Do these height techniques work?

[Zeekie]

Nope, he put them at the exact same place. Can you show me evidence it’s been debunked?

Ugh, yes, cherry-picking information from old studies is disingenuous. Animal models disprove this (barely) hypothesis. Steinberg and Trueta et al, found that treadmill running had more of an anabolic effect on the bones of infant rats than mature rats, with the observation of greater bone mass, length, and diameter as well as increased bone x-ray density, cortical thickness, and circumferential ring formation in young exercising rats compared to controls. No such differences were seen in the mature exercising rats compared to age-matched controls.
Similar results were found in a study by Rubin et al., using the loadable functionally isolated ulnas of male turkeys. Eight weeks of 300 cycles per day of loading resulted in statistically significant differences between the loaded and unloaded ulnae of the young turkeys, with no significant differences between ulnae of the older turkeys.

You said fractures won’t cause longitudinal adaptations, yet the studies showcase this. And you still haven’t debunked zhang’s law which clearly showcases that bones under pressure can ELONGATE. What aren’t you understanding?

Zhang's Law is a real theory within the study of the skeletal structures of mammals, I can't debunk that, that's a very real thing. What I'm trying to debunk is trying to biohack your biology into becoming stronger. Also, I'm like 99% sure that Zhang's Law emerged to propose that bone resorption can cause reductions in length, curvature and thickness, not the other way around, but maybe that's me misreading the literature.

Devon’s case has nothing to do with joint/tendon laxity, those have nothing to go with one arm being longer than the other. His case is a prime example of one arm being put under more pressure and ending up longer than the other arm.

I don't see why not, it is widely accepted in medicine that generalized joint laxity can cause increases in length of normal joints.

Also, you’re wrong about bones not having plasticity. Zhang’s law and Wolff’s law clearly prove this. Bones are able to change and elongate when put under certain kinds of pressure.

Wolff's Law emerged as a way to validate that a bone can become thicker because of strains applied on it, none of Wolff's work validate the idea of significant bone lengthening. Zhang's law and the works of people like Harold Frost, arose as a way to validate skeletal remodeling beyond growing years, not exactly to prove that positive bone length adaptations are positive beyond the growing years.

 

[Zeekie]

https://web.mit.edu/mbuehler/www/research/PTO000041.pdf

Can you elaborate on how exactly does this study validate your point? The study defines plasticity as "permanent deformation" but explains that this occurs at the molecular and submicrometer levels through mechanisms such as the breaking and re-forming of hydrogen bonds and the "intermolecular sliding" of collagen molecules and mineral crystals. It describes the material internal behavior, not a process that adds length to the entire bone.

Ultimately, what the article describes is bone thickening and involves cells that "dissolve and remove old bone" and "create new bone". This process is described as a self-repair mechanism and "adaptability to changing mechanical load patterns". The goal is to repair damage and maintain functionality, not to add length.

Could theoretically this process lead to increases in bone length? Probably, if we ignore the fact that dysfunctional bone tissue is removed and that some of this process will inevitably lead to bone contraction, then yes, some very microscopic and uneven bone length increases may occur asymmetrically throughout the bone, but this will not make you taller, and again, we're stretching things quite a bit with our descriptions.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Ugh, yes, cherry-picking information from old studies is disingenuous. Animal models disprove this (barely) hypothesis. Steinberg and Trueta et al, found that treadmill running had more of an anabolic effect on the bones of infant rats than mature rats, with the observation of greater bone mass, length, and diameter as well as increased bone x-ray density, cortical thickness, and circumferential ring formation in young exercising rats compared to controls. No such differences were seen in the mature exercising rats compared to age-matched controls.
Similar results were found in a study by Rubin et al., using the loadable functionally isolated ulnas of male turkeys. Eight weeks of 300 cycles per day of loading resulted in statistically significant differences between the loaded and unloaded ulnae of the young turkeys, with no significant differences between ulnae of the older turkeys.

Zhang's Law is a real theory within the study of the skeletal structures of mammals, I can't debunk that, that's a very real thing. What I'm trying to debunk is trying to biohack your biology into becoming stronger. Also, I'm like 99% sure that Zhang's Law emerged to propose that bone resorption can cause reductions in length, curvature and thickness, not the other way around, but maybe that's me misreading the literature.


I don't see why not, it is widely accepted in medicine that generalized joint laxity can cause increases in length of normal joints.


Wolff's Law emerged as a way to validate that a bone can become thicker because of strains applied on it, none of Wolff's work validate the idea of significant bone lengthening. Zhang's law and the works of people like Harold Frost, arose as a way to validate skeletal remodeling beyond growing years, not exactly to prove that positive bone length adaptations are positive beyond the growing years.

How does any of this disprove my claim? I mean, there are studies showcasing bone increase length in mice. But one thing you didn’t take into account is that mice’s growth plates don’t actually close, unlike humans.

“Eight weeks of 300 cycles per day of loading resulted in statistically significant differences between the loaded and unloaded ulnae of the young turkeys, with no significant differences between ulnae of the older turkeys.”
These are turkeys, not humans. Secondly, Older bones are generally less responsive to mechanical loading.. However, bone growth in adult humans is seen.

“Zhang's Law is a real theory within the study of the skeletal structures of mammals, I can't debunk that, that's a very real thing. What I'm trying to debunk is trying to biohack your biology into becoming stronger. Also, I'm like 99% sure that Zhang's Law emerged to propose that bone resorption can cause reductions in length, curvature and thickness, not the other way around, but maybe that's me misreading the literature.”

Zhang’s law doesn’t say anything about bones reducing in length lol. That’s just your misinterpretation of the literature. How exactly is my interpretation of the law incorrect? If the law states that high pressure = length. Then what about my theory is incorrect? If you apply pressure on the bones, they will grow in many different forms, including length, this is undeniable.

“Zhang's law and the works of people like Harold Frost, arose as a way to validate skeletal remodeling beyond growing years, not exactly to prove that positive bone length adaptations are positive beyond the growing years.”

Bone length adaptations = a form of skeletal remodeling.

If it’s not about positive bone length, then why does the study itself on zhang’s law state LENGTH?

 

[AbuSdanteet]

I don't see why not, it is widely accepted in medicine that generalized joint laxity can cause increases in length of normal joints.

Prove this is the case with Devon larret. We can clearly see that his bones are longer. And please substantiate that external loading (mechanical loading) causes joint laxity which therefore increases length.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

T

Can you elaborate on how exactly does this study validate your point? The study defines plasticity as "permanent deformation" but explains that this occurs at the molecular and submicrometer levels through mechanisms such as the breaking and re-forming of hydrogen bonds and the "intermolecular sliding" of collagen molecules and mineral crystals. It describes the material internal behavior, not a process that adds length to the entire bone.

Ultimately, what the article describes is bone thickening and involves cells that "dissolve and remove old bone" and "create new bone". This process is described as a self-repair mechanism and "adaptability to changing mechanical load patterns". The goal is to repair damage and maintain functionality, not to add length.

Could theoretically this process lead to increases in bone length? Probably, if we ignore the fact that dysfunctional bone tissue is removed and that some of this process will inevitably lead to bone contraction, then yes, some very microscopic and uneven bone length increases may occur asymmetrically throughout the bone, but this will not make you taller, and again, we're stretching things quite a bit with our descriptions.

