Going from 6" to 6'3-6'4" with quadrilateral lenghtening

Edit Post

Quote from: Kintaeryos on December 17, 2023, 09:31:33 AMYou keep saying "ridiculous amounts". What do you mean by that? OP has clearly stated he wants to do 8-10 cm, a very standard but also decent amount, he just wants to distribute it along two smaller segments to lengthen even further below the safety limits than it would be with just femur, and to preserve his tibia/femur ratio and thus biomechanics. Also, not everyone has normal-looking legs pre-LL, some people's tibia/femur ratio is already at the limits of statistical normality and can't do single LL without ending up with weird-looking legs they have to live with for the rest of their lives, worry about having to cover up, going to the beach etc. Just like some people have a short arm span/height ratio and have to do arm lengthening to avoid "t-rex arms" after LL (though Paley has said this is rare).
Does your argument mainly boil down to "LL is risky, so doing it twice is riskier, therefore double LL should be avoided as much as possible in favor of single LL"?

Edit Post

Quote from: Body Builder on December 17, 2023, 01:42:49 PM3cm is a ridiculous amount to break your legs for that.
If you are willing to do tibias you should do 5-6.5 cm to really worth it. Otherwise stick with 6-7 cm on femurs and nothing more.
OP will be tall even with 6cm added on femurs.which is a reasonable and relatively safe amount and nothing else. By breaking the tibias for 3cm he won't gain anything in reality. The biomechanics won't be ok with 7cm on femurs and 3on tibias, the difference should have been something like 6cm on femurs and 4,5 on tibias. Still the biomechanics will be altered.from LL no matter what, even if the ratio between femurs and tibias would remain the same (which it won't with 7 and 3 cm).
And of course.doing 2 surgeries instead of 1, especially as he wrote he would do them (not the second after completely rehabilitation of the first but with only some weeks difference) is an extra recipe for disaster.

But I'll wait for his diary and see if he will do it first of all and especially if he goes with tibias too after seeing how extreme LL is . Because most of people who talk about that ridiculous amounts (most of the times already average or tall) never do it, at least not as they planned it. They do one segment at best and just that.

Edit Post

Quote from: Kintaeryos on December 17, 2023, 02:04:54 PMAssuming someone has normal tibias and femurs pre-LL, do you think 7 cm femurs-only will make a noticeable difference in how the legs look?

Edit Post

Quote from: Body Builder on December 17, 2023, 02:44:59 PMA noticeable, if you mean plain obvious with clothes on, definitely not.
I did 7.5 cm on tibias and I look great with clothes. And 7.5cm on tibias look definitely more disproportional than 7cm on femurs.

That said, without clothes there would be a little discrepancy but only to the experienced eye of an LLer. A normal person I don't think it will look twice or see something abnormal.
Again with my personal experience, I have some scars on tibias and they are relatively long compared to my femurs, still noone ever thought that something was not right when I am with underwear or a swimsuit.

So no, I don't beliebe that 7cm in femurs in normally proportional legs (before LL) would make a visible difference to how the legs look. But it will make a big difference to how tall you are.

Edit Post

Quote from: Kintaeryos on December 17, 2023, 03:37:04 PM7 cm on tibias? Interesting, first time I hear that. What made you decide on that and not femurs?

Edit Post

Edit Post

Quote from: CLLvet on December 18, 2023, 04:25:07 PMI essentially did what you are describing (you can see in my signature block that I did the surgery 2 times over a few years). The 2nd time my starting height was right around 6 feet (182-183 cm) pre-surgery. Now I stand 188-189 cm (6'2.5"). I mention this range because our bodies naturally shrink/ decompress a bit throughout the day, so those were my heights depending on what time in the day I measured myself (with a stadiometer). 

What is the difference in how I feel now/ how I am perceived? Well nowadays, many people who meet me remark how tall I am. That did not occur when I was "only" 6 feet. Many people guess I am in the height range of 6'3-6'4, especially women who meet me. I currently live in the USA and am usually the tallest (or one of the tallest) guys in most rooms. Those things certainly DID NOT occur while I was "only" 6 feet. 

So becoming that tall is something that might benefit your mental health (if your goal is to become taller than everyone). But it will not give you any strong social advantages. I agree with some other posters here that the "social advantages" are probably much more noticeable for someone who increases their height from say 5'5" to 5'10" or something around that range. That person is transforming from "short" to "average/ above average". At his newfound 5'10 height, he is now free from height discrimination (and perhaps ridicule/ insensitive comments from others) that he may have heard at his prior 5'5" height. He will no longer be disqualified by women as a dating prospect due to height. He will no longer be identified as "the short guy." And that will free him to achieve great things and be his best self around others, because his height is no longer a barrier socially. 

However, in your case, (going from 6' to 6'3), you are going from tall to "very tall." How important is it to you to be "very tall?" If it is important to you personally, maybe it is worth it (it was for me). But if you are trying to improve your dating life or business prospects (societal benefits), then don't expect some sort of radical benefits socially. People will still pretty much treat you the same afterwards, there will not be a radical shift, just because you are now "very tall".

Edit Post

Edit Post

Edit Post

Quote from: CLLvet on December 18, 2023, 04:50:54 PMSure, I can. What specifically would you like to see?