FrankTalk.org

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:39 am**

It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.

You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.

That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.

Its akin to hair transplants, is not actually permanent, eventually you'll need more transplants, which is why the hair transplant industry is so huge, imagine if hair cloning came along? It'd be the end for them.

Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime

These surgeries are very expensive and they don't even last a lifetime, they quote 10 to 15 years if lucky? No way

The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.

If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 1:19 pm**

I got my implant 6 months ago and I understand what you’re saying. One big issue with malleable is no girth expansion and whatever length they install is what you got all the time!! And whatever girth you get is all youlll ever have. If this one were to fail in a short time I might consider one but man do I ever love my IPP!!

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:15 pm**

Rufian wrote:It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.

You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.

That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.

Its akin to hair transplants, is not actually permanent, eventually you'll need more transplants, which is why the hair transplant industry is so huge, imagine if hair cloning came along? It'd be the end for them.

Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime

These surgeries are very expensive and they don't even last a lifetime, they quote 10 to 15 years if lucky? No way

The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.

If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

I agree with every single word of yours. the problem here is that if you try to express this opinion they lynch you.
luckily we have the testimony of "anfonee in loco coloplast malleable 1 piece".

I know that one day, if there is no cure, I will have to have a prosthesis, but if they don't create an indestructible 3 component prosthesis, I would definitely take

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:16 pm**

Italian wrote:
Rufian wrote:It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.

You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.

That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.

Its akin to hair transplants, is not actually permanent, eventually you'll need more transplants, which is why the hair transplant industry is so huge, imagine if hair cloning came along? It'd be the end for them.

Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime

These surgeries are very expensive and they don't even last a lifetime, they quote 10 to 15 years if lucky? No way

The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.

If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

I agree with every single word of yours. the problem here is that if you try to express this opinion they lynch you.
luckily we have the testimony of "anfonee in loco coloplast malleable 1 piece".

I know that one day, if there is no cure, I will have to have a prosthesis, but if they don't create an indestructible 3 component prosthesis, I would definitely take malleable

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:33 pm**

Italian wrote:
Italian wrote:
Rufian wrote:It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.
You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.
That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.
Its akin to hair transplants, is not actually permanent, eventually you'll need more transplants, which is why the hair transplant industry is so huge, imagine if hair cloning came along? It'd be the end for them.
Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime
These surgeries are very expensive and they don't even last a lifetime, they quote 10 to 15 years if lucky? No way
The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.
If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

I agree with every single word of yours. the problem here is that if you try to express this opinion they lynch you.
luckily we have the testimony of "anfonee in loco coloplast malleable 1 piece".
I know that one day, if there is no cure, I will have to have a prosthesis, but if they don't create an indestructible 3 component prosthesis, I would definitely take malleable

I'm not sure that pointing out the short comings of malleables rises to the level of lynching a poster.
In my opinion most malleable supporters ignore the negatives of that implant style. They frequently are cost adverse because of the country that they are from. Cheap isn't usually seen as a benefit in many countries.
We've had members that felt a malleable wasn't a bad option. After a year or so they weren't as thrilled of the constantly erect penis.
Fear of a revision weighed heavily on their minds. Yes, that is a real concern but some men let that issue lead them to believe in some medical conspiracy for their money. Most successful implant surgeons have plenty of business. They don't need to push a poor product to make money.
Another point to consider. Malleables have evolved & been improved for their entire existence. This pretty much shows that they aren't perfect or there wouldn't be any need for revised models. It would be easy to get a poor performing malleable implant. So you'd perhaps be wanting a revision anyways.
Point to note. My father in law had an early rigid implant. He took it to his grave. That type of rigid implant hasn't been offered for years.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:39 pm**

Gt1956 wrote:
Italian wrote:
Italian wrote:I agree with every single word of yours. the problem here is that if you try to express this opinion they lynch you.
luckily we have the testimony of "anfonee in loco coloplast malleable 1 piece".
I know that one day, if there is no cure, I will have to have a prosthesis, but if they don't create an indestructible 3 component prosthesis, I would definitely take malleable

