This is a FAQ about the vibration and hammer method that I talked about in this youtube video.

Q: I’m worried about doing vibration because of jackhammer workers and hand-arm vibration syndrome?

A: The key word here is jackhammer. And the people who do jackhammers do them for hours a day. Vibration is a biphasic stimulus with too low duration giving new results and too high stimulus potentially causing nerve damage. The key is to find that happy medium. I do not think the highest setting is needed. Obviously, all vibration is not bad as you are exposed to vibration in moving vehicles for example. Ideally, we would have studies to determine the optimal vibration setting but I do not have the capability to do such studies.

Q: What things should you watch out for when performing vibration?

A: Tingling sensation in fingers, skin damage. If you get tingling sensation than adjust your method and shorten the duration. If you get skin damage then try holding the hammer in a different location to give your skin a break. Try to use “common sense”. Also, you can try some gloves or other skin protection while holding the hammer.

Q: What is the science behind the vibration + hammer holding method?

A: It is based on the anecdotal evidence that exercises such as archery, arm wrestling, and tennis have both been reported to increase bone length and they involve torsion and vibrational loading. Judo and baseball pitch mainly involve torsional loading and also have anecdotal evidence to increase bone length. Susan Pfeiffer’s paper Age Changes in the External Dimensions of Adult Bone have evidence that increase in bone length is possible post epiphyseal fusion. Torsional loading is the most effective way to drive fluid flow in the bone as what’s the best way to wring out a sponge? By twisting it. And vibrational loading further drives fluid flow. This fluid flow stimulates osteocyte activity. The exact mechanism by how this could increase bone length is yet unknown. But osteocytes have the power to drive both osteoblast and osteoclast activity so there could be a bone modeling effect where bone models to grow longer. It’s also possible that there could be a stem cell mechanism, plastic deformation, or articular cartilage endochondral ossification.

Q: How much have you grown from this method?

A: From self measurement I have increased my wingspan from 75 to 75 3/16″. I am only doing the method on my left hand and my left thumb seems much longer than my right thumb. Once I consistently measure 75 1/4″ the plan is to get x-rays. Wingspan is more accurate as you can do certain rotational tricks to make one hand appear longer than the other. Wingspan is reliable but there is variance so I measure multiple times. But any PR in wingspan is likely not measurement error as 1/16″ of an inch may as well be a mile as it is basically impossible to stretch your way to additional length. I need sufficient length as photoshop/gimp measurement is not 100% accurate so need to get above measurement error. I do have before X-rays.

Q: Has anyone else grown from this method?

A: Someone else has tried it and they have reported a growth in wingspan of 1/4″. They are doing it on both hands. I need other people to validate results because of measurement bias from myself.

Q: What’s the exact mechanism of performing the method?

A: I want people to use a variety of different techniques and use common sense. I do not think the exact vibration location and the exact mechanism of holding the hammer matters as the vibration and load is going to go throughout the entire hand. I do think though it’s better to do shorter durations, heavier loads(Hold hammer at end so it’s harder and there’s more torsion), possible hold multiple or heaver hammers, and do it multiple times during the day. Experimentation would be needed but I’m guessing the optimal duration would probably be 30 seconds to a minute multiple times during the day.

Q: I want to lengthen my legs and torso.

A: I have tried applying vibration and holding weights with feet and between knees. The issue is that legs are not as good as gripping things as the hands. Once this method is proven to work then we will have more resources and I can more easily test the other methods and have more support. So it is very important that even if you only want to grow legs you should try this method so I can get proof and then it will be easier to develop additional methods.

Q: I just want to do limb lengthening surgery.

A: The bones are connected to the tendons via the enthesis and any method that stimulates bones will likely stimulate the growth of those soft tissue as well due to the connection. People with limb lengthening surgery do seem to have issues with muscle tightness and bone healing post surgery. Vibration and torsional stimuli likely can help with this healing. So even if you only want to do surgery these techniques can possibly help with rehab. Also, it would be cost prohibitive to increase hand/foot size with limb lengthening surgery. This technique could be a cost efficient way to stimulate those tissues.

Q: Any supplements that can help?

A: I would recommend bone both soup for the hyaluronic acid and glucosamine/chondroitin. Also, a multivitamin. In the future, I can see things that stimulate CNP, HGH, IGF2, and Relaxin possibly helping as well.

Q: How fast can I expect results?

A: Results will vary but I’d say about 1/16″ per month.

Q: What will grow?

A: Fingers, palm, and possible overall arm length and width. It’d be hard to say for sure without more experimentation.

Q: I’m not getting results.

A: Try using a heavier hammer. Doing it more times during the day and increasing duration.

Q: Anyway to contact for further help?

A: Mail me at NaturalHeightGrowth@gmail.com or DM me at heightquest on instagram.

{Huge: Got a response from the author:

“Not yet, another methodological and statistical approach is needed to confirm that. We will try to explore that in the next few years.

Thanks for your question”

Here was my question: FYI, “In your paper Evaluation of body symmetries in judo, you note a length asymmetry in arms and legs is there any evidence that this could be causal?”

