Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nerve tissue regrowth with restoration.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nerve tissue regrowth with restoration.

    I am new to restoration (haven't actually started yet) and trying to decide on the best route to take. I was cut as an infant. Haven't even considered that much of my lack of sensitivity during intercourse for many years was due to circ. until just a week ago or so.

    After reading quite a bit about Circumcision, it is clear that much of the natural nerve tissue for proper stimulation, gliding and lubrication is removed. My question is this: Does anyone really KNOW whether or not any of the remnant nerve tissue (Meissner corpuscles) is "restored" through the process of restoration? The skins is restored but any information about the actual nerve restoration would be awesome. Please respond if you have valid knowledge based on neurology (or personal experience).

    Thank you.

    Great information link below:

    http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/.

    Seth


  • #2
    I doubt anyone can respond within the limitations you imposed. I have not seen any histological studies of restored tissue.

    However, what men here can offer is that the feelings, or sensations, you will get by restoring will be dramatically better. There is wide consensus on this. This suggests that whatever nerve components are growing as we restore, they are providing a huge benefit in feelings.

    Plus, the skin you grow will restore the so called gliding motion, and that is not trivial. That is where most of the improvements seem to lie for me, the movement of the skin is apparently stimulating the nerves. Plus, and this is important on its own, the sliding skin makes intercourse feel much better for my wife.

    Hope that helps.

    Comment


    • #3
      No, you don't grow new nerve endings. The existing nerves do grow longer along with your skin though. A large part of the sensitivity loss other than the missing nerve endings due to being cut is keratin build up. The inner mucosal tissue was never designed to be exposed permanently and when it is your body produces a protein called keratin in an attempt to protect that sensitive tissue. It's the same thing your hair and finger nails are made from.
      Over time that keratin gets thicker with each passing year and is the primary factor in guys needing ED drugs when they reach their 40s and 50s. Cut guys are 5 times more likely to develop ED. Sensitivity loss is the culprit. It's not always a circulation issue. If you restore you'll probably never have to worry about ED or Viavra.

      Comment


      • #4
        Greg..... Thank you! What you said makes complete sense. I appreciate the feedback very much.

        Comment


        • #5
          Parsecskin...... Thank you! Thats very interesting about ED. The gliding makes sense for sure. Do you have any idea how long it takes to remove the keratin? Does the natural sloughing of skin do the trick over time if the area is covered or protected?

          Comment


          • #6
            Once you have gained reliable coverage (or able to fully retain) it takes a few months. That's when the magic happens. Your glans and inner skin will become smooth and shiny and the increase in sensitivity will blow your mind. It will also become quite pinkish if not down right red like your lips. I highly recommend to NOT retain until you can do so easily and comfortably with an o-ring or 2. If you don't have reliable coverage the chaffing on your clothing with being de-keratinized will be quite uncomfortable. The other thi g that happens along with losing the keratin layer is that once covered mozt of tbe time, your inner mucosa will become moist and slightly tacky. This will help keep your restored foreskin in place AND the sticky rolling action feels incredible! KOT!

            Comment


            • #7
              Ok. Here's Info's glazed-eyes-inducing understanding on what Science also poorly understands (but not as poorly as Info ).

              Really what you are asking are several questions lumped together, but your primary question is: can tension, the cycles of tension which we apply to our skin, regrow neurons (the neuronal cell body itself) and/or axons. That's all we're doing, is applying tension. Is it magical? The answer, for us, is: no.

              Tension, itself, does not have the direct effect (as a stimulus) on neurons or axons, that it has as a stimulus for skin expansion. Sad, but true, or there'd be a lot of folks walking and reaching, who don't and won't. Skin grows more of itself through a particular (complex) process. Axons have their own process of repair which does not respond to tension per se. So now you have to define "repair" vs "regeneration", and that's where we ought to smile and leave the room, because for us, it's repair, not regeneration per se, (or that's what I get from it all), and this type of repair is only possible because nothing is disrupted, nothing is severed, and something is already present.

              So, the point to consider is that neurons (the electrical, peripheral message receivers) are not "generated", or "regenerated", or "repaired" by tension. They can repair in some types of injury, to an extent because of their own repair program. A very small extent, or so Science has observed recently. That repair goes very slowly, and usually ineffectively. And, if nothing else, neurons are located under the skin, not in the skin. We tug on our skin. Neurons, healthy or destroyed, are physically isolated in this regard.

              Axons, in our case, can very slowly extend (apparently), but they don't "stretch" due to tension, and they don't "grow" because of tension directly. Axons have their internal repair process, which doesn't rely on tension, and which also can be spotty in terms of a complete response to their internal process.

              Next point is to remember that, as a result of circumcision, we had many neurons and significant portions of their axons, cut away. So: not there, gone, finito. You can't tug something that isn't there anymore, into existence. Tension never does that, for anything we walk around in.

              But..............that's the mechanical aspect of sensation. Neurons are the peripheral sensors, axons are the wiring back to the CNS/brain. Parsec alludes to the effect of the attenuation of existing, healthy sensors via a keratinized covering of mucosa. No peripheral signal is detected because the signal is muddy. They can send a good signal, via healthy existing axons, back to the CNS/brain, but they don't (apparently) because they don't see the initial stimulus as over a threshold level. They will detect and send a message, apparently, when the sensors under mucosa can get a clearer message (light touch, tissue stretch, etc.). When the attenuation by a poor signal is removed, a clear signal can be detected and relayed.

              However.......there is also the interpretation aspect of the signal, by the brain; the other (at least) 50% of it. So goes this theory: When the natural covering of your foreskin was removed, the brain 'saw' a constant, chaotic signal from the neurons which were left after circ. So the brain learned to tune that overload out. So we come along, recover existing mucosa, which returns to it's intended function, and those neurons continue sending a signal, but the brain can now up-tune the reception because the chaos has been addressed naturally (or artificially), and it sees more sensation. This process isn't strictly mechanical, it's qualitative; it's tuning out the 'noise'.

              So.........for us? Again, nope, not new senders, but maybe some somewhat longer sender connectors, and very possibly, usually, more sensation despite not growing new senders. So don't just assume that no new senders equals a bleak scenario, because it doesn't. That assumption will rob you of something that is wonderful.

              Ok, I gave the cloudy "why" of it, and now I realize I should've just said: "nope, but tug anyhow it'll work out". : )

              Comment


              • #8

                http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/480071_5

                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2846285/

                Comment

                Working...
                X