I re-measured my penis (erect version)

[JohnDoe]

Not even 6 inches and has the nerve to call others "dicklet" JFL, get humbled you cunt

 

[Michael Myers]

mine seems to stay the same and doesnt change by 1.2 inches in a couple of months

First it was 1.1, now it’s 1.2. Guess you’re a lying piece of shit after all, eh?

 

[WatermelonLover]

Yeah.

With a stone.

No way I’m going to have pre-marital sex.

Based

 

[Michael Myers]

Based

Thanks bhai.

 

[ambi]

First it was 1.1, now it’s 1.2. Guess you’re a lying piece of shit after all, eh?

yeah i forgot u actually claimed 5.75 instead of 6 LMAO

 

[Michael Myers]

yeah i forgot u actually claimed 5.75 instead of 6 LMAO

Well it’s 6.5 actually, in case you didn’t know. Only you and some irrelevant small-cocked pakjeet pedo is barking for me here. Really makes you think, eh?

 

[Azonin]

I was asking a question, retard. I didn’t imply you actually lived there. I was asking if you did.

i already gave you that answer long ago moron

The point is that there is a limit. And so 5 x 4.5 is ideal.

Well… yeah.. kinda.

 

[ShawarmaFilth]

Pulling numbers outta your ass. Provide studies that say this.

They mixed up BP and NBP measurements, they mixed up centimeters and inches, they used wrong numbers, they relied on studies that were done exclusively on men with erectile dysfunction, etc

CalcSD is a step in the right direction, but here's all the studies of the Calcsd Western Dataset that have measured BPEL and/or BPSFL, and I noticed some flaws in even that dataset.

I removed all the studies that were done on an overwhelmingly amount of men with erectile dysfunction (as several studies showed that there's a significant decline in size (e.g. -1.7cm in the Kamel study and -1.9cm in the Awwad study)) and split them up, because in my opinion the Middle East isn't part of the West. It even has East in it's name.

Then I used the same calculation as CalcSD and came to these results:

Middle Eastern Average: 13.87 (1.72) / 5.46" (0.67)

Western Average: 15.71 (1.99) / 6.18" (0.78)

Black Average: 16.84 (1.7) / 6.62" (0.66)

Dataset |avg |top 25% |top 10% |top 1%
Veale |13.12 |14.9 |15.3 |17
CalcSD Eastern |13.23 |14.7 |15.1 |16.6
KPW Middle East |13.87 |15 |16 |17.9
CalcSD Western |14.39 |15.7 |16.9 |18.9
KPW Western |15.71 |17 |18.3 |20.3
Black |16.84 |18 |19 |20.8 All in all I think it's fair to say that for healthy western men average is about 6.2" and that 14.9% are 7" and 1% are 8", as opposed to the 5.67" on CalcSD with 3.8% at 7" and 0.09% at 8", or the flawed 5.2" of Veale with 0.25% at 7" and 1 in 100.000 at 8"

tl;dr: the 5.1" average is a feel-good lie that's based on bad methology. In the west 6.3" isn't top 95%, it's basically average and below average for Black people.

calcSD - The Veale Study

old-v2.calcsd.info

calcSD - The calcSD Average (v4)

old-v2.calcsd.info

Theres a reason bitches dont bat an eye at 6-7 inches

i doubt that blacks are bigger on avg but smth around that is prob the avg yeah

 

[Michael Myers]

i already gave you that answer long ago moron

You think someone with memory problems is gonna remember everything you said?

 

[Michael Myers]

They mixed up BP and NBP measurements, they mixed up centimeters and inches, they used wrong numbers, they relied on studies that were done exclusively on men with erectile dysfunction, etc

CalcSD is a step in the right direction, but here's all the studies of the Calcsd Western Dataset that have measured BPEL and/or BPSFL, and I noticed some flaws in even that dataset.

I removed all the studies that were done on an overwhelmingly amount of men with erectile dysfunction (as several studies showed that there's a significant decline in size (e.g. -1.7cm in the Kamel study and -1.9cm in the Awwad study)) and split them up, because in my opinion the Middle East isn't part of the West. It even has East in it's name.

Then I used the same calculation as CalcSD and came to these results:

Middle Eastern Average: 13.87 (1.72) / 5.46" (0.67)

Western Average: 15.71 (1.99) / 6.18" (0.78)

Black Average: 16.84 (1.7) / 6.62" (0.66)

Dataset |avg |top 25% |top 10% |top 1%
Veale |13.12 |14.9 |15.3 |17
CalcSD Eastern |13.23 |14.7 |15.1 |16.6
KPW Middle East |13.87 |15 |16 |17.9
CalcSD Western |14.39 |15.7 |16.9 |18.9
KPW Western |15.71 |17 |18.3 |20.3
Black |16.84 |18 |19 |20.8 All in all I think it's fair to say that for healthy western men average is about 6.2" and that 14.9% are 7" and 1% are 8", as opposed to the 5.67" on CalcSD with 3.8% at 7" and 0.09% at 8", or the flawed 5.2" of Veale with 0.25% at 7" and 1 in 100.000 at 8"

tl;dr: the 5.1" average is a feel-good lie that's based on bad methology. In the west 6.3" isn't top 95%, it's basically average and below average for Black people.

calcSD - The Veale Study

old-v2.calcsd.info

calcSD - The calcSD Average (v4)

old-v2.calcsd.info

Theres a reason bitches dont bat an eye at 6-7 inches

Look at those small sample sizes. JFL at taking this seriously. Also where’s the exclusion criteria etc?

 

[ShawarmaFilth]

Look at those small sample sizes. JFL at taking this seriously. Also where’s the exclusion criteria etc?

Sample size is fine bro fym

The one with big sample sizes are flawed

 

[Michael Myers]

Sample size is fine bro fym

The one with big sample sizes are flawed

“fym “ it’s fine? That’s tiny. If it doesn’t have 10,000 participants it’s not reliable.

They’re not flawed because they had a good exclusion criteria. Yours is the one that is flawed.

 

[Azonin]

You think someone with memory problems is gonna remember everything you said?

It was literally messages ago

 

[Michael Myers]

It was literally messages ago

I’m THAT forgetful.

 

[ShawarmaFilth]

“fym “ it’s fine? That’s tiny. If it doesn’t have 10,000 participants it’s not reliable.

They’re not flawed because they had a good exclusion criteria. Yours is the one that is flawed.

The exclusion criteria makes sure they’re healthy and they dont fucking mix up everything wrongly

 

[Michael Myers]

The exclusion criteria makes sure they’re healthy and they dont fucking mix up everything wrongly

Nope. Exclusion criteria should be thorough, that was the case for the mega review. This crap has irrelevant sample sizes. 19? Really? 400? LOL.

 

[ShawarmaFilth]

Nope. Exclusion criteria should be thorough, that was the case for the mega review. This crap has irrelevant sample sizes. 19? Really? 400? LOL.

400 is a lot of people

 

[Michael Myers]

400 is a lot of people

Not for a penis size study. If less than 6,000 it’s pretty much meaningless.