My initial wingspan was 75 inches. My wingspan measurement is very consistent. I tried torsional loading for like 11 months got no measurable change in wingspan. I even tried manually added some vibration to the exercises no measurable change. I do the exercise above in the youtube video I got 1/16″ in a month. Then I do it for another month about 1/16″ so now my wingspan is about 75 1/8″. Also my thumb has gotten longer based on side to to side comparison with other thumb but there are rotation tricks you can do to fingers appear longer only x-rays are reliable and I have before x-rays but I need to get about 1/4″ to get x-rays because I need sufficient length gain to show up in the x-ray as even with gimp it is hard to detect minor changes.

Essentially, the exercise involves holding the end of a hammer with a pinch grip and then applying vibration to the hand using a machine gun. I do this for at least five minutes a day but often longer up to an hour. The hand does get fatigued doing this though so I have to take breaks. I usually multitask using the free hand.

There is minimal chance that there is measurement error. There is some variance with wingspan measurement but not really when fully stretched. I did torsional loading for 11 months trying to stretch for a result. No gain. I do this exercise for 2 months and the measurement starts creeping up. There is minimal chance that this is measurement error. It’s more likely to be something like soft tissue growth rather than measurement error but soft tissue growth will still be a find. But I still need others to reproduce the result. 1/8″ is small but when measuring something like wingspan or height for that matter once you’ve hit the stretching cap 1/8″ may as well be a mile. Once you’ve perfected stretching your wingspan out the only to increase the measurement is via growth.

The principle behind this exercise is that torsional loading moves fluid within the bone from areas of compression to areas of tension. Vibration makes changes faster so there is more movement than normal. Fluid flow stimulates osteocyte and stem cell activity and this part is not controversial. The controversial part is that it can make the bones longer.

Many anecdotal exercises that increase bone length involve torsion Arm Wrestling, Baseball pitching, Tennis, etc. Tennis also involves vibration as does arm wrestling.

Hiroki Yokota and Ping Zhang favored lateral load over axial loads because logically that is a better way to drive fluid flow within the bone. But torsional loading is superior to lateral loading because what better way to wring water out of a sponge by twisting it.

The exact mechanism by which fluid flow could increase bone length is unknown. But as fluid flow can stimulate osteocytes which can enhance both osteoblast and osteoclast activity which could theoretically remodel the bone to become longer it is possible to see a mechanism. Also the mechanism could involve stem cells as well.

Phase 1 the initial result is the hardest part. Now time to move the next phases:

1. Get other people to validate the result
2. Increase my own result so that it can show up on an X-ray
3. Try to apply the result to other bones.

Here are the keys behind which are needed for the growth to work:

1: The load must be near the bone. If you want to grow the legs for instance squats and deadlifts wouldn’t work because the load is too far from the target bone the legs. The load must be near or on the legs. The reason has to do with direct and indirect loading. If the load is indirect then must of the load is due to muscle pull but if there is a direct loading force than you also get deformations due to the weight itself.

2. The vibration must be near the target bone. The exact location is not important but if the vibration is too far away then the vibrations will dampen before reaching the target bone.

3. The load must be sufficient to put a deforming force on the bone. If it is too light then it won’t drive fluid forces within the bone

Here are some ways to make the exercise more effective:

1. The load should be asymmetrical. The more the bone is exposed to different regions of tension and compression the more fluid flow is going to flow within the bone
2. The should be near the epiphysis as the epiphysis is more easily deformable than the diaphysis of the bone.
3. The loading should be dynamic. The more dynamic the load is the more the regions of tension and compression within the bone will change.

These principles will help in designing exercises for the legs. The torso is challenging because of all the intervertebral discs and the difficulty of applying direct load but it will need to be tackled. It’s also possible to design other exercises for things like the jaw.

But next step is to have other people validate the results. So to validate it I need people to:

Before starting:

1. Measure wingspan and thumb length and compare hands side by side.
2. Do the measurement several times to get a feel for potential errors that happen in the measurement.

Then:

1. Do the exercise in the video for five minutes a day either one hand or both hands
2. Repeat the measurements done initially weekly.
3. Report the Result.

Phase 1 is the hardest initial result stage. Now that that is done the result can follow but I need others to validate my result so if you think you an get an accurate measurement and can spare five minutes a day try it out.

There is a lot of evidence that shows that bite jumping appliances and other dynamic loading methods can induce growth of the jaw. This growth seems to be due to the lateral pterygoid muscle applying dynamic load on the mandibular condylar cartilage. There, is a possibility of applying these same techniques to other long bones. Other bones however do not have this muscle insertion so directly into the cartilage. We would have to think hard to find a way to apply this technique.

