An Alternative Explanation On Why The LSJL May Actually Help People With Closed Growth Plate Increase Height And Grow Taller (Big Breakthrough!)

I have written many posts for the website but this post I feel may be one of the most important and possible breakthrough posts and insights so far in the research. 

In the last two recent posts I had been focused on this experiment done entitled “A PROCEDURE FOR STIMULATION OF LONGITUDINAL GROWTH OF BONE AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY” which showed that apparently it is possible to increase height by stripping the periosteum in the region of the long bones close to the growth plates in people who still had their growth plates.

In the last two posts I had not been able to figure out any possible theoretical justification on why the experimental idea  would work until only a few minutes ago. The insight I reached is slightly startling and comes in a form of almost epiphany which makes me wonder whether I could be wrong in my thoughts or not. What I plan to  do now is get Minigolf’s/Tyler’s own thoughts on my new proposed explanation on why his idea on Lateral Synovial Joint Loading has eve been abel to even have any results.

In many posts before I had debated on the feasibility and effectiveness of the idea proposed by Tyler from In some posts I had argued that the idea would not be effective with “Evidence That The LSJL Method Or Loading Is Ineffective In Post-Pubertal Adult Humans? (Important)” and “Why LSJL Might Not Work, An Explanation Using Bone Mechanics And Bone Bridge Studies while in other posts I had argued that it had potential of been effective with “New Proposed Height Increase Method Using LSJL Device WIth Chondrocyte Implants And Growth Factor Injections and “Growth Plate Physeal Longitudinal Growth May Actually Overcome Bone Bridges, New Evidence Showing LSJL May Work

This post will be a completely new proposed alternative idea and explanation on why the LSJL method has been only sporadically effective and seem to only work for a small increment in height increase. I have always been in the school of scientists who believe that science must always be proved through real experimental facts and results. That is why I have always felt that ideas and theories that are too theoretical (but still logically consistent) like the string theory or M-Theory one finds in theoretical physicists attempt to reconcile the differing results of quantum theory and general relativity is not a good path to take.

I personally believe that for a decent theory to work, it must first be able to explain the data we find in our experiments. This theory I am proposing which I am excited in today is something which required the knowledge of almost all of the bone parts to take come up with.

It started from the article I have been looking at recently. The idea of periosteum removal for longtitudinal growth increase was unique but it got me wondering. Here is the proposed hypothesis I have been thinking about…

The LSJL method does work because it manages to induce incisions/fractures/ breaks into the long bone’s surface, past the periosteum causing an entire layer of the long bone to be lifted, thus turning the inner cambium proliferating layer of the periosteum to increase in size, thus adding the neccesary surface thickness increase ,thus height increase.

Let’s look at this hypothesis step by step.

1. You take some thing like a clamp or dumbbell and use a dynamic, alternating hitting/ loading motion on it.

2. On the rare clamp session, one does manage to clamp at just the right magnitude and angle to cause a clear crack in the outer bone layer.

3. Remember that the bone has on the outside a layer known as the periosteum. However, what is not well known is that the periosteum is actually a 2 layer part. There is the outer layer which is hard, protective, and non-proliferative. The inner layer of the periosteum is what is known as the cambium layer, (like the cambium tree layer cells) where the cells are proliferative.

4. If we read the Wikipedia article on the perichondrium, which is the layer which protects hyaline cartilage and the growth plates before being vascularized and then going through ossification, and also read the article on the periosteum, we can see that the the outer two layer are very similar. From the article on the periosteum, we would learn that the perichondrium would actually turn into the periosteum from vascularization. This could suggest that the inner layer of the adult mature human with long bones still would have a type of cell which can differentiate.

Note: At this point I have not done the research but I would guess that the cells we find in the inner layer of the adult human’s long bone of the periosteum is a type of stem cell, or at least a progenitor cell which has not been differentiated into bone cells, specifically the osteocytes/osteoblasts yet.