I'm not sure that pointing out the short comings of malleables rises to the level of lynching a poster.
In my opinion most malleable supporters ignore the negatives of that implant style. They frequently are cost adverse because of the country that they are from. Cheap isn't usually seen as a benefit in many countries.
We've had members that felt a malleable wasn't a bad option. After a year or so they weren't as thrilled of the constantly erect penis.
Fear of a revision weighed heavily on their minds. Yes, that is a real concern but some men let that issue lead them to believe in some medical conspiracy for their money. Most successful implant surgeons have plenty of business. They don't need to push a poor product to make money.
Another point to consider. Malleables have evolved & been improved for their entire existence. This pretty much shows that they aren't perfect or there wouldn't be any need for revised models. It would be easy to get a poor performing malleable implant. So you'd perhaps be wanting a revision anyways.
Point to note. My father in law had an early rigid implant. He took it to his grave. That type of rigid implant hasn't been offered for years.

I’m going through a failure right now…lots of failures on here recently.
I’d like to know the actual numbers on revisions within the first couple of years. I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy guy, but how do we know the actual numbers? What reason would manufacturers have to disclose that? I
I think I were a little smaller I’d definitely have a malleable. There doesn’t seem to be any real urgency to help someone these docs and manufacturers have failed.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:24 pm**

Rufian wrote:It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.

You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.

Depends on what you call high in a failure rate.

And I will point out that the tubing connecting between the components rarely fails. Connectors fail far more often. And pumps. But the actual implant tubes fail, too.

Sure, the malleable is almost 100% indestructible and lasts far longer than inflatables, which have an average service life (at last report) of 10-15 years.

Rufian wrote:That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.

It seems to me, to imply a financial incentive for all surgeons across the board is prejudicial and undermines your own credibility. Of course, surgeons, car mechanics, plumbers, piano tuners all have potential incentive for unwarrantied work that requires periodic performance. But the temporal nature of maintenance and repair work should not suggest doing substandard work on purpose for financial gain.

Rufian wrote:Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime

For some, the malleable's superior service lifespan is a major factor. Indeed, I agree with you that any malleable is almost certain to outlast any inflatable currently available. Fewer moving parts make that almost a certainty and less wear of the material from flexing.

Lasting the implantee's lifetime is almost a certainty, absent a poor initial intallation, physical injury or infection.

The choice of a malleable which (practically) guarantees no failures vs an inflatable with an expected, finite failure rate is a personal one based on a number of factors.

Cost and the prospect of replacement are considerations favoring the malleable. But as you point out, the desire to have a fairly natural-looking and feeling flaccid state is also a factor.

Rufian wrote:The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.

The difficulties and discomfort of concealing and living with a malleable are significant to some men. Less significant to others. Unobtrusive stowage, discomfort of an always-sizable penis, deployment for urination, etc can be troubling.

I will also note that an inflatable can be more rigid than a malleable can ever be, since the malleable by of design must be able to be bent (for stowage) and inflatables do not have that requirement.

I got an inflatable for the naturalness of the flaccid state, the usefulness of the inflated state and I appreciate the ability to adjust the degree of rigidity from a soft "squishy toy" state, to a remi-rigid state perfect for fellatio all the way up to unbendable.

Rufian wrote:If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

I, too am concerned about that day. But I do not fear that day. I enjoy what I have and will deal with future eventualities when and if they come.

There are some improved designs on the horizon. One in particular has the benefits of malleables (no reservoir or pump an dno tubing connectiong compnents at all because it is just a single (actually two expandable implants) just like inflatables and malleables today) that stiffen and enlarge in response to heat and go flaccid in response to cooling down. It has been tested in animal trials and cadavers. Made of a type of "memory metal" . But even though it does away with the drawbacks of malleables (inconvenient flaccid state) and of inflatables (shorter service life and complex components), it brings new issues. Well, the search for perfection continues.