Long-Term Effect of Diet Consistency on Mandibular Growth within Three Generations: A Longitudinal Cephalometric Study in Rats

<-harder foods likely work by forcing the lateral pterygoid muscle to work harder in a more dynamic way thus placing a stronger load on the mandibular condylar cartilage. One thing that would be interesting to try is if this worked on adults.

“Craniofacial growth has been shown to be affected by different factors, including environment. It is thought that environmental changes could possibly affect the growth of the mandible. The question of how diet consistency affects mandibular growth within one generation of rats has been answered to some extent by various studies, according to which diet consistency may result in different masticatory forces that affect mandibular growth. There is no study so far that examined possible quantitative and qualitative growth changes in the mandible within different generations. The present experiment evaluated the impact of different food consistencies on mandibular growth within three generations. The results of this study indicate that a soft diet could be responsible for less mandibular growth, and this information might be passing through generations.”

“A total breeding sample of 60 female and 8 male Wistar rats were used in this study. Measurements took place only on female animals. Twenty female Wistar rats at 30 days old and four male rats at 30 days old comprised the primary breeding sample of the first generation, and from these animals two different generations were reproduced. Lateral cephalometric X-rays were taken from all female rats at the age of 100 days.”

“Means of measurements of all soft diet groups compared to hard diet groups were significantly smaller. According to linear measurements, there was a significant difference only between the first-generation soft diet with the third-generation soft diet group. According to geometric morphometric analysis, the statistical differences appeared on the condylar process and the angle of the mandible”

“muscular loading forces play their own part in bone growth and development. One of the most critical muscular systems is the orofacial, which is necessary for feeding in vertebrates. Mandibular growth is closely associated with the movement of the jaws and loads of the orofacial region. Mastication, as one of the environmental factors, seems to be responsible for a variety of developmental changes in the craniofacial region and more specifically in the mandible”

“The coordinated actions of osteoclasts and osteoblasts result in the resorption and replacement of the existing cortical bone, a process known as intracortical bone remodeling (or simply remodeling). Secondary osteons, which are cylinder-shaped structures, are created as a result of this process. Due to their concentric lamellae and surrounding cement line, secondary osteons are apparent in cross-section. The remodeling process’ resorption phase releases mineral reserves to support mineral homeostasis, but it also leads to the development of microcracks as a result of mechanical deformation. Both significant mechanical deformations (high strain) and repeated cycles of loading have been linked to microcracks. Therefore, areas of the skeleton with more severe loading conditions should have increased rates of remodeling since those areas should sustain more microdamage. When the load situation is unknown, it is less evident if increased remodeling may be attributable to high strain or cyclical loading.” <-they suggest that the loading may cause microcracks and that could cause the change in bone shape but I think the increase in size is due to articular cartilage endochondral ossification.

“high strain may not be necessary for substantial remodeling to occur and that cyclical loading may be more likely to result in elevated remodeling”<-this alludes to fluid flow theory.

“various epigenetic mechanisms are now known that consist of intracellular macromolecular chain reactions and extend from the membrane to the cell nucleus. In this way, information is transferred between the extracellular environment and the nucleus. The osteocyte network detects and responds to mechanical stimuli and thus plays an important role in triggering bone remodeling. In addition, loading applied to the tissues can change the shape of the cells. As a result, deformation of the intracellular content, including the cytoskeleton, is observed, and processes are activated that even change the mechanisms of action of the genome”

“Increased mineralization was found on the trabecular bone in the condyle of the hard diet group than in the soft diet group”

“chewing hard food enhances nearly all physiological masticatory parameters, muscular coordination, and masticatory side modifications as compared to chewing soft food”<-the question becomes whether we can keep chewing harder food to gain more in the mandible.

Every dimension was superior in the harder food group.

“The indications for the posterior mandibular height were Co-Go, Co-Go’ linear measurements. There were statistically significant differences between all soft diet groups when they were compared with the hard diet groups in all linear measurements. There were no statistically significant differences between all hard diet generations due to linear measurements.”

Definitely noticable difference in the G group.

“In 2014, Hichijo et al. found that there was no significant difference between the hard diet and soft diet groups in the mandibular length and the mandibular base length”

“It is important to mention that we used a similar methodology to previous studies, but with some of these studies, our results differ in terms of one-generation outcome. This could be possibly explained because we used a different rat strain than some of the previous studies. Another possible reason could be the limitations of 2D X-rays and the procedure that each study followed to take those.”

So this study provides further evidence that mechanical loading can influence growth of the mandible and we can possibly apply those principles to alter the growth of other long bones.