That Bone has high level of plasticity and isn’t as solid or unmalleable (I know that’s not a word) as you think.

 

[BrutalN2L]

1.)Microfractures + over the bed stretching (substantiated via zhang’s law which states bones can lengthen under pressure)

2.) LSJL

Just take HGH if youre serious about getting taller

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Can you elaborate on how exactly does this study validate your point? The study defines plasticity as "permanent deformation" but explains that this occurs at the molecular and submicrometer levels through mechanisms such as the breaking and re-forming of hydrogen bonds and the "intermolecular sliding" of collagen molecules and mineral crystals. It describes the material internal behavior, not a process that adds length to the entire bone.

Ultimately, what the article describes is bone thickening and involves cells that "dissolve and remove old bone" and "create new bone". This process is described as a self-repair mechanism and "adaptability to changing mechanical load patterns". The goal is to repair damage and maintain functionality, not to add length.

Could theoretically this process lead to increases in bone length? Probably, if we ignore the fact that dysfunctional bone tissue is removed and that some of this process will inevitably lead to bone contraction, then yes, some very microscopic and uneven bone length increases may occur asymmetrically throughout the bone, but this will not make you taller, and again, we're stretching things quite a bit with our descriptions.

According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, LENGTH, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity.

Keyword: LENGTH.

What aren’t you understanding?

Law of dynamic deformation of bone - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[-=t3rm1n4t0r_2005=-]

According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, LENGTH, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity.

Keyword: LENGTH.

What aren’t you understanding?

Law of dynamic deformation of bone - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Who exactly is this Zhang and how do you know this "Law" is actually Law?
I've never heard of it before and it doesn't seem like it's in a scientific consensus that Zhang's Law is true. Matter of fact I can't find anything other than this pubmed article on Zhang's Law.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Who exactly is this Zhang and how do you know this "Law" is actually Law?
I've never heard of it before and it doesn't seem like it's in a scientific consensus that Zhang's Law is true. Matter of fact I can't find anything other than this pubmed article on Zhang's Law.

If it’s on pubmed then it’s definitely true lol. You can’t publish fake info on there

 

[Magnum452]

Well I don’t want my neck any longer ngl.



So my protocol is as follows:

1.) microfractures
2.) stretch the microfractures via over the bed method

3.) sleep stretching
4.) cycling with raised seat.

Is this good? I wonder how much growth I can get if I do this for a year straight. The other guy was saying microfractures would just give a few millimeters in the span of years.

Lemme know if u see results....aka tag me in ur future threads

 

[Zeekie]

Honestly, last response I'll give you, if you still choose to cope about being short and believe you can become taller through this bs, then go ahead, I won't stop you, go and become 6'6" king, I'm sure that's possible!!!

Let's go point by point here, and explain why you’re completely misrepresenting the actual biomechanics here

1. Wrong framing. Older bones don’t just become “less responsive", they lose the ability for longitudinal growth because the growth plate cartilage is gone. Post-maturity, loading affects density and shape (Wolff), not length. You’re pretending there’s a continuum of responsiveness when it’s actually a biological stop sign for height.
2. Both of those studies are done on animals, not humans, true, but disregarding evidence because it is done on human models is stupid. Also yeah, older bones are more resistant to remodeling, like those of adult humans lol. Plus, yes, mice's growth plates never completely close like with humans, but wouldn't that actually help your case here? Except not even in adult mouse who are supposed to have partially open growth plates were significant increases in bone length of joint-locked extremities.
3. About the stupid fucking study about bone growth in adults, the study isn’t showing longitudinal growth like in adolescence. It’s showing age-related morphological drift in small, irregularly loaded bones of the hand. What they saw wasn’t new bone pushing the finger longer, it was peripheral apposition at the phalanges, which are NOT constrained by a growth plate or a major joint, like your legs, this is even acknowledged in the study itself.
4. "Muh Zhang's law says length so you're wrong!!" Zhang’s law mentions length in the context of morphological adaptation, which includes minor adjustments and reshaping (and yes, this decrease in length can also be negative), not adding centimeters to an adult femur. Remodeling can slightly straighten or curve bones over time, issue is you’re reading “length” and leaping straight to “height increase", which is a massive misinterpretation.
5. You’re conflating skeletal remodeling with longitudinal growth. Remodeling doesn’t equal height gain; it’s the reshaping of existing bone tissue. You can get thicker cortices, altered curvature, but not functional elongation once plates are closed.

Anyway, remodeling is a LOCALIZED process that involves the coupled action of osteoclasts, and osteoblasts, where osteoclasts first resorb a pit of older bone, and osteoblasts are subsequently recruited to the site to form and mineralize new bone. There's absolutely no possibility that this mechanism will add any significant amount of length to your height.

Try all you want, but you won't grow a single cm from this, unless your goal is to gain around 1 nanometer of growth unevenly in a portion of your length, you're just coping hard.

If beyond this point you still disagree with me, then let's just call it quits. Nothing you say will sway me from your position, and the opposite seems to also be true, put your hypothesis to the test and see how much you grow.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Honestly, last response I'll give you, if you still choose to cope about being short and believe you can become taller through this bs, then go ahead, I won't stop you, go and become 6'6" king, I'm sure that's possible!!!

Let's go point by point here, and explain why you’re completely misrepresenting the actual biomechanics here

1. Wrong framing. Older bones don’t just become “less responsive", they lose the ability for longitudinal growth because the growth plate cartilage is gone. Post-maturity, loading affects density and shape (Wolff), not length. You’re pretending there’s a continuum of responsiveness when it’s actually a biological stop sign for height.
2. Both of those studies are done on animals, not humans, true, but disregarding evidence because it is done on human models is stupid. Also yeah, older bones are more resistant to remodeling, like those of adult humans lol. Plus, yes, mice's growth plates never completely close like with humans, but wouldn't that actually help your case here? Except not even in adult mouse who are supposed to have partially open growth plates were significant increases in bone length of joint-locked extremities.
3. About the stupid fucking study about bone growth in adults, the study isn’t showing longitudinal growth like in adolescence. It’s showing age-related morphological drift in small, irregularly loaded bones of the hand. What they saw wasn’t new bone pushing the finger longer, it was peripheral apposition at the phalanges, which are NOT constrained by a growth plate or a major joint, like your legs, this is even acknowledged in the study itself.
4. "Muh Zhang's law says length so you're wrong!!" Zhang’s law mentions length in the context of morphological adaptation, which includes minor adjustments and reshaping (and yes, this decrease in length can also be negative), not adding centimeters to an adult femur. Remodeling can slightly straighten or curve bones over time, issue is you’re reading “length” and leaping straight to “height increase", which is a massive misinterpretation.
5. You’re conflating skeletal remodeling with longitudinal growth. Remodeling doesn’t equal height gain; it’s the reshaping of existing bone tissue. You can get thicker cortices, altered curvature, but not functional elongation once plates are closed.

