Size Survey that's actually accurate

[cockboiii]

Why doesn't anyone ever bring up this survey? I know it is possibly slightly exaggerated bc it is self reported, but not sure why anyone would have a reason to lie in an anonymous survey. From what I've seen as a gay man this is much more accurate in terms of what I actually see in person during sex, in the locker room, in armature porn. There is defiantly a correlation between height and penis size and average to me (seeing hundreds of penises) is definitely 6 or above. This guy does a great job using stats. The non-self reported ones are all soft stretched dicks from guys with ED which we all know doesn't accurately measure your size (I'm a lot bigger hard than stretched).

The Definitive Penis Size Survey | SizeSurvey.com

Thoughts?

 

[Rooker]

Self-reported is flawed simply because people will lie to themselves.

 

[Snakebyte]

Why doesn't anyone ever bring up this survey? I know it is possibly slightly exaggerated bc it is self reported, but not sure why anyone would have a reason to lie in an anonymous survey. From what I've seen as a gay man this is much more accurate in terms of what I actually see in person during sex, in the locker room, in armature porn. There is defiantly a correlation between height and penis size and average to me (seeing hundreds of penises) is definitely 6 or above. This guy does a great job using stats. The non-self reported ones are all soft stretched dicks from guys with ED which we all know doesn't accurately measure your size (I'm a lot bigger hard than stretched).

The Definitive Penis Size Survey | SizeSurvey.com

Thoughts?

Could have stopped at self reported. Hence it's absolutely useless. Some years ago there was a study (from Europe iirc) that compared self reported measurement with clinical measurement and the difference was up to 4 cm.
And no, the clinical measurements are not all soft stretched dicks. There are plenty of studies using chemical induced erections and no not all studies measure guys with ED. Your anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

 

[dickapick]

Yes, I have thoughts. Self reported is bs. Even with photos of penises obviously showing something different people will claim a bigger size. And that site is supported by penis enlarging devices. I suppose for a reason ..

 

[cockboiii]

I believe self reports are more accurate for a number of reasons. First most clinical studies use people who have some form of erectile dysfunction. Secondly, all these studies report “stretched” soft length. Anyone who is a man knows that doesn’t remotely come close to accurately describing his penis at full mast. Third, even if the guy could get hard how hard can you get under a clinical study? Self reports are likely much more accurate in my opinion and also just from what I’ve observed as a gay man. The 5 something average just isn’t accurate at all. It’s way too small and I’ve seen hundreds of dicks. Admittedly almost all white guys though.

 

[dickapick]

I believe self reports are more accurate for a number of reasons. First most clinical studies use people who have some form of erectile dysfunction. Secondly, all these studies report “stretched” soft length. Anyone who is a man knows that doesn’t remotely come close to accurately describing his penis at full mast. Third, even if the guy could get hard how hard can you get under a clinical study? Self reports are likely much more accurate in my opinion and also just from what I’ve observed as a gay man. The 5 something average just isn’t accurate at all. It’s way too small and I’ve seen hundreds of dicks. Admittedly almost all white guys though.

No, no, and I don’t know how hard I would get with a chemical induced erection.

Even with a measuring device people are easily of by an inch. In a clinical study I assume they do a better job.

 

[Snakebyte]

I believe self reports are more accurate for a number of reasons. First most clinical studies use people who have some form of erectile dysfunction. Secondly, all these studies report “stretched” soft length. Anyone who is a man knows that doesn’t remotely come close to accurately describing his penis at full mast. Third, even if the guy could get hard how hard can you get under a clinical study? Self reports are likely much more accurate in my opinion and also just from what I’ve observed as a gay man. The 5 something average just isn’t accurate at all. It’s way too small and I’ve seen hundreds of dicks. Admittedly almost all white guys though.

Do you even read? I already stated that this is nonsense.

 

[cockboiii]

Um yes I read and I think you are full of nonsense. These are reports of guys who have some penile dysfunction and are “stretched”. These reports aren’t even close to what a normal male would measure. Have you read the Stanford report??

 

[cockboiii]

This report seems to line up exactly with my observations

 

[Rooker]

It is an advertisement.

 

[Snakebyte]

Um yes I read and I think you are full of nonsense. These are reports of guys who have some penile dysfunction and are “stretched”. These reports aren’t even close to what a normal male would measure. Have you read the Stanford report??

I in fact I have read dozens of those studies, and I mean the real papers and not some bullshit website, from all over the world. There are plenty of them measuring either nbpel or bpel. Some even induce the erection chemically so the erections are at their maximum. That's a fact. Also only a handful of studies look at ED. While the meta analysis of Veale is flawed, it literally has plenty of studies in it measuring erect length.
You got no fkn clue what you are talking about. I mean, why do I even talk to someone who thinks anecdotal evidence and some self-reported nonsense is worth more than dozens of clinical studies... you're literally the flat earther of penis size

 

[Alex22876]

It is an advertisement.

This

 

[Murphys]

I in fact I have read dozens of those studies, and I mean the real papers and not some bullshit website, from all over the world. There are plenty of them measuring either nbpel or bpel. Some even induce the erection chemically so the erections are at their maximum. That's a fact. Also only a handful of studies look at ED. While the meta analysis of Veale is flawed, it literally has plenty of studies in it measuring erect length.
You got no fkn clue what you are talking about. I mean, why do I even talk to someone who thinks anecdotal evidence and some self-reported nonsense is worth more than dozens of clinical studies... you're literally the flat earther of penis size

^^This.^^ Perfectly spot-on.

 

[Shepardson]

Do you even read?

Well I do, but skimming through this thread, there wasn't much point when I got to this:

I believe self reports are more accurate for a number of reasons.