TOPIC: Planning on PMMA, please advise on latest tech

No, I was talking about this guy:

phalloboards.websitetoolbox.com/post/dr-...29534#post1287229534

Hey brice,

thanks for the info and i have been reading for over 2 years now on it and following everything.

i just recently read 2 peoples post that it was still kinda liquid like is why i asked that because most of the progress reports i read were that it eventually did exactly as you said and stays solid more so than liquid like.

i just dont want after 6 months or a year for it to just still be liquid like and i have to move it around or w/e.

glad to know it doesnt do that.

my point for getting it is because i want a thicker penis but not all crazy thick and the main reason is so it hangs better because of its lack of weight and thickness it tends to shrivel up ... i am a Grower not a shower for sure but i figured this would help that along with a ADS.

Here's some more pics. My pathologist said you would need a physical chemist to determine if the sizes are equal or not...since it is 3D and you'd need it isolated from the tissue. You see a regular h & e stain here... which pathologists use, not chemists.

The best way to make sense of this is to try to find histopathology of artecoll vs. artefill...and compare them to each other and to this.

The other guy who got linnea safe when I did had no issues.

My Dermatologist recently said to me that he thinks I had too much put in, and he's had women who get artefill added over and over, and then they start getting lumps. But, I haven't seen that on this board at all. My theory is that some kind of network of collagen developed with the existing metacrill implant, and the linnea safe implant 6 months later just couldn't stick to it or stay under it. I literally have one normal metacrill implant on my buck's fascia and then a bunch of lumps at my injection sites bound to my Dartos fascia...it's like the product got squeezed out and formed nodules (rather quickly) at the injection sites - which were still ther 4.5 months later, full size.

I think irregular particule size is more of a trigger for inflammation and granulomas than for nodules...from what I recall.








You wouldn't want to see this in your slides (this is Dermalive):



These photos are from the two nodules shown here. They were very firm bundles of collagen, similar to the texture of chewed gum that has been left out. They did not respond to injections (you can see the needle track in one of them actually - but that's the best it did...leave a track).





Note that the top one is the one that caused all the problems. The bottom one, though larger, was isolated and the wound closed immediately. The top one created a 2 month mess.

Hello guys, I have been reading a lot on here and other places regarding the PMMA procedure. I am planning to get this done as soon as I clarify some questions for surety. I am located in New York. My current stats are at 6-6.25" EL and 4.5" EG.

-I understand that Dr. C is the most experienced with PMMA, and preferred for this procedure?

-Artefill is currently the safest and most reliable injectable?

-How much does Dr. C charge for one session of Artefill?

-In Flaccid state is it always possible to separate the filler from the shaft, or does this occur only in some individuals?

-There are typically no length gains with this procedure?

-I am not aiming for the most gains in a short period, but rather gains over time for the best natural appearance, from what I know a 10% concentration is most suitable for this? (my goal is 5.5-6" EG)

-Are there any scars from this procedure?

Thank you for your help and I hope this can help others as well.

I also noticed this in the photo of the slide you posted Restoration. The little beads appear to be different sizes. Perhaps this is not the only cause of your complications, but it certainly does not work in your favor. Several years ago when Dr Lemperle was more active he mentioned particle size was critical to prevent an inflammatory reaction and the non-artfill brands had much wider tolerances. He did not mention smoothness but said spheres below a certain size are at risk of triggering a immune response. Also I understand if the spheres are too large they will not stimulate scar tissue growth. Hence the need for the tight tolerance which is expensive to do with the same high standard as artefill.

I do not know where you got the idea that PMMA stays liquid.
For all practical purposes, PMMA is basically tiny plastic beads suspended in a carrier (fluid). The carrier is absorbed by the body within a few days and your body, over time, replaces this with your own collagen.
This is why you have to pay special attention to it for the first three days or so after receiving it. After that, it is pretty much set in place where it will be, lumps, bumps, divots and all. That is the reason behind keeping it extended, massaging it and trying your best to even it out as often as possible within the first few days. Any imperfections are set after that but you can have them addressed with a touch up if you feel the need.

Please make sure you are knowledgeable about the procedure, possible outcomes, etc before you bite the bullet.

I am surprised to find a groupon deal for this doctor. He uses Bellafill. I have no idea if that is a better choice than artefil, but will look into it.

Edit - Bellafill is rebranded artefil. May give it a shot. Anyone have experience with Dr Mizra?