Anyway, remodeling is a LOCALIZED process that involves the coupled action of osteoclasts, and osteoblasts, where osteoclasts first resorb a pit of older bone, and osteoblasts are subsequently recruited to the site to form and mineralize new bone. There's absolutely no possibility that this mechanism will add any significant amount of length to your height.

Try all you want, but you won't grow a single cm from this, unless your goal is to gain around 1 nanometer of growth unevenly in a portion of your length, you're just coping hard.

If beyond this point you still disagree with me, then let's just call it quits. Nothing you say will sway me from your position, and the opposite seems to also be true, put your hypothesis to the test and see how much you grow.

I’ll respond to your points in order.



1.) older bones DO become less responsive, the same reason why it’s harder for older people to build muscle. We aren’t talking about growth plates, we are talking about BONES. How can a 20 year old such as myself lose the ability to heal microfractures? Bone adaptation is seen in adults, you completely ignored this.



2.) I’m not fully disregarding animal studies, but you can’t fully equate the two because at the end of the day, we are humans and our biology doesn’t work all the same as animals.



3.) where in the study does it say that?



4.) this doesn’t debunk the premise that mechanical loading can stimulate longitudinal bone growth though, all you’re doing is adding onto its potential meaning.



Directly from Zhang’s article:



“Microfractures can induce bone remodeling. It has been reported that at least 10% of bone is renewed per year by this physiological process.[1] Microfractures, bone absorption and bone regeneration can lead to changes in skeletal morphology.”



So microfractures -> bone remodeling -> longer bone as stated by zhang.





5.) longitudinal growth is a form of skeletal remodeling dumbass. “It’s the reshaping of existing bone tissue” yeah genius, and according to zhang, it can reshape into longer, stronger, thicker bone .







“Try all you want, but you won't grow a single cm from this, unless your goal is to gain around 1 nanometer of growth unevenly in a portion of your length, you're just coping hard.”



So you’re admitting that there is growth. Lol.


Devon Larret’s example alone refutes you.

Also, medieval archers had deformed arms from pulling bow strings, their bones didn't just get thicker, they got longer.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Honestly, last response I'll give you, if you still choose to cope about being short and believe you can become taller through this bs, then go ahead, I won't stop you, go and become 6'6" king, I'm sure that's possible!!!

Let's go point by point here, and explain why you’re completely misrepresenting the actual biomechanics here

1. Wrong framing. Older bones don’t just become “less responsive", they lose the ability for longitudinal growth because the growth plate cartilage is gone. Post-maturity, loading affects density and shape (Wolff), not length. You’re pretending there’s a continuum of responsiveness when it’s actually a biological stop sign for height.
2. Both of those studies are done on animals, not humans, true, but disregarding evidence because it is done on human models is stupid. Also yeah, older bones are more resistant to remodeling, like those of adult humans lol. Plus, yes, mice's growth plates never completely close like with humans, but wouldn't that actually help your case here? Except not even in adult mouse who are supposed to have partially open growth plates were significant increases in bone length of joint-locked extremities.
3. About the stupid fucking study about bone growth in adults, the study isn’t showing longitudinal growth like in adolescence. It’s showing age-related morphological drift in small, irregularly loaded bones of the hand. What they saw wasn’t new bone pushing the finger longer, it was peripheral apposition at the phalanges, which are NOT constrained by a growth plate or a major joint, like your legs, this is even acknowledged in the study itself.
4. "Muh Zhang's law says length so you're wrong!!" Zhang’s law mentions length in the context of morphological adaptation, which includes minor adjustments and reshaping (and yes, this decrease in length can also be negative), not adding centimeters to an adult femur. Remodeling can slightly straighten or curve bones over time, issue is you’re reading “length” and leaping straight to “height increase", which is a massive misinterpretation.
5. You’re conflating skeletal remodeling with longitudinal growth. Remodeling doesn’t equal height gain; it’s the reshaping of existing bone tissue. You can get thicker cortices, altered curvature, but not functional elongation once plates are closed.

Anyway, remodeling is a LOCALIZED process that involves the coupled action of osteoclasts, and osteoblasts, where osteoclasts first resorb a pit of older bone, and osteoblasts are subsequently recruited to the site to form and mineralize new bone. There's absolutely no possibility that this mechanism will add any significant amount of length to your height.

Try all you want, but you won't grow a single cm from this, unless your goal is to gain around 1 nanometer of growth unevenly in a portion of your length, you're just coping hard.

If beyond this point you still disagree with me, then let's just call it quits. Nothing you say will sway me from your position, and the opposite seems to also be true, put your hypothesis to the test and see how much you grow.

Also that last paragraph isn’t nice to say. I thought we were friends?

 

[Azie555]

1.)Microfractures + over the bed stretching (substantiated via zhang’s law which states bones can lengthen under pressure)

2.) LSJL

drink raw milk and raw honey and do masai jumps

 

[AbuSdanteet]

drink raw milk and raw honey and do masai jumps

Ahhh

 

[Zeekie]

1.) older bones DO become less responsive, the same reason why it’s harder for older people to build muscle. We aren’t talking about growth plates, we are talking about BONES. How can a 20 year old such as myself lose the ability to heal microfractures? Bone adaptation is seen in adults, you completely ignored this.

I never said you couldn't heal microfractures, that's a strawman fallacy. But you won't grow longer bones because of these microfractures. Let's try another approach, how do you think Limb Lengthening surgery works? Do you think they crack a little bit of bone, let it heal for it to grow longer? Absolutely not, they break the COMPLETE BONE and artificially lengthen it to achieve the desired results.

2.) I’m not fully disregarding animal studies, but you can’t fully equate the two because at the end of the day, we are humans and our biology doesn’t work all the same as animals.

Yes, but when two animal studies, that don't even differ significantly from our own bone biology show the exact same results, that should say something shouldn't it?

3.) where in the study does it say that?

Something tells me you didn't even read this study. It's literally in the abstract, the first part of the paper past the title and credits.

4.) this doesn’t debunk the premise that mechanical loading can stimulate longitudinal bone growth though, all you’re doing is adding onto its potential meaning.

No, stop moving the goalposts. Mechanical loading remodels bone SHAPE and DENSITY, not length, once growth plates close. This isn’t “adding meaning", I'm clarifying basic biology you keep misinterpreting. Remodeling, as per described by Zhang, Wolff or anyone in the realm of osteology, is not magically generating extra millimeters of long bone. If loading really caused longitudinal growth in mature humans, elite gymnasts, powerlifters, and manual laborers would literally outgrow their height charts. Guess what? They don’t.

Directly from Zhang’s article:



“Microfractures can induce bone remodeling. It has been reported that at least 10% of bone is renewed per year by this physiological process.[1] Microfractures, bone absorption and bone regeneration can lead to changes in skeletal morphology.”



So microfractures -> bone remodeling -> longer bone as stated by zhang.

Yes, Zhang said microfractures stimulate remodeling, but he did NOT say “microfractures = lengthening in adult long bones.” Remodeling replaces damaged tissue, optimizes load-bearing shape, and can even cause shortening where bone is resorbed (like the metacarpals in your OWN hand-bone study, that you didn't read).