Update 2/5/2013: From the Wikipedia article on the periosteum, the issue for Note has been resolved. From the article, it specifically states…

The fibrous (inner) layer (of the periosteum) contains fibroblasts, while the cambium layer contains progenitor cells that develop into osteoblasts. These osteoblasts are responsible for increasing the width of a long bone and the overall size of the other bone types. After a bone fracture the progenitor cells develop into osteoblasts and chondroblasts, which are essential to the healing process.

5. From the article we had been looking at, the theory to explain why periosteum stripping would work is that the stripping caused the inner periosteum layer to be pushed out of the outer layer of the periosteum, giving it enough flexibility to differentiate into chondrocytes causing the entire upper layer or area of the long bone to be finally allowed to be pushed up.

url-26. I had always had a reservation over the LSJL idea because the theory is that chondrocytes induced inside the epiphysis has enough force from it’s hypertrphy to push in all 3 dimensions of space past the cortical bone holding it together. Remember that the cortical bone is as strong as steel tensile strength. This issue was raised in the post “Why LSJL Might Not Work, An Explanation Using Bone Mechanics And Bone Bridge Studies“. The problem was always that the chondrocytes induced can not push past the bones, especially since the bones are holding the chondrocytes inside intact in all 3 dimensions.

Note: This main issue over the fact that the chondrocytes have no direction to push in was rasised in the post “How Lateral Synovial Joint Loading Works To Increase Height From Non-Distraction: FAQs and Concerns Answered (Guest Post)

The counter-arguement would be that in growing children, the chondrocytes does have to push upwards against the gravitionaly force and weight of the upper body of the person to increase the height. So any chondrocyte accumulation into cartilage would have to be strong, even if it has only 1 dimension or degree of freedom it can move and increase in size in, ie. longitudinally.

7. So we can say that the LSJL loading on certain people who have working inner periosteum cambium progenitor cells caused a fracture deep enough to allow the cells to be not fully, completely enclosed in by the hard bones. This means that the induced chondrocytes finally have 1 degree of freedom they can increase again. The 1 degree of freedom, with the contraint of not allowing the chondrocytes to push the long bones longitudinally to increase in length will finally be removed, means that the bones will have cells turned to chondrocytes can finally increase again.

Note: Just this last month I would write two critical posts “Local Growth Factor Injections In Aged Periosteum Result In Increased Cambium Proliferation And Cartilage Formation (Breakthrough) and “Increase Height And Grow Taller Using Local Subperiosteal Injection Of Growth Factors IGF-1 And TGF-Beta Percutaneously.” looking at the possible way of using the periosteum inner cells as a possible new alternative growth plate source. The study found yesterday shows that the periosteum inner cambium cells may indeed be used as a possible way to increase the long bone longitudinally.

8. Tyler would show from many protein pathway diagrams looking as multiple gene up-regulations that the technique of dynamically loading bone will cause many of the genes that cause chondrogenesis to be up-regulated. I don’t disagree with him on this fact, and at this point I do believe that the LSJL does cause chondrogenesis in some of the progenitor cells. However, I think he may be mistaken on which cells the loading actually have been having an effect on. Instead of the MSCs we have been thinking has been differentiating from the marrow inside the epiphysis, I propose in this post that the actual cells that are been turned into chondrocytes are actually the inner periosteum cells, the cambium cells. The loading like the stripping of the periosteum, causes the entire inner layer of the cambium layer to be able to push up the top layer of the bone easily,

9. This reasoning and thinking would completely resolve why it is that people like Tyler who has been doing it has seen results, but the results stop after say 3-4 cms. You have hit the bone for too much in the same area of the long bone. From too much hitting, the inner periosteum has become vascularized and completely turned to osteoblasts and calcified. From my own observation of the bones I have shown in video been disected which I have uploaded to YouTube HERE, I can say with complete confidence that even after just 1 day in normal room temperature with normal moisture, the articular cartilage that is exposed to air become extremely hardened to the level of bone-like very quickly. I would guess the process or action which caused this is diffusion of water or air molecules causing the cartilage to loose it’s elastic structure and properties.