So definitely watch Jožef Šimenko to say if he has any follow up papers.}

Judo joins the other athletic endeavors that suggest that torsional loading can increase bone length.

Evaluation of body symmetries in judo

“The participants were 21.5 ± 3.5 years old, their height 176 ± 3.8 cm, their weight 74.2 ± 6.9 kg and all of them were right hand dominant.”<-unfortunately, the young age does not allow for us to see if growth can continue with age. Sample size was 10 which is small.

“Large, frequently one-sided, training loads which influence the athletes and are very frequent in judo
when training their special technique (tokui waza), may also affect the body posture through different muscle proportions”

Judos do undergo a lot of torsional loading.

According to Anatomic and functional leg-length inequality: A review and recommendation for clinical decision-making. Part I, anatomic leg-length inequality: prevalence, magnitude, effects and clinical significance, usually the left leg is the longer one so it is possible that the small leg length discrepancy here is due to natural growth.

According to Normal Ranges of Upper Extremity Length, Circumference, and Rate of Growth in the Pediatric Population, right arm length = 0.14 (height) + 0.28 (age) + 0.41 (sex), R² = 0.90; left arm length = 0.14 (height) + 0.28 (age) + 0.41 (sex), R² = 0.90. The equations for both the right and left arm are equivalent,. Since the equations are the same it is normal for the arm lengths to be equal thus we can see that the arm length difference in judo may be abnormal.

The evidence here is not great (more and better studies are needed) but it does add further support to the claim that torsional loading can increase bone length. The difference in bone length is relatively minor but judo has irregular loading therefore it is likely that the loading is not sufficient to induce large changes.

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.

Continuing Periosteal Apposition I: Documentation, Hypotheses, and Interpretation

“This paper reviews 42 studies published since 1964 that have found both significant and nonsignificant
age-related change in various skeletal size dimensions, e.g., length, diameter, width, and area”

“Continuing periosteal apposition (CPA) of lamellar bone in adulthood leads to greater skeletal dimensions in older individuals.”

The paper mentions several citations that show changes in skull shape with age including length of skeletal elements. If skull bones can increase in length it is possible that other bones could increase in length too.

This review paper mentions a Harry Isreal paper as showing that the vertebral body can increase in height past skeletal maturity:

PROGRESSIVE ENLARGEMENT OF THE VERTEBRAL BODY AS PART OF THE PROCESS OF HUMAN SKELETAL AGEING

“Both longitudinal and cross-sectional evaluation of the body of the third cervical vertebra reveal
that age-associated continuing enlargement occurs in women through adulthood and into the later
years.“<-this is exciting stuff as it means it is possible to gain torso height and it could explain the height gain in pregnancy.

So only one person did not have a age related vertebral body height increase. And amazingly this was a longitudinal study with some people well past their twenties.

This is the third cervical vertebrae

The paper Continuing growth in sella turcica with age also looks promising as Sell Turcica is a bone but I could not get the paper.

Here’s another one of the papers mentioned that measured length:

Sex Differences in Age-Related Remodeling of the Femur and Tibia

“In a previous study of a preindustrial sample with high activity levels, both men and women exhibited bone subperiosteal expansion and increase in second moments of area with aging.”

“In preliminary analyses of the data, we found that there was a significant negative trend in femoral and
tibial length with age, particularly among men, where bone length decreased 34 mm per decade on
average”<-if bone length can decrease it is possible that it can increase.

I emailed Susan Pfeiffer regarding her paper “Age Changes in the External Dimensions of Adult Bone” which showed bioarcheological data that stated that persistent physical activity could stimulate bone growth in length. This paper showed archeological evidence that limb assymetry continued to widen post puberty. The issue with that paper is that it is not a longitudinal study(not on the same subjects over time) so there could be methodological issues. The paper is quite old so I sent her an email about it and she replied ” It looks to me that my paper joins a number of others. Its core conclusions appear to remain valid.”

I asked her to expand on the papers that provided evidence to contribute to the theory that lengthening post epiphyseal fusion is possible and this is one of the ones she suggested. Unfortunately, she stated that her research did continue to go down the direction. I of course was not satisfied with this but I’m lucky I got a response at all. Her is the paper she mentioned: Now it does not show proof of longitudinal growth but it show evidence that appositional growth increase is possible post maturity.

IF you look at figure 3 you can see that in some individuals cortical bone continued to increase for the 3rd metacarpal between the ages 20 and 25.

Cortical index is a radiogrammetric parameter that assesses cortical bone stock using a bone X-ray. It is calculated using the ratio between the thickness of the cortical bone and the diameter of the bone shaft.

The exciting statement of course is that appositional continues post fusion at least but not necessarily limited to the ages of 20 and 25.

It looks though if anything and in measuring on gimp that the second metacarpal is longer in the second photo in figure 3. The third metacarpal is too close to call. This is despite the increase in appositional growth being more in the third metacarpal. It is extremely difficult to do an accurate measurement via gimp.