You’re confusing “bone morphology change” with actual net elogation. Morphology includes thickening, straightening, curvature changes, even minor edge expansions, not a miracle femur extension. If you honestly think healing microfractures makes you taller, why aren’t osteoporotic patients turning into giants from all their stress fractures?

5.) longitudinal growth is a form of skeletal remodeling dumbass. “It’s the reshaping of existing bone tissue” yeah genius, and according to zhang, it can reshape into longer, stronger, thicker bone .

You’re cherry-picking phrases like "length" out of context and ignoring the fundamental biology of skeletal maturity. Adult bone adaptation ISN'T lengthening. PERIOD. Until you produce actual human longitudinal bone length data post-epiphyseal closure, your argument is just hand-waving with buzzwords.

“Try all you want, but you won't grow a single cm from this, unless your goal is to gain around 1 nanometer of growth unevenly in a portion of your length, you're just coping hard.”



So you’re admitting that there is growth. Lol.

Stop being fucking pedantic, this isn't about whether length is possible or not, it's about whether microfractures can produce a significant amount of lengthening of bones meaningful enough to make you taller.

Devon Larret’s example alone refutes you.

This is joint laxity, note how the length of the forearm and thereby the bones are exactly the same, and curiously a significant extension in length only presents itself starting from the radius and articular disk, meaning that only the hand (curiously filled with joints and cartilage) appears to be longer)

And note how this differs too from people with a limb asymmetry who DO have longer bones. This is an exaggerated example of course, but it paints the picture, this girl has a longer tibia, Devon just has a longer hand

 

[Zeekie]

Also that last paragraph isn’t nice to say. I thought we were friends?

I'm just trying to save you from cope, but we ain't pals dude (that's a lie, I don't actually care if you believe this shit, but I do fear for the brains of other people reading this and falling for it too)

anyway, good luck growing to 6'6" dude, if you really think this is right, despite logic and studies that straight up contradict this notion denying this, then go ahead, grow, I'll be waiting.

 

[Zeekie]

Also, you're conveniently ignoring the nature of microfractures and strains as literally described by "Plasticity and toughness in bone", the study YOU provided. The microfractures occurring in the bone are largely localized and asymmetric, this is a visual representation:

(Note that this is a massive overestimation of the actual process, again, we're speaking of literal NANOMETERS of remodeling and this isn't even considering the amount of bone compression due to resorption, again as described by your OWN source.)

How do you expect to gain any positive result through this mechanism, given the glaring asymmetrical flaw of your hypothesis? (And again, this is even assuming you're going to get any statistically significant increases in longitudinal bone length)

I know it is hard to be short, I'm not even that tall myself, but coping and trying to use gross scientific misinterpretations to justify it, just ain't it twin Just let it go and get the LL

 

[AbuSdanteet]

I never said you couldn't heal microfractures, that's a strawman fallacy. But you won't grow longer bones because of these microfractures. Let's try another approach, how do you think Limb Lengthening surgery works? Do you think they crack a little bit of bone, let it heal for it to grow longer? Absolutely not, they break the COMPLETE BONE and artificially lengthen it to achieve the desired results.


Yes, but when two animal studies, that don't even differ significantly from our own bone biology show the exact same results, that should say something shouldn't it?


Something tells me you didn't even read this study. It's literally in the abstract, the first part of the paper past the title and credits.
View attachment 3939930View attachment 3939937


No, stop moving the goalposts. Mechanical loading remodels bone SHAPE and DENSITY, not length, once growth plates close. This isn’t “adding meaning", I'm clarifying basic biology you keep misinterpreting. Remodeling, as per described by Zhang, Wolff or anyone in the realm of osteology, is not magically generating extra millimeters of long bone. If loading really caused longitudinal growth in mature humans, elite gymnasts, powerlifters, and manual laborers would literally outgrow their height charts. Guess what? They don’t.

Yes, Zhang said microfractures stimulate remodeling, but he did NOT say “microfractures = lengthening in adult long bones.” Remodeling replaces damaged tissue, optimizes load-bearing shape, and can even cause shortening where bone is resorbed (like the metacarpals in your OWN hand-bone study, that you didn't read).

You’re confusing “bone morphology change” with actual net elogation. Morphology includes thickening, straightening, curvature changes, even minor edge expansions, not a miracle femur extension. If you honestly think healing microfractures makes you taller, why aren’t osteoporotic patients turning into giants from all their stress fractures?


You’re cherry-picking phrases like "length" out of context and ignoring the fundamental biology of skeletal maturity. Adult bone adaptation ISN'T lengthening. PERIOD. Until you produce actual human longitudinal bone length data post-epiphyseal closure, your argument is just hand-waving with buzzwords.


Stop being fucking pedantic, this isn't about whether length is possible or not, it's about whether microfractures can produce a significant amount of lengthening of bones meaningful enough to make you taller.


This is joint laxity, note how the length of the forearm and thereby the bones are exactly the same, and curiously a significant extension in length only presents itself starting from the radius and articular disk, meaning that only the hand (curiously filled with joints and cartilage) appears to be longer)
View attachment 3939964
And note how this differs too from people with a limb asymmetry who DO have longer bones. This is an exaggerated example of course, but it paints the picture, this girl has a longer tibia, Devon just has a longer hand
View attachment 3939985

Says he won’t respond then types all this cope. Let’s refute it shall we?



“I never said you couldn't heal microfractures, that's a strawman fallacy. But you won't grow longer bones because of these microfractures. Let's try another approach, how do you think Limb Lengthening surgery works? Do you think they crack a little bit of bone, let it heal for it to grow longer? Absolutely not, they break the COMPLETE BONE and artificially lengthen it to achieve the desired results.”



I never said you claimed microfractures don’t heal, now who’s strawmanning? Anyway, you said you won’t grow longer bones due to these microfractures yet once again you haven’t substantiated your presupposition. What epistemic framework are you using to presuppose this? As for LL, they break the bone as opposed to breaking it little by little so that the results can speed up. Was that actually an argument? .



“Yes, but when two animal studies, that don't even differ significantly from our own bone biology show the exact same results, that should say something shouldn't it?”



No, because our bones and their bones are still different.



“No, stop moving the goalposts. Mechanical loading remodels bone SHAPE and DENSITY, not length, once growth plates close. This isn’t “adding meaning", I'm clarifying basic biology you keep misinterpreting. Remodeling, as per described by Zhang, Wolff or anyone in the realm of osteology, is not magically generating extra millimeters of long bone. If loading really caused longitudinal growth in mature humans, elite gymnasts, powerlifters, and manual laborers would literally outgrow their height charts. Guess what? They don’t.”



Prove that they don’t. Just because it hasn’t been measured doesn’t necessitate it hasn’t occurred. Anyway, once again you stated mechanical loading remodels bone shape and density, not length. Yet you haven’t proven so. If mechanical loading doesn’t stimulate length; then why does zhang’s law say density, shape, curvature AND length…?



“Yes, Zhang said microfractures stimulate remodeling, but he did NOT say “microfractures = lengthening in adult long bones.” Remodeling replaces damaged tissue, optimizes load-bearing shape, and can even cause shortening where bone is resorbed (like the metacarpals in your OWN hand-bone study, that you didn't read).”



Also zhang’s article:



>According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, LENGTH, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity.



He doesn’t have to say “microfractures even lengthening bones” specially. He said that bones when put under pressure (mechanical loading) can lead to a change in bone structure. These changes can necessitate things like shape, density, structure, LENGTH, curve, etc.





“You’re confusing “bone morphology change” with actual net elogation.”



How are the two different here? They aren’t mutually exclusive. The bone morphology change here includes length as stated by zhang’s law.



“You’re cherry-picking phrases like "length" out of context and ignoring the fundamental biology of skeletal maturity. Adult bone adaptation ISN'T lengthening. PERIOD. Until you produce actual human longitudinal bone length data post-epiphyseal closure, your argument is just hand-waving with buzzwords.”



You’ve yet to explain how I’m actually taking it out of context. What does length here mean then?



“Stop being fucking pedantic, this isn't about whether length is possible or not, it's about whether microfractures can produce a significant amount of lengthening of bones meaningful enough to make you taller.”



It is about whether length is possible and I’ve proven so. The significance of it isn’t even something you or I can substantiate, unless there’s a direct study on it. But Devon Larret’s case as well as the archer I provided showcases it.



“This is joint laxity, note how the length of the forearm and thereby the bones are exactly the same, and curiously a significant extension in length only presents itself starting from the radius and articular disk, meaning that only the hand (curiously filled with joints and cartilage) appears to be longer)”



The forearm appears to be slightly longer. The bones of the hangs and fingers appear to be longer too. But let me go with you and say this isn’t bone lengthening but just joint laxity. It was still caused by mechanical loading. So isn’t this a clear sign we can still grow taller from mechanical loading?



Also you still haven’t refuted my example of the archer. I’m waiting for this please

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Also, you're conveniently ignoring the nature of microfractures and strains as literally described by "Plasticity and toughness in bone", the study YOU provided. The microfractures occurring in the bone are largely localized and asymmetric, this is a visual representation:
View attachment 3940084

(Note that this is a massive overestimation of the actual process, again, we're speaking of literal NANOMETERS of remodeling and this isn't even considering the amount of bone compression due to resorption, again as described by your OWN source.)

How do you expect to gain any positive result through this mechanism, given the glaring asymmetrical flaw of your hypothesis? (And again, this is even assuming you're going to get any statistically significant increases in longitudinal bone length)

How does any of this refute my premise? The bones won’t be compressed if we use the OTB method.

I know it is hard to be short, I'm not even that tall myself, but coping and trying to use gross scientific misinterpretations to justify it, just ain't it twin Just let it go and get the LL

I’m 6’0.5 so I’m not sure if I even classify as short lol. I’m trying to get an extra inch or 2 which I know is possible using all these methods in conjunction.

I know many stories of people growing 1+ inches from this.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

I never said you couldn't heal microfractures, that's a strawman fallacy. But you won't grow longer bones because of these microfractures. Let's try another approach, how do you think Limb Lengthening surgery works? Do you think they crack a little bit of bone, let it heal for it to grow longer? Absolutely not, they break the COMPLETE BONE and artificially lengthen it to achieve the desired results.


Yes, but when two animal studies, that don't even differ significantly from our own bone biology show the exact same results, that should say something shouldn't it?


Something tells me you didn't even read this study. It's literally in the abstract, the first part of the paper past the title and credits.
View attachment 3939930View attachment 3939937


No, stop moving the goalposts. Mechanical loading remodels bone SHAPE and DENSITY, not length, once growth plates close. This isn’t “adding meaning", I'm clarifying basic biology you keep misinterpreting. Remodeling, as per described by Zhang, Wolff or anyone in the realm of osteology, is not magically generating extra millimeters of long bone. If loading really caused longitudinal growth in mature humans, elite gymnasts, powerlifters, and manual laborers would literally outgrow their height charts. Guess what? They don’t.

Yes, Zhang said microfractures stimulate remodeling, but he did NOT say “microfractures = lengthening in adult long bones.” Remodeling replaces damaged tissue, optimizes load-bearing shape, and can even cause shortening where bone is resorbed (like the metacarpals in your OWN hand-bone study, that you didn't read).

You’re confusing “bone morphology change” with actual net elogation. Morphology includes thickening, straightening, curvature changes, even minor edge expansions, not a miracle femur extension. If you honestly think healing microfractures makes you taller, why aren’t osteoporotic patients turning into giants from all their stress fractures?


You’re cherry-picking phrases like "length" out of context and ignoring the fundamental biology of skeletal maturity. Adult bone adaptation ISN'T lengthening. PERIOD. Until you produce actual human longitudinal bone length data post-epiphyseal closure, your argument is just hand-waving with buzzwords.


Stop being fucking pedantic, this isn't about whether length is possible or not, it's about whether microfractures can produce a significant amount of lengthening of bones meaningful enough to make you taller.


This is joint laxity, note how the length of the forearm and thereby the bones are exactly the same, and curiously a significant extension in length only presents itself starting from the radius and articular disk, meaning that only the hand (curiously filled with joints and cartilage) appears to be longer)
View attachment 3939964
And note how this differs too from people with a limb asymmetry who DO have longer bones. This is an exaggerated example of course, but it paints the picture, this girl has a longer tibia, Devon just has a longer hand
View attachment 3939985

Even ChatGPT agrees with me (and you even) on Devon’s case:

Yes, Devon Larratt has openly mentioned in interviews and videos that one of his arms (specifically his right arm)became slightly longer than the other due to decades of high-volume, asymmetric armwrestling training—especially when he focused predominantly on his right arm early in his career.

Details:​

• The Difference: The length difference isn't extreme (likely within 1–2 cm or less), but it's noticeable enough in side-by-side comparisons or certain poses.
• Cause: Years of intense bone and connective tissue stressfrom armwrestling have led to:
  • Bone remodeling (from Wolff’s Law – bones adapt to stress)
  • Joint capsule laxity or changes in elbow/shoulder alignment
  • Muscle hypertrophy pulling the arm into slightly altered positioning

Devon even joked that his arm looks like it "belongs to a different person" due to its size and length. This is part of why many elite armwrestlers train both arms to avoid extreme imbalances.

---

Fun Fact:​

Orthopedic studies confirm that dominant arms in athletes (especially unilateral sports like tennis or armwrestling)can grow longer over time—not just due to muscle, but slight bone adaptations as well.

Would you like a breakdown of how this type of training affects the bones and muscles specifically?

 

[AbuSdanteet]

I never said you couldn't heal microfractures, that's a strawman fallacy. But you won't grow longer bones because of these microfractures. Let's try another approach, how do you think Limb Lengthening surgery works? Do you think they crack a little bit of bone, let it heal for it to grow longer? Absolutely not, they break the COMPLETE BONE and artificially lengthen it to achieve the desired results.


Yes, but when two animal studies, that don't even differ significantly from our own bone biology show the exact same results, that should say something shouldn't it?


Something tells me you didn't even read this study. It's literally in the abstract, the first part of the paper past the title and credits.
View attachment 3939930View attachment 3939937


No, stop moving the goalposts. Mechanical loading remodels bone SHAPE and DENSITY, not length, once growth plates close. This isn’t “adding meaning", I'm clarifying basic biology you keep misinterpreting. Remodeling, as per described by Zhang, Wolff or anyone in the realm of osteology, is not magically generating extra millimeters of long bone. If loading really caused longitudinal growth in mature humans, elite gymnasts, powerlifters, and manual laborers would literally outgrow their height charts. Guess what? They don’t.