10. If Tyler and other people who practice it has been getting results, they have essentially destroyed certain areas of the epiphysis in the periosteum which causes appositonal growth (width wise) for physically mature humans. They have managed to get results, but the results are only a 1 time thing. While it is believed that the bone from remodeling has become desensitized (from piezoelectric sensitivities)  to the loading and we need to increase the loading to get the bone to work again, my thinking at this point is that the loading can be done only once, and cause only a certain amount of real height increase.

The issue with this type of post is that only a few real serious height increase researchers would be able to understand that implications of this post but I feel that this post may be one of those which will dramatically change the direction of this website and the direction of the research we are doing.

Implications and how to solve this issue & Increase height:

url-4What I propose now is that instead of only a blunt instrument to hit or rub the epiphysis like Tyler proposed in LSJL, it would be smarter to instead use 2 types of equipment in succession.

  • First, use a rather sharp, edge instrument to cut/fracture the epiphysis on the side edges, creating effectively a circle of microfractures (aka a closed cloop of indents on the long bone ends which is mostly bone, lacking any muscle tissue tissue). The idea of microfractures is something many former height increase researchers have looked at and does have a high possibility to work. It doesn’t have to be very large or strong, just a few light tapping on the epiphysis close to the closed growth plate with a wedge and hammer like the picture on the right (but not that deep into the bone.
  • Note: Remember that for the distraction osteogenesis of the ilizarov external method or limb lengthening method to happen, the surgeons actually do exactly the same thing. For the initial distraction to hammer, they use a chisel/wedge and hammer to create just a small , unifrom fracture. For our purposes, we do something every similar, but a weaker one creating smaller fractures.
  • The addition of the tapping would make the LSJL far more effective in getting results. After one sees results, the location of the tapping will have to be moved, further and further up (distally) up the distal tibial end. This is because after the induced microfracture of the periosteum is made, that region will become ossified into bone eventually, and the region will be dead for any chondrogenesis. To gain more height, the tapping will have to occur where there is still some cambium progenitor cells left, which means tapping closer to the top of the tibia, creating another layer and chance for the periosteum to increase in thickness.

14 thoughts on “An Alternative Explanation On Why The LSJL May Actually Help People With Closed Growth Plate Increase Height And Grow Taller (Big Breakthrough!)

  1. Nick

    This is very interesting and exciting!
    I would be willing to be a tester. I definitely think you should create a page on this site dedicated to this method, and more importantly you should create a detailed guide with pictures like the above, and pictures of a human leg that highlights the exact locations that must be fractured (where we should start etc.)
    With your discovery we might be able to get consisten result out of LSJL instead of the sporadic results we have had so far.

  2. MiniGolfer

    I’ll have to read this post in detail later but the difference in microfracture and the distraction osteogenesis method is a different microenvironment that is more favorable to chondrogenesis. You’ll note that knee microfracture creates mostly fibrocartilage instead of hyaline cartilage. The hematomma created by fracture is very important.

    Although LSJL could alter the microenvironment of microfractures to be more pro-chondrogenic.

    1. admin

      I do note that the fibrocartilage will most likely to be the result from knee microfractures. However, that is why I have always felt there should be a multiple step process. THe LSJL would work better even with fibrocartilage than the hyaline cartilage we would be looking for.

  3. balrog

    How could you possibly create microfractures all around the bone. In you lower tibia there is your achilles tendon. Likewise, there are other tendons and muscles around your upper tibia and your femur.

    Also, what happens with the fibula? If the periosteum around the fibula is intact, would it then inhibit longitudinal growth?

    1. admin

      The inner side of the knee may not be able to be reached due to muscle tissue, but I was suggesting first doing it on the upper calf leg epiphysis area,

      The Fibula is actually not held to the tibia by bone material but ligaments which have more elasticity than any bone material would allow.

  4. Pingback: Cyclic Mechanical Shear Compression Induces Progenitor Mesenchymal Stem Cells Towards Chondrogenesis - Breakthrough!

  5. Pingback: Shin Splints Induces Shear Stress Facture Of Tibia Periosteum - Can It Induce Pseudoepiphyseal Cartilage Tissue Generation?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *