Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BestOfLuck]

Hello again,

So after measuring myself ive realized that my tibia and femur are both the same size as each other, So im wondering in this scenario would it be better to go for tibias or femurs all things considered. Usually you lengthen whichever limb is shorter for better proportions but in this scenario both would work. Not so sure id wanna do tibias in all honestly, femur always seemed more easier but if thats not the more logical route to go i might reconsider. Im not doing externals, and i intend to get minimum 5cm and a max of 8 if i decide to tom brady it. any recommendations?

[NailedLegs]

I agree with DanishViking.

Additionally, I have a suspicion that Medium Drink of Water's complications were caused by his T:F ratio being severely skewed. Knee pain and he had to get the fascia of his gastrocnemius(I believe that was it, but the thread where he mentioned it is gone now sadly) released due to it swelling(?). Point is, you should lengthen femurs over tibias, unless your Doctor recommends otherwise.

[kamaruusman]

I agree with DanishViking.

Additionally, I have a suspicion that Medium Drink of Water's complications were caused by his T:F ratio being severely skewed. Knee pain and he had to get the fascia of his gastrocnemius(I believe that was it, but the thread where he mentioned it is gone now sadly) released due to it swelling(?). Point is, you should lengthen femurs over tibias, unless your Doctor recommends otherwise.

No, femurs are more dangerous. More painful and invasive.

[NailedLegs]

No, femurs are more dangerous. More painful and invasive.

"More painful and invasive" is only *maybe* true when using LON due to the upper leg(thigh) having more soft tissues to go through than the lower leg. LON is an inferior way to lengthen anything. Nobody uses LON for cosmetic limb lengthening for any reason other than it's cheaper. None. It's an outdated piece of medical equipment that should not be used today. Internal lengthening nails are better by every metric.

Assuming you're using an internal lengthening nail, which you should be, femurs are better than tibias.

Height Journey made an excellent video about this. Check it out here:

[BestOfLuck]

No, femurs are more dangerous. More painful and invasive.

respectfully almost every dominant surgeon says otherwise. And lets just say your right about it being more painful (which id assume it would be). Im the type of guy who would rather deal with more pain, but a faster recovery. Then dealing with less pain but a way longer recovery. If femurs hurt more but recovery is faster thats the choice im making. Im not gonna sit idle for extra time because i opted to do the tibia, especially considering if i did tibias my legs would look extremely 💩

[BestOfLuck]

"More painful and invasive" is only *maybe* true when using LON due to the upper leg(thigh) having more soft tissues to go through than the lower leg. LON is an inferior way to lengthen anything. Nobody uses LON for cosmetic limb lengthening for any reason other than it's cheaper. None. It's an outdated piece of medical equipment that should not be used today. Internal lengthening nails are better by every metric.

Assuming you're using an internal lengthening nail, which you should be, femurs are better than tibias.

Height Journey made an excellent video about this. Check it out here:

Thanks for the reply, i would never even think of letting that outdated hunk of 🚮 method anywhere near my legs. So im not to worried about any complications that would arise from that method. I dont intend to cheap out on this in any way so internals will be the play

[BestOfLuck]

Measuring yourself that way with a tape measure isn't going to get you an accurrate measurement, you need to x-ray scan your legs at a clinic.

 In generel doing tibias is a stupid idea unless your're planning on doing both segments femur + tibia or you find out after x-ray scanning that you have abnormally long femurs compared to tibias.

They heal slower, have a higher complication rate, increase chance of joint problems / early arthisis, less overall safe length achieved / cutting 2 bones (tibia+fibula) vs 1 for femur etc.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26398436/

http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=83172.0 (this guy did what you want and got a horrible outcome...)

Thanks man, one surgery is more then enough to take me past average height and i have no desire to be tall, so two segments is completely off the table here. It doesnt seem very smart for me to do tibia anyways seeing as 5cm is the minimum i want and id prob give out at like 6-8 max. So i mine aswell do femurs just incase my body ends up being able to do a bit more