I think this is an overblown issue. I also dont even believe LL would take 20% of your max potential unless doing quadrilateral and high amounts then its possible.
of course it basically sets you to zero but theres no reason after a few years you wouldn't be able to get back to where you were
Quote from: dbg on February 20, 2023, 11:50:09 PMThere is a lot of factors implied: method, doctor, how many cm you lengthen and at what rythm you do it, etc.
However, if you play it safe with those factors, unless you are a professional athlete it should be ok.
I also think that it should be possible to go back exactly where you were before surgery. The reason the opposite believe is so extended is because (1) you didn't play it safe with the basic factors or (2) because to get to the previous surgery point you had to use your body for decades, and, almost always, what is compared to that, is the state achieved by only a few years of recovery.
Also it is worth of mention that many of the people that don't achieve good athletic capacities post surgery is because they never had them in first place.
It will be interesting to see if in the future someone surpass this myth.
its frustrating how messy this discourse is
IIRC Paley claims new muscle is also grown when you stretch the legs which honestly makes sense considering I dont know how outcomes would be as close to as good as they are if they aren't. to me, intuitively, you cant just stretch a muscle 8cm and expect to ever be very functional again, maybe this intuition is wrong though and muscles do just stretch.
other Drs claim muscles do not grow. Paley is definitely one of the highest if not the highest level doctor but he could be wrong.
If the muscles do grow, it should have zero impact over the very long term (3+ years) on your ability but im also fairly sure thats not the case. Or maybe its more nuanced and its a different kind of muscle tissue thats weaker that grows.
You must be logged in to post a reply.