Glanspro?

Glanspro?

RG
RG

July 1st, 2013, 8:42 pm #1

I'm 33 years old and my foreskin is a but tight. I can pull it back but it's painful. Has anyone heard of glanspro.com?

Thanks!
Quote
Share

Joined: March 23rd, 2003, 5:51 am

July 2nd, 2013, 12:39 am #2

Such a device should work, but it will be quite limited in scope. We recommend using your fingers or a flesh tunnel.
Quote
Like
Share

RG
RG

July 2nd, 2013, 1:38 am #3

Thanks, Jim. How would this device be limited in scope? Should I buy the phimocure flesh rings? I cannot use fingers at least for now because I can only fit in one finger...

Thanks!
Quote
Share

Joined: June 5th, 2003, 4:12 am

July 2nd, 2013, 12:17 pm #4

I'm 33 years old and my foreskin is a but tight. I can pull it back but it's painful. Has anyone heard of glanspro.com?

Thanks!
It's not as if we are newcomers to this matter - by any means.

The reason we simply do not mention the "Glanspro", or the "Glansie" at all, is that they are crude devices which clearly have very limited application.

You need to read the historic discussion here, which means you need to read a lot of the previous discussion threads here, and I really mean a lot - at least a hundred. Only then can you begin to understand all the nuances of what is involved in "stretching" a tight foreskin. Specifically, it is not stretching as you apply to an inanimate object, though some medical use of stretching is simply a matter using sufficient force to stretch the part in question.

What is meant by stretching as it applies to the foreskin, is a process by which it is stretched little by little over time, and caused to grow to a larger size. Once you comprehend that, you can get a better grip () on the matter.

What is wrong with these devices, is that they apply the tension to very narrow points - two points in the case of the Glansie and three for the lauded Glanspro. While the latter may be a marginal improvement, these devices are really only useful in the case of a genuine "pinhole phimosis" and as soon as the opening is beyond something like ten millimetres diameter, are quite useless - as you will see described in a recent posting here (so - do the reading and find out). Applying pressure at these narrow points when trying to stretch a larger opening is traumatic and consequently, ineffective.

And they are ridiculously cumbersome. The process of stretching is not a mattey of doing it for a minute or so every few days, to make it effective you need to allocate a few sessions every day totalling a good part of an hour - or use a device you can leave in place underneath clothing most of or all day - because what the skin responds to is persistent pressure.

Finally, if you can fit in one finger, you are doing well. You progress to whatever finger is a tight fit for ten, fifteen, twenty minutes. Once you get to a thumb, you can replace it with two little fingers and then the real stretching starts.

However - if you can already retract the foreskin, I think you are wrong and can in fact already fit two little fingers.
Quote
Like
Share

RG
RG

July 2nd, 2013, 7:43 pm #5

Thanks for your great reply Paul! Yes, I read this forum for the 5 hours yesterday and created this plan of action:

I'm not a fan of using fingers because I need to do some formal measurements and all...remember the saying "if you can't measure it you can't manage it."

I ordered a few silicon flesh tunnels from ebay with sizes ranging from 10 mm to 30 mm at a cost of $27. I got 1% hydrocortisone cream from the local Jewel Osco for $6. I'll probably begin with the 10 mm ring and wear it for a month or so and clean it 2x daily. I'll most likely create an Excel spreadsheet charting my progress.

I know I'll need to be patient...this process could take 6-8 months! But that's still better than circumcision. Anyways, thank you for this great forum...I'll keep you posted!

Regards,

RG
Quote
Share

Joined: June 5th, 2003, 4:12 am

July 2nd, 2013, 9:50 pm #6

It's not as if we are newcomers to this matter - by any means.

The reason we simply do not mention the "Glanspro", or the "Glansie" at all, is that they are crude devices which clearly have very limited application.

You need to read the historic discussion here, which means you need to read a lot of the previous discussion threads here, and I really mean a lot - at least a hundred. Only then can you begin to understand all the nuances of what is involved in "stretching" a tight foreskin. Specifically, it is not stretching as you apply to an inanimate object, though some medical use of stretching is simply a matter using sufficient force to stretch the part in question.

What is meant by stretching as it applies to the foreskin, is a process by which it is stretched little by little over time, and caused to grow to a larger size. Once you comprehend that, you can get a better grip () on the matter.

What is wrong with these devices, is that they apply the tension to very narrow points - two points in the case of the Glansie and three for the lauded Glanspro. While the latter may be a marginal improvement, these devices are really only useful in the case of a genuine "pinhole phimosis" and as soon as the opening is beyond something like ten millimetres diameter, are quite useless - as you will see described in a recent posting here (so - do the reading and find out). Applying pressure at these narrow points when trying to stretch a larger opening is traumatic and consequently, ineffective.

And they are ridiculously cumbersome. The process of stretching is not a mattey of doing it for a minute or so every few days, to make it effective you need to allocate a few sessions every day totalling a good part of an hour - or use a device you can leave in place underneath clothing most of or all day - because what the skin responds to is persistent pressure.

Finally, if you can fit in one finger, you are doing well. You progress to whatever finger is a tight fit for ten, fifteen, twenty minutes. Once you get to a thumb, you can replace it with two little fingers and then the real stretching starts.