Yes, Zhang said microfractures stimulate remodeling, but he did NOT say “microfractures = lengthening in adult long bones.” Remodeling replaces damaged tissue, optimizes load-bearing shape, and can even cause shortening where bone is resorbed (like the metacarpals in your OWN hand-bone study, that you didn't read).

You’re confusing “bone morphology change” with actual net elogation. Morphology includes thickening, straightening, curvature changes, even minor edge expansions, not a miracle femur extension. If you honestly think healing microfractures makes you taller, why aren’t osteoporotic patients turning into giants from all their stress fractures?


You’re cherry-picking phrases like "length" out of context and ignoring the fundamental biology of skeletal maturity. Adult bone adaptation ISN'T lengthening. PERIOD. Until you produce actual human longitudinal bone length data post-epiphyseal closure, your argument is just hand-waving with buzzwords.


Stop being fucking pedantic, this isn't about whether length is possible or not, it's about whether microfractures can produce a significant amount of lengthening of bones meaningful enough to make you taller.


This is joint laxity, note how the length of the forearm and thereby the bones are exactly the same, and curiously a significant extension in length only presents itself starting from the radius and articular disk, meaning that only the hand (curiously filled with joints and cartilage) appears to be longer)
View attachment 3939964
And note how this differs too from people with a limb asymmetry who DO have longer bones. This is an exaggerated example of course, but it paints the picture, this girl has a longer tibia, Devon just has a longer hand
View attachment 3939985

Be a dear and read this:

Running and Microfractures and Height

I mentioned in an earlier blog entry about how bone density scans(Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) also detect changes in size. Researcher...

www.heightquest.com

Study shows proof of concept that microfractures can increase bone length | Natural Height Growth

Irrefutable.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

@chadbeingmade you’re a smart boi. Give thoughts

 

[Zeekie]

I never said you claimed microfractures don’t heal, now who’s strawmanning? Anyway, you said you won’t grow longer bones due to these microfractures yet once again you haven’t substantiated your presupposition. What epistemic framework are you using to presuppose this?

"never said you claimed microfractures don’t heal" That was the implication.

And yes I have substantiated it, no clinical research has been conducted that evidences significant growth of joint-locked bones such as your femurs or tibias. And the conducted animal research, both on mice and turkeys, come to the same conclusions (different animals btw, same principles of experimentation) that bone length increases only occur in YOUNG animals still experiencing puberty, there's no sound argument to provide in order to suggest that the same doesn't apply to humans

As for LL, they break the bone as opposed to breaking it little by little so that the results can speed up. Was that actually an argument?

In limb lengthening they do not "break the bones little by little" they straight up create a full split in the bone and expand it beyond that fracture. Surgeons have to saw through the bone, create a controlled gap, and then slowly distract it with an external or internal fixator over MONTHS to force new bone formation in the gap. Even then, it’s insanely painful, slow (1mm/day at most), and requires constant medical oversight to prevent deformity or nonunion.

No, because our bones and their bones are still different.

Yes, this obviously should invalidate the fact that the literal foundation of research in medicine and clinical settings relies on animal research.

Prove that they don’t. Just because it hasn’t been measured doesn’t necessitate it hasn’t occurred. Anyway, once again you stated mechanical loading remodels bone shape and density, not length.

Won't be addressing, my comment above is about that.

Yet you haven’t proven so. If mechanical loading doesn’t stimulate length; then why does zhang’s law say density, shape, curvature AND length…?

Because, if we play into your little pedantic game because you're trying SOOO HARD to be right, technically increases in length do occur, but they are measured in nanometers and micrometers. A NANOMETER IS 1 BILLION TIMERS BIGGER THAN A CENTIMETER, BRO.

Also zhang’s article:


>According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, LENGTH, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity.


He doesn’t have to say “microfractures even lengthening bones” specially. He said that bones when put under pressure (mechanical loading) can lead to a change in bone structure. These changes can necessitate things like shape, density, structure, LENGTH, curve, etc.

Won't be addressing, my comment above is about that.

How are the two different here? They aren’t mutually exclusive. The bone morphology change here includes length as stated by zhang’s law.

It's not that the two are necessarily different, is that you're attributing the mechanism of one thing to try and achieve a very different outcome.

It is about whether length is possible and I’ve proven so. The significance of it isn’t even something you or I can substantiate, unless there’s a direct study on it. But Devon Larret’s case as well as the archer I provided showcases it.

This whole thread is around the topic of height increase, your original question is literally... "Do this height techniques work?", you're brutally misconstruing context and indeed being very pedantic here. YOU WILL NOT GAIN HEIGHT FROM THIS:

• Aguirreet al, showed that within 3 days of tail-suspension in mice, osteocyte apoptosis incidence increased in both trabecular and cortical bone, followed by osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption two weeks later. Let me translate this into simpler terms... after stretching mice's tails for 3 days they became denser, but after stopping the stretch new bone created was destroyed.
• Steinberg and Trueta et al, found that treadmill running had more of an anabolic effect on the bones of infant rats than mature rats, with the observation of greater bone mass, length, and diameter as well as increased bone x-ray density, cortical thickness, and circumferential ring formation (tetracycline labling) in young exercising rats compared to controls. AGAIN, no such differences were seen in the mature exercising rats compared to age matched controls.
• Similar results were found in a study by Rubin et al., using the loadable functionally isolated ulna preparation in young (1 year-old) and old (3 years old) male turkeys. Eight weeks of 300 cycles per day of loading (each cycle generating~3,000 microstrain) resulted in statistically significant differences between the loaded and unloaded ulnae of the young turkeys (+3.5% cortical area, -5.6% endosteal area,+17% periosteal area), with no significant differences between ulnae of the older turkeys.

The forearm appears to be slightly longer.

No, you're coping.

The bones of the hangs and fingers appear to be longer too.

Again, joint laxity, although the tips of the fingers may very hypothetically be longer as evidenced by the bone-hand study, but only in the ends of the finger.

But let me go with you and say this isn’t bone lengthening but just joint laxity. It was still caused by mechanical loading. So isn’t this a clear sign we can still grow taller from mechanical loading?

If you're willing to accept the horrible effects of knee and hip joint laxity, such as those experienced by long distance runners, then, perhaps. But I reckon you're being very optimistic, in almost all situations the arms, hands and related joints are loose, meanwhile the legs and spine are constantly in a compressed state because of gravity, getting any meaningful height increase from this is again, very hard.

Also you still haven’t refuted my example of the archer. I’m waiting for this please

The fuck do I know? Regardless, the photo of an archer does not constitute scientific evidence and if you want me to get real deep into it, we could be looking at analyzing different angles of the photo because there's clearly angles at play.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Because, if we play into your little pedantic game because you're trying SOOO HARD to be right, technically increases in length do occur, but they are measured in nanometers and micrometers. A NANOMETER IS 1 BILLION TIMERS BIGGER THAN A CENTIMETER, BRO.

