them with the plates. It's not the same as gradual distraction for 1 mm / day so soft tissues can't adapt properly using that technique Eppley uses. Due to that reason men who got the procedure with him experienced several issues and ended up regretting getting it done.

The desired outcome is straightened clavicle that lengthens laterally in order to get the exact mms distracted. Since average clavicle length is 15 cm, 2.5 cm on each side is optimal to lengthen. It makes a huge difference in one's frame width.

But, the procedure is very obscure and Paley doesn't recommend it citing that you lose shoulder ROM and there are even more concerns mechanically which he didn't elaborate further but it makes perfect sense since clavicles are connected to many bones and it lies in upper part of torso. There are concerns about humerus, scapula and neck functionality since it affects them biomechanically.

Are any of you aware of this procedure and its legitimacy? Assuming one does it with distraction osteogenesis method and gradually lengthens the bones, will he end up fully functional after the procedure and get the exact mms in frame width as much he lengthens the bones?

This is an interesting topic.
I hope some guys who did it are coming here to share their experience...

2 cm per clavicle is significant permanent gain in shoulder breadth which doesn't depend on muscle mass. 4 cm is solid 1.5 inches. That's the amount one can increase with natty training realistically and not more. With roids, another inch or inch and a half is possible so with roids you can gain up to 3 inches of shoulder breadth but at the expense of health.

Now, imagine you're training natty and got that 1.5 inches of bideltoid breadth increase through gaining muscle mass. You're capped at this point and unless you start roiding, you won't gain more, only maintain the gains.

With clavicle lengthening, you can add permanent 1.5 inches of bideltoid breadth but it's in the bones so not only bideltoid breadth increases in this case but biacromial length too, which means your wingspan will increase by 1.5 inches too. Bones are superior to muscles when it comes to shoulder width.

Even 2 inches is realistic (1 inch per side) but IMO that's the max amount one can go since 1 inch gain per clavicle is as significant as 3 inch gain in femurs.

Right now my bideltoid breadth is 21 inches without proper gym training and without roiding. If I start serious training I can gain up to 1.5 inches within a year and up to 3 inches if I add roids on top of that. But, I don't want to roid so 1.5 inches is what I think is realistic gain for me.

Optimal bideltoid breadth is about 3.5 times the breadth of one's face and ideal is anything between 3.7 to 4.0.

The problem is I have wide face at 6 inches of breadth so currently my shoulder breadth is 3.5 times the breadth of my face and I want at least 3.7. With 22.5 inches, it will become 3.75 and it's fine but muscle is muscle, it can be lost if one stops working out and doesn't roid to maintain the size.

If I lengthen the clavicles for 1.5 inches total, I can go up to 24 inches of bideltoid without roids (1.5 inches of gaining muscles and 1.5 inches through clavicle lengthening), so the ratio of my bideltoid width to facial breadth will become 24 / 6 = 4, which is ideal.

When I edit the pics of me and add about 1.5 inches of shoulder width, the harmony between shoulders and head / face increases dramatically. Another 1.5 inches would make even more dramatic results IMO.

So, just stumbled upon an old interview of a doctor specializing in shoulder width elongation and he mentions that above an inch or even 3/4 inch lengthening per clavicle requires scapula lengthening too in order to expand the shoulder girdle further. If one doesn't lengthen the scapula bones too, the clavicles won't expand shoulders laterally past an inch per side, rather, it will retract backwards even more and functionality and aesthetics will be ruined.

Regarding scapula lengthening, this is a very serious procedure and he said he has done it alongside clavicle lengthening in the same procedure to lengthen 2 inches per side (4 inches total shoulder width elongation). The scapula is wrapped in muscles and therefore those muscles need to be cut first and after the scapula bones are exposed, those irregular and weird shaped (non-long bones) need to be cut, stretched and then fixated with plates and screws. He mentioned that this has very high chances of ruining patient's shoulder function and doesn't recommends it, only in extreme cases where the shoulders are comically narrow and affects daily functions does he recommend getting this procedure done, otherwise, for cosmetic cases, he says that 2 cm per clavicle is upper safe limit and produces visible results without noticeable backwards slope of clavicles.