I note that another poster suggested that you would receive a lot of negative feedback for your support of the malleable choice. I hope my post is not counted among those nay-sayers. I just believe there are virtues and drawbacks to both.

Posted: **Sat Nov 26, 2022 12:49 am**

Rufian wrote:It seems the failure rate for these inflatables is high, not only are they more expensive, but the problem is always the tubing, the pump, that's what fails, is not the actual implant probably and that's the problem with these devices.

You would think they'd design something that is pretty much indestructible considering is inside the body, so if it develops a leak, you have to be opened up, pay again and go through the same crap again? That's horrible.

That works for the surgeons tho, more money for them and that's why they prefer these implants. They're not permanent they have an expiration date, they're more likely to fail. If it fails, it should be replaced for free, because 9 out of 10 is the surgeons fault.

Its akin to hair transplants, is not actually permanent, eventually you'll need more transplants, which is why the hair transplant industry is so huge, imagine if hair cloning came along? It'd be the end for them.

Wouldn't a malleable implant be a better option then? It will probably outlast all these inflatables, it may even last your lifetime

These surgeries are very expensive and they don't even last a lifetime, they quote 10 to 15 years if lucky? No way

The failure happens because of the desire of wanting to have a regular penis that goes hard and flaccid.

If I got these inflatable implants someday, I'd be afraid all the time that on day is going to fail.

This is the only thing that is holding me back and waiting to see what 2023 has for ED. These companies make these devices at low cost and then sell them for thousands just like smart phones. Men just are desperate because they have no other choice than to completely destroy whay is left of their corpus cavernosum. Ill probably get one since their is no other choice
What bugs me is that it is the same penile prosthesis from the 1970s and it is 2023 and now they are working on Bluetooth prosthesis.
Why is so hard to make and battery operated device that pushes blood and restraints it just like the Potency Flow? They can even make a new corpus cavernosum.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 017-1582-2

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5312219/
The reality is that don't really want to cure ED since they make loooots of money out of it. Please don't get upset with me. It's just an opinion.

Posted: **Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:29 am**

Why is so hard to make and battery operated device that pushes blood and restraints it just like the Potency Flow? They can even make a new corpus cavernosum.

Excellent point. THAT is more what I think of as being "Bionic". IPPs and malleables are just functional prostheses. A plastic dildo you pump up like a tire is no more bionic than a denture or prosthetic limb. Not to mention it permanently disturbs what function you may have left.

Posted: **Sat Nov 26, 2022 3:03 am**

My opinion and contribution

Both types of penile prosthesis have their advantages and disadvantages, I don't think one is demonized and the other sanctified, I think that each partner in FT shows their preferences according to multiple factors such as lifestyle, health condition, mobility or dexterity with the hands, etc.

Each type of prosthesis corresponds to the needs of the patient and to a type of patient, so the guidance of the doctors is perhaps more important than our wishes.

Example. Hydraulic prostheses have a greater possibility of mechanical failure due to the multiple components and higher infection rates (which have been controlled and decreased), malleable prostheses are generally more uncomfortable, difficult to hide and with greater possibilities of extrusion. If they do not fail, their useful life is around 15 years for both.

When I was talking to the doctor in the waiting room, before the operation, he offered me a malleable implant, telling me that it acts as a tissue expander (actually, I didn't want a bigger penis, mine is enough, 18cm, which now they have fallen a bit short, let's hope they recover) and that if I was not satisfied in three or six months, he would replace it with one of 3 components.
I had my decision very thoughtful (partly due to the FT readings) and I opted for the placement of the inflatable prosthesis, now it is a bit difficult for me to hide the penis in my clothes, I can't imagine with something permanently erect (even if it is folded), for others, surely, this would not be a problem

FrankTalk.org

Why not just get a malleable implant

Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant

Re: Why not just get a malleable implant