But How do you know it won’t be centimeters per year or something?

 

[Zeekie]

Be a dear and read this:

Running and Microfractures and Height

I mentioned in an earlier blog entry about how bone density scans(Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) also detect changes in size. Researcher...

www.heightquest.com

Boy You do NOT read the articles you provide as evidence, but before I go over any of this, notice how all of this research is done on animals?? Oh but I though "animal bones are different from ours", so they're only different when the evidence doesn't validate your retarded beliefs? You're a fucking hypocrite. That aside.

1. This is not a scientific portal, it's from a community of people coping that they're short, but for the sake of the argument let's ignore that. If we actually go to the studies they're talking about, we see interesting stuff.
2. To begin with there's already a problem here if we're being purely statistical, and I'm not even the one to acknowledge this. This whole hypothesis depends on the idea of running causing microfractures on the bone and getting height from that... "Note however that the sedentary individuals are actually the tallest and that the more the individuals ran per week, the shorter they tended to be. This could be due to proteoglycan depletion and other factors from articular cartilage." - Your own article, btw.
3. If you actually read the article something is obvious, all the studies analyzed touch the topics of cortical length, in your stupid monkey brain you probably think "Length!! That must be height!!" but no, cortical length is the width of the bone, so it's bone thickness. Basically what these idiots do is say "This study proves that bones can become thicker" and then start to yap about hypothetical scenarios where that COULD lead to height increase.

Props to them, they're actually very honest that those are just interpretations of the available data. But when it comes to providing research to validate that bone lengthening is possible... NADA, it's all on cortical length, and such bone thickness adaptations. Which means this does NOT validate your hypothesis.

Study shows proof of concept that microfractures can increase bone length | Natural Height Growth

Irrefutable.

I'm not gonna bother explaining this one much, literally the same case as above. In these studies, “bone overgrowth” just means localized thickening or irregular repair at the subchondral bone plate, NOT actual lengthening of the entire bone. The overgrowth was literally in microns to millimeters and happened in a small defect area.

Congratulations, you’ve discovered that drilling holes in bone makes it heal unevenly! They even admit the “overgrowth” was minor and localized, 27% of sections showed some extra bone creeping into the cartilage defect, but it was not restoring original shape, let alone adding net length.

Please read before you try to use a study as evidence for anything, reading the title is not enough At the very least read the abstract goddamn it!

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Boy You do NOT read the articles you provide as evidence, but before I go over any of this, notice how all of this research is done on animals?? Oh but I though "animal bones are different from ours", so they're only different when the evidence doesn't validate your retarded beliefs? You're a fucking hypocrite. That aside.

1. This is not a scientific portal, it's from a community of people coping that they're short, but for the sake of the argument let's ignore that. If we actually go to the studies they're talking about, we see interesting stuff.
2. To begin with there's already a problem here if we're being purely statistical, and I'm not even the one to acknowledge this. This whole hypothesis depends on the idea of running causing microfractures on the bone and getting height from that... "Note however that the sedentary individuals are actually the tallest and that the more the individuals ran per week, the shorter they tended to be. This could be due to proteoglycan depletion and other factors from articular cartilage." - Your own article, btw.
3. If you actually read the article something is obvious, all the studies analyzed touch the topics of cortical length, in your stupid monkey brain you probably think "Length!! That must be height!!" but no, cortical length is the width of the bone, so it's bone thickness. Basically what these idiots do is say "This study proves that bones can become thicker" and then start to yap about hypothetical scenarios where that COULD lead to height increase.

Props to them, they're actually very honest that those are just interpretations of the available data. But when it comes to providing research to validate that bone lengthening is possible... NADA, it's all on cortical length, and such bone thickness adaptations. Which means this does NOT validate your hypothesis.


I'm not gonna bother explaining this one much, literally the same case as above. In these studies, “bone overgrowth” just means localized thickening or irregular repair at the subchondral bone plate, NOT actual lengthening of the entire bone. The overgrowth was literally in microns to millimeters and happened in a small defect area.

Congratulations, you’ve discovered that drilling holes in bone makes it heal unevenly! They even admit the “overgrowth” was minor and localized, 27% of sections showed some extra bone creeping into the cartilage defect, but it was not restoring original shape, let alone adding net length.

Please read before you try to use a study as evidence for anything, reading the title is not enough At the very least read the abstract goddamn it!

View attachment 3940444

You admitted bone lengthening is possible with these methods so which is it? What epistemic framework are you using to substantiate your position that it’s only possible in millimeters, not centimeters/inches?

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Boy You do NOT read the articles you provide as evidence

I don’t

 

[Zeekie]

But How do you know it won’t be centimeters per year or something?

I just don't get it, I don't understand why you're trying to make the impossible work, look, I'm like 5'11, I'D BE JUMPING AND CRYING TEARS OF JOY IF YOU COULD BECOME TALLER WITHOUT LIMB LENGTHENING, BUT WE HAVE TO BE OBJECTIVE HERE.

But answering your question:
Bones are in a constant cycle of osteoclast resorption and osteoblast deposition. That’s why they replace ~10% of their microstructure each year. If microscopic remodeling added even 1mm per year, every adult would be 6+ cm taller after a decade. Funny how literally no one gets taller after puberty, unless they go under the saw for distraction osteogenesis. Microns don’t add up to centimeters, they just maintain bone integrity.

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter. You’d need a billion nanometer-level “gains” to equal a single meter. Microscopic mineral turnover is measured in microns, tiny fractions of a millimeter, not even close to structural elongation. It would be just ABSURD, to expect to gain "1 inch" from any of this GIVEN THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE PROVIDED. (which again, isn't even in bone lengthening, it's functionally just bone thickening, but you're forcefully trying to repackage it into lengthening)

Furthermore, you're wrong here, calling microscopic surface irregularities ‘growth’ is like saying a pothole repair makes a road longer. It doesn’t, it just patches damage

 

[AbuSdanteet]

I just don't get it, I don't understand why you're trying to make the impossible work, look, I'm like 5'11, I'D BE JUMPING AND CRYING TEARS OF JOY IF YOU COULD BECOME TALLER WITHOUT LIMB LENGTHENING, BUT WE HAVE TO BE OBJECTIVE HERE.

But answering your question:
Bones are in a constant cycle of osteoclast resorption and osteoblast deposition. That’s why they replace ~10% of their microstructure each year. If microscopic remodeling added even 1mm per year, every adult would be 6+ cm taller after a decade. Funny how literally no one gets taller after puberty, unless they go under the saw for distraction osteogenesis. Microns don’t add up to centimeters, they just maintain bone integrity.

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter. You’d need a billion nanometer-level “gains” to equal a single meter. Microscopic mineral turnover is measured in microns, tiny fractions of a millimeter, not even close to structural elongation. It would be just ABSURD, to expect to gain "1 inch" from any of this GIVEN THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE PROVIDED. (which again, isn't even in bone lengthening, it's functionally just bone thickening, but you're forcefully trying to repackage it into lengthening)

Furthermore, you're wrong here, calling microscopic surface irregularities ‘growth’ is like saying a pothole repair makes a road longer. It doesn’t, it just patches damage

At 5’11 you’re taller than almost everyone anyway but nevertheless.