IMO, this procedure is rather obscure and risky. There's no other patient except that retard who got crippled at Yuksell Yurtas. He also got clavicle lengthening with Eppley or Rogers and doesn't reccommend the procedure. AFAIK there's no other patient testimony on the web.

I will try to resort with weight lifting to gain as much 3D delts as possible and grow out lats too in order to increase bideltoid distance and get wider naturally.

P.S. Even with 2 cm lengthening, the clavicles will always retract backwards (not to a comical degree though). This might not be too noticeable but it will certainly look odd and there's no guarantee of shoulder ROM and functionality after the lengthening is done.

I’d give more importance to arm lengthening then clavicle lengthening. At least with the shoulder width you can make up for it by gaining muscle and weight mass to appear stronger. And unless you are a bodybuilding person narrow clavicle can still be attractive as some people are attracted to slender builds. But short baby forearms for your height just looks more silly then narrow clavicles. If I’m risking anything I’d pick forearm over clavicle and be happy with that.

Forearm lengthening is as risky and obscure as clavicle lengthening. Paley says forearms and clavicles are a no go for distraction osteogenesis unless there's a severe defect. Even then, the loss of functionality is guaranteed.

IMO, arm lengthening is also insane from cosmetic perspective unless one has Artem Lobov tier humerus relative to torso, only then it is justified to lengthen the upper arms.

Up to 2 inches per segment in double LL looks more or less acceptable on most guys, unless one has Artem Lobov tier arms. Anything starting from 10 cm total lengthening produces visible disproportion betwen legs and arms. Also, leg-to-torso ratio should never exceed 0.5 if one wants to have a balanced, masculine body overall.

There's one user on Looksmax forum who claims that he increased his bideltoid width by 4 inches (so 2 inches per side which is huge) without roiding in about 2-3 years of consistent and progressive overload training.

He has posted his before and after photos and he looks much wider (his lats and deltoid muscles got huge, so at least 3 inches total bidelt width gain is believable IMO).

I thought that he was still young and his bone structure also got wider but he mentioned that he started working out at 25 years of age so there's 0% chance that his skeletal frame could gain any meaningful width after that age.

He was a bit skinny but had light muscles on his delts, so he didn't start from bones only.

Wide frame (skeletal + muscle mass) is vital for masculine appearance. It makes one look like a grown man, even if he stands at 5'5 height. Narrow frame makes one look like a child. The wider the frame, the less big one's head looks. What I find ridiculous is narrow framed guys whose heads are almost taking entire shoulder space. It just looks so feminine and I don't think women find that attractive at all.

I'd rather be 5'8 with robust, wide frame rather than 6 feet with a narrow, childish skeletal frame.

Where did you find the interview with this doctor?

I'm an extreme case: my bideltoid breadth is shorter than yours, and you wouldn't believe my biacromial width, which is also asymmetrical. No man in my family has this problem. My torso growth was stunted at 14, and my narrower shoulders are now causing functional problems as well.

I was oblivious to the issue when it might have been addressed non-surgically, in part because I didn't watch one consistent cohort of peers growing. I was also able to more or less date any girl I wanted as a teenager, so it didn't occur to me that anything was wrong.

I do think it's overall less important than height - and my proportions still look improved with conservative LL femur mockups - but it would be worth some risk for me to have this addressed in even a marginal way. Even 2 cm on each clavicle would be a game-changer, taking me from having comically narrow clavicles to the low end of normal adult male width.

Leif Rogers and ZEM-Germany both seem generally credible, despite Rogers not being an orthopedic surgeon, and I've at least heard no horror stories about them.

Paley definitely advises against clavicle lengthening, and says his one patient experience was negative, but the potential benefits to me would be significant enough that I want to explore this anyway.