However - if you can already retract the foreskin, I think you are wrong and can in fact already fit two little fingers.
Not sure for what you propose to use the hydrocortisone cream?

If you have been reading here, sufficiently, you would note that hydrocortisone is of negligible assistance in stretching, it specifically does not usefully weaken the skin matrix in the manner that the "potent" steroids can, it may increase susceptibility to Candida - "Thrush" - and cream is the wrong form for pharmacological efficacy.
Quote
Like
Share

RG
RG

July 3rd, 2013, 12:26 am #7

Paul - read this article:http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/777539-medication

Physicians officially prescribe betamethasone..which just works faster than hydrocortisone. Basically, steroids potentiate cellular replication in the dermal and epidermal skin layers...hence smooth out the expansion process. So basically, once I pop out the flesh ring, the foreskin will not shrink back to it's original size as quickly as it would without the hydrocortisone cream.

Steroids also help heal minor tears and cuts on the foreskin which may occur secondary to stretching and/or too much manipulation.

RG
Quote
Share

Joined: June 5th, 2003, 4:12 am

July 3rd, 2013, 1:56 pm #8

Not sure for what you propose to use the hydrocortisone cream?

If you have been reading here, sufficiently, you would note that hydrocortisone is of negligible assistance in stretching, it specifically does not usefully weaken the skin matrix in the manner that the "potent" steroids can, it may increase susceptibility to Candida - "Thrush" - and cream is the wrong form for pharmacological efficacy.


I looked at the article you cite. I am pretty sure I have examined it before, probably long ago.

One thing that renders the article less than helpful to us here is that it actually offers circumcision (or dorsal slit/ "preputioplasty") as a "remedy" for either phimosis or paraphimosis, even as a "last resort". (It would be more correct to define it as "the lazy way out".)

In any case, please note that that article does not mention hydrocortisone, and it does not do so for a very good reason. The reason is that hydrocortisone is not simply a "slower acting" version of the "potent" betamethasone, but that it is a different class of steroid, in fact a weak steroid. It will take vastly longer to achieve the same effect as the betamethasone and only then because and if you are actually stretching. It is almost certainly, simply not worth it for the reason explained following.

I cannot for the life of me imagine from where you get these ideas about steroids "potentiating cellular replication" or "helping heal minor tears and cuts" - or that it will cause the foreskin to retain its stretched form on removal of the ring.

Steroids in fact do the very opposite - they retard healing and suppress the immune system which is necessary to fight infection. The risk of using them on the foreskin is that it becomes more likely to develop a Candida infestation in the process, especially in association with all the manipulation involved (because stretching does not occur simply with steroid use, you have to actually perform the stretching).
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 23rd, 2003, 5:51 am

July 3rd, 2013, 2:17 pm #9

Thanks, Jim. How would this device be limited in scope? Should I buy the phimocure flesh rings? I cannot use fingers at least for now because I can only fit in one finger...

Thanks!
Unless there have been vast improvements recently in the design of this item and another quite like it, it will be useful only in the beginning stages of stretching, not having the ability to expand the skin past a certain limited point. I'd go for the tunnels.
Quote
Like
Share

RG
RG

July 3rd, 2013, 7:19 pm #10



I looked at the article you cite. I am pretty sure I have examined it before, probably long ago.

One thing that renders the article less than helpful to us here is that it actually offers circumcision (or dorsal slit/ "preputioplasty") as a "remedy" for either phimosis or paraphimosis, even as a "last resort". (It would be more correct to define it as "the lazy way out".)

In any case, please note that that article does not mention hydrocortisone, and it does not do so for a very good reason. The reason is that hydrocortisone is not simply a "slower acting" version of the "potent" betamethasone, but that it is a different class of steroid, in fact a weak steroid. It will take vastly longer to achieve the same effect as the betamethasone and only then because and if you are actually stretching. It is almost certainly, simply not worth it for the reason explained following.

I cannot for the life of me imagine from where you get these ideas about steroids "potentiating cellular replication" or "helping heal minor tears and cuts" - or that it will cause the foreskin to retain its stretched form on removal of the ring.

Steroids in fact do the very opposite - they retard healing and suppress the immune system which is necessary to fight infection. The risk of using them on the foreskin is that it becomes more likely to develop a Candida infestation in the process, especially in association with all the manipulation involved (because stretching does not occur simply with steroid use, you have to actually perform the stretching).
Paul - I'll use flesh tunnels in conjunction with the hydrocortisone cream. Anyways, check out this link:

http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/dewan/

"Steroid cream is a painless, less complicated and more economical alternative to circumcision for the treatment of phimosis. Wright had a success rate of 80% (89 of 111 boys) using 0.05% betamethasone.34 Kikiros et al. reported an improvement in 33 of 42 boys (78%) with 0.05% betamethasone, and in 18 of 21 boys (86%) with hydrocortisone, but they considered that the betamethasone worked more quickly.3 Another steroid cream, 0.05% clobetasol propionate, has also been used successfully by (70%, 54 boys) by Jørgersen and Svensson"

Regards,

RG
Quote
Share