Let’s say microfractures are cope. What about sleep stretching? Hueters Volkmans law

 

[Zeekie]

You admitted bone lengthening is possible with these methods so which is it? What epistemic framework are you using to substantiate your position that it’s only possible in millimeters, not centimeters/inches?

YES BONE LENGTHENING IS POSSIBLE WITH THESE METHODS, if we use the hardest, most rigorous definition of lengthening then yes, very asymmetric and MICROSCOPIC lengthening, but it's lengthening nonetheless. But let me remind you, this whole discussion is around height, it's around becoming taller with any of this.

If we leave semantics aside, in the context of this discussion that length is functionally meaningless, it won't make you taller, hence me saying that you can't lengthen bones.

"What epistemic framework are you using to substantiate your position that it’s only possible in millimeters, not centimeters/inches?" I'm using the studies you have provided, literally every single one of them speaks of bone growth in nanometers/micrometers, NOT MILIMETERS (that was hyperbolic), let alone anything greater

This is from "Plasticity and toughness in bone".

 

[Zeekie]

At 5’11 you’re taller than almost everyone anyway but nevertheless.

At least I have that.

Let’s say microfractures are cope. What about sleep stretching? Hueters Volkmans law

I'm aware the channel from the 5-minute video has something on this I believe, hanging weights on your ankles or something you mean? Or is it the thing about that one medieval-looking torture device some guy supposedly used to grow taller by stretching himself?

 

[AbuSdanteet]

YES BONE LENGTHENING IS POSSIBLE WITH THESE METHODS, if we use the hardest, most rigorous definition of lengthening then yes, very asymmetric and MICROSCOPIC lengthening, but it's lengthening nonetheless. But let me remind you, this whole discussion is around height, it's around becoming taller with any of this.

If we leave semantics aside, in the context of this discussion that length is functionally meaningless, it won't make you taller, hence me saying that you can't lengthen bones.

"What epistemic framework are you using to substantiate your position that it’s only possible in millimeters, not centimeters/inches?" I'm using the studies you have provided, literally every single one of them speaks of bone growth in nanometers/micrometers, NOT MILIMETERS (that was hyperbolic), let alone anything greater

View attachment 3940460
View attachment 3940462

This is from "Plasticity and toughness in bone".

This makes me really sad bro.

At least I have that.


I'm aware the channel from the 5-minute video has something on this I believe, hanging weights on your ankles or something you mean? Or is it the thing about that one medieval-looking torture device some guy supposedly used to grow taller by stretching himself?

Yeah. Stretching by attaching a band or rope to your ankles.

 

[Zeekie]

This makes me really sad bro.

Me too, me too.

Yeah. Stretching by attaching a band or rope to your ankles.

Well I'm going to be absolutely honest, I have zero knowledge in this area. I believe some could theoretically be possible because of a similar case like Devon Larratt with tendon laxity or even collagen thickening, but would this work at all beyond a hypothetical? Could it cause a significant increase in limb length? Would it get you injured (again laxity in your knees and hips, not very good, long distance runners suffer this badly)? Who knows, I certainly don't.

But if we're speaking pure osteogenesis then no, bones are EXTREMELY resistant to tensile forces, and in rat studies (like the tail one) all that happens is that the bones adapt to get thicker and resist the tensile force even better, there's no increase in total length, and even then, for whatever reason this effect is lost after the 2-week mark and the bone is resorbed, so any gains will potentially require upkeep as to inhibit osteoclasts

 

[Copercel]

@Zeekie just know that I couldn’t mirin your patience and knowledge more than I do.


Your dopamine levels are crazy good.

 

[Zeekie]

@Zeekie just know that I couldn’t mirin your patience and knowledge more than I do.


Your dopamine levels are crazy good.
View attachment 3940496View attachment 3940497

Namaste brother

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Me too, me too.


Well I'm going to be absolutely honest, I have zero knowledge in this area. I believe some could theoretically be possible because of a similar case like Devon Larratt with tendon laxity or even collagen thickening, but would this work at all beyond a hypothetical? Could it cause a significant increase in limb length? Would it get you injured (again laxity in your knees and hips, not very good, long distance runners suffer this badly)? Who knows, I certainly don't.

But if we're speaking pure osteogenesis then no, bones are EXTREMELY resistant to tensile forces, and in rat studies (like the tail one) all that happens is that the bones adapt to get thicker and resist the tensile force even better, there's no increase in total length, and even then, for whatever reason this effect is lost after the 2-week mark and the bone is resorbed, so any gains will potentially require upkeep as to inhibit osteoclasts

I’m not too sure of the science myself but I’d say it’s worth a try. Wouldn’t hurt.Even so, I have two more proven methods I can try anyway.

1.) is fixing my anterior pelvic tilt to help me stand at my true height

2.) is supplementing with glucosamine sulfate to stop gravity’s compression on my spine.

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Me too, me too.


Well I'm going to be absolutely honest, I have zero knowledge in this area. I believe some could theoretically be possible because of a similar case like Devon Larratt with tendon laxity or even collagen thickening, but would this work at all beyond a hypothetical? Could it cause a significant increase in limb length? Would it get you injured (again laxity in your knees and hips, not very good, long distance runners suffer this badly)? Who knows, I certainly don't.

But if we're speaking pure osteogenesis then no, bones are EXTREMELY resistant to tensile forces, and in rat studies (like the tail one) all that happens is that the bones adapt to get thicker and resist the tensile force even better, there's no increase in total length, and even then, for whatever reason this effect is lost after the 2-week mark and the bone is resorbed, so any gains will potentially require upkeep as to inhibit osteoclasts

Btw broski, do you know Dennis Raney?

How you can make your spine longer with stretching – GTWSL

How it is possible to lengthen the spine permanently with stretches, spine disc decompression and disc thickening thus making your upper body longer.

growtallerwithshinlengthening.com

Does Cycling increase height ? Leg lengthening with cycling

Can cycling make you grow taller ? Cycling with a raised seat will help you get longer legs and increase height at 15, 16, after 18 or even 25.

growtallerwithshinlengthening.com

This dude

 

[keife]

1.)Microfractures + over the bed stretching (substantiated via zhang’s law which states bones can lengthen under pressure)

2.) LSJL

 

[AbuSdanteet]

View attachment 3941132

:/

 

[AbuSdanteet]

@Jonas

 

[sheistyy.norr]

there was some russian i think that did banded stretching ever night for like 8 years and grew a substantial amount at 30+, im not sure if he incorporated microfracturing into his routine but i think that only applies in extreme scenarios where you have a mechanical pressure loading the bones and creating the fractures, there was a thread about some crazy richel method with all kinds of red light devices etc but i dont have it. if ur willing to look into these and ur still below 20 id research HGH related topics first just to set the foundation then once thats done you can move onto modifications of your exercises to help squeeze whatevers left of your height.

i’m 21 but i was gh deficient im still taking hgh now will i still see differences?

 

[LLcel]

i’m 21 but i was gh deficient im still taking hgh now will i still see differences?

how long have u been on it for and are your plates still open?

 

[AbuSdanteet]

Bahanchee