What are the medical risks of penile traction or hanging weights?
Executive summary
Penile traction therapy (PTT) — the medically supervised use of traction devices — is generally described in the literature as tolerable with mostly mild, transient adverse effects in men treated for Peyronie’s disease, but the evidence base is limited and reports of rare, serious complications from excessive force or improper use exist [1] [2] [3] [4]. Important gaps remain: many studies are small, device use varies by hours per day, commercial devices are widely available with minimal patient education, and DIY “hanging weights” are not well studied in medical literature [5] [6] [2].
1. Safety profile reported in clinical trials — mild and transient adverse events dominate
Randomized and controlled trials of modern PTT devices report that therapy was “well tolerated” and that adverse events were generally transient and mild, with benefits in curvature and length among men with Peyronie’s disease after prescribed daily use (30–90 minutes in newer RestoreX studies), supporting a favorable short-term safety signal in selected patients under study conditions [1] [7] [8].
2. Documented complications — rare but real structural and tissue injuries
Although uncommon, the literature documents serious complications tied to excessive traction or prolonged use, notably a published case of severe pubic bone edema on MRI attributed to prolonged high tensile force from a traction device, illustrating that overuse or excessive force can cause bone and soft-tissue injury [9]. Systematic reviews and narrative reviews caution that PTT is not risk-free and advise counseling patients to stop if they experience pain or discomfort [2] [5].
3. What “minor” adverse events look like in practice
Across trials and reviews, the most frequently reported problems are local and temporary: discomfort during use, skin irritation from contact points, transient numbness or paresthesia, and soreness — events characterized as minor and self-limited in published cohorts [1] [8] [4]. These are the AEs most consistently cited in randomized trials and meta-analyses that assess device tolerability [10].
4. Usage patterns, patient education and commercial pressures that shape risk
Clinical benefit and safety appear linked to controlled protocols (duration, force, device fit), yet devices are widely sold online and patient education is often limited, which increases the risk of improper application or excessive force outside supervised settings [6] [5]. Some of the most favorable efficacy and safety data come from manufacturer-supported trials, and conflicts of interest are disclosed in several device studies, which should be weighed when interpreting risk claims [7] [8].
5. Evidence gaps and the unstudied domain of hanging weights/DIY traction
Peer-reviewed literature focuses on regulated traction devices in men with Peyronie’s disease; systematic reviews and long-term studies note the overall small size and heterogeneity of trials and emphasize no single medical therapy has definitive large trial support, underscoring limitations in detecting rare harms or long-term sequelae [3] [10]. The available sources do not provide evidence about improvised methods such as hanging weights, so the safety, complication rates, and biomechanical consequences of those practices are not documented in these medical reports — a critical absence in the public record (no p#s# covers DIY weights).
**6. Clinical takeaway and practical risk-reduction**
For men with Peyronie’s disease using clinically tested traction devices under urologic guidance, the literature describes a generally favorable safety profile with mostly minor, temporary side effects and rare but real risks if devices are misused; clinicians therefore recommend device selection, adherence to prescribed duration and force, cessation with pain, and medical follow-up, while cautioning that unsupervised or improvised hanging-weight approaches lack studied safety data and could increase risk of structural injury [1] [2] [9] [5].