Even with the top surgeons the chance of infection for us young guys is almost 10%

[mschicago]

You've had one implant already. You can catastrophize and project about any future revision if you like but it seems to me that you can either (i) decide not to have a revision when your current implant fails or (ii) have a revision (or multiple revisions if necessary over your lifetime) and make damn sure you find the best surgeon and follow their advice when healing. But worrying, projecting and catastrophizing gets you nowhere.

[darkflame]

Credit to Allhaited.
"Also, for the 10% figure to hold water, you would need to have upwards of 10 revisions - unlikely to happen unless you got extremely unlucky and consistently needed a revision every 5 years, for decades. It's more likely you'll need around 5-6 if that, bringing your lifetime infection risk to ~5% (in reality much lower in the next few decades whilst you're young and still in your sexual prime) - again, easy for me to say as I'm not implanted, but I quite like those odds.
And all this assuming that medical technology does not budge one bit in the next 30 to 50 years, with no progress in fighting infection rates and improving implant lifespans."

I like your attitude. His revision frequency is way too pessimistic. What says he'll want sex or even have a partner at 80. Absolutely no thought given to engineered antibiotics or any other infection control improvements in the future.
He is missing the key element in his statics. Every roll of the dice has a 1 in 6 chance of any given number. In the end analysis, his flawed thinking still means that his chances of NOT getting an infection is 90%. Doesn't sound so bad when said like that.
I've told this story before. A co working had a knee replacement & it worked perfectly. The other knee took five replacements to get one that worked right.

I inject test, guarantee you I will be horny at 80. If there are infection control regimens in development that you would like to share I am all ears. I have been reading through the literature like a madman. All I have seen is more specificity in selecting antibiotics more tailored towards gram negative bacteria as opposed to gram positive. Seems most infections now vs in the early 2000's are gram negative. Beyond the no-touch technique I do not see any developments in the pipeline.

Implants in other areas of the body like the knee are different. The penis gets fibrosis rapidly with infection and collagen is quickly deposited in the soft penile tissues resulting in permanent atrophy and shrinkage.

[Gt1956]

I don't believe that bio research labs are crowing about their work as it is being done. Many times break through discoveries come as a surprise. Viagra comes to mind. Research papers are a trailing thing. Reading them only tells you what happened at some point in the past. The future is yet to be written.
I have faith that in the future antibiotics will be engineered by some type of gene splicing or similar process. I don't sit & agonize over the end of the world. One thing is certain, one day I'll die, so will you.
As for your testosterone use. Why is a young man taking it? Have you thought about building an immunity to it?? That is how type 2 diabetes can work. Your body still makes insulin but becomes resistant to your bodies signals to glucose to produce enough insulin.
But interestingly you are obsessing over a miniscule chance of multiple implants, long life & a small infection risk all occurring to you.
To the side effects of infections on you penis. The side effects are totally irrelevant to your infection risk. Btw, was your need for an implant self caused??

[defiant]

I’m not going to pretend to be a math wizard, quantum physicist or genius but the way independent event risk is calculated just doesn’t seem right.

Type in ‘random number generator’ on Google.

Assume ‘10’ represents infection.

Set the field from 1 to 100.

See how many times it takes until you get 10, each ‘number generation’ representing a surgery.

It might be the first go! But it was 40 odd times ‘til I got infected. It’s when you set it to 1 to 50, the nerves start really set in.

Let me know your results!

[Fourtytwo00]

I can't understand why you start bothering about infection instead of enjoying your dick.

There are multiple issues that could occur to your implant.
There are not trivial chances that your gf / wife will start to be less interested in sex once she gets menopausal.
There are not trivial chances sex will become less enjoyable while you get older for other reasons: backpain, prosthate, injuries, diseases, whatever.

Actually chances of having something between a moderate sexual activity and a sexless life after 65 are in double digit territory for everyone, implanted or not.

So what? Enjoy your penis instead of overthinking your next revision.

[Flounder]

You really need to read the book; How to stop worrying and start living by Dale Carnegie.

[AllHailTed]

I inject test, guarantee you I will be horny at 80. If there are infection control regimens in development that you would like to share I am all ears. I have been reading through the literature like a madman. All I have seen is more specificity in selecting antibiotics more tailored towards gram negative bacteria as opposed to gram positive. Seems most infections now vs in the early 2000's are gram negative. Beyond the no-touch technique I do not see any developments in the pipeline.

Implants in other areas of the body like the knee are different. The penis gets fibrosis rapidly with infection and collagen is quickly deposited in the soft penile tissues resulting in permanent atrophy and shrinkage.

OP, please just stop for a moment and read what it is you're saying.

We are talking about a 5% lifetime risk of infection (closer to 2-3% in your sexual prime as you undergo your first few revisions in the coming decades), yet you appear convinced this is somehow guaranteed to befall you. You have berated multiple people in this thread for not understanding probability, but I don't think you understand it yourself.

So convinced are you of this 1 in 20 prospect befalling you - of losing some size by the time you're 80 years old - that it's making you suicidal.

All this, under the wildest of assumptions: that medical technology - implant lifespans, infection risk prevention, and length restoration methods post-infection - will not advance one iota for the remainder of your life.

I think you need to get off the internet for a bit and speak to a therapist.

[Cnidium]

Implanted at 27, not worried about a thing. Problems arise, fix them. If infection occurs, then I know I did by best. Its not always easy, but that is life. If you really have no other options besides an implant (such as myself), I would gladly take this risk (which I did).

5-10% chance of infection after multiple revisions? In the least mean way possible - Whatever.

[Lost Sheep]

Thats why im normally for the malleable for young guys. At least for some good years. Later in life maybe try an inflatable.

Hmmm. Why not the other way around? Inflatable first, and if revisions become problematic switch to the malleable?

The inflatable (by all reports) seems to be a lot more practical to live with when uninflated and more satisfactory for sex. I would guess a younger man would get more out of an inflatable than a malleable where an older man (and presumably older partners) may be less demanding in an implant's use.

(I am not trying to argue, just to learn the reasoning behind your recommendation so I can understand the differences between malleable and inflatable implants better.)

[Gt1956]

Thats why im normally for the malleable for young guys. At least for some good years. Later in life maybe try an inflatable.

Hmmm. Why not the other way around? Inflatable first, and if revisions become problematic switch to the malleable?
The inflatable (by all reports) seems to be a lot more practical to live with when uninflated and more satisfactory for sex. I would guess a younger man would get more out of an inflatable than a malleable where an older man (and presumably older partners) may be less demanding in an implant's use.
(I am not trying to argue, just to learn the reasoning behind your recommendation so I can understand the differences between malleable and inflatable implants better.)

Well there you go LS. Asking the important questions. For what little my opinion might be worth. I don't recall many (if any) men wishing that they had goten a malleable instead of an inflatable. This preference seems be popular amongst members that fear revisions for whatever reason. Could be infections, money or lack of insurance.
Malleables are sized on the consertive side inorder to prevent erosion. An inflatable doesn't keep constant pressure on the penile tissue. With malleables, way too many compromises have to be made in my opinion.