Caitlin MacKenna writes in Increase a Cup Size in 30 Days with Breast Massage:

If you massage your breasts for 20-30 minutes a day, they should grow one cup size larger in 30 days.

Massage does two things to stimulate growth. One benefit of massage is increased circulation. Since phytoestrogens travel through the bloodstream, the more blood you have flowing to your breasts, the easier it is for your breast receptors to pick up what they need in order to grow. Another benefit of massage is prolactin production. This important breast-enlarging hormone is triggered by regular stimulation of the breasts and nipples.


This method of breast massage is a part of an ancient Taoist exercise, the female deer exercise. That means it has been used and tested for hundreds, possibly thousands of years. All you need is some time, your hands, and dedication to have larger breasts in just 30 days.

Does enlargement result as an effect for an average woman who massages her breasts as Caitlin MacKenna suggests?

  • 14
    Is this actually a notable claim? It just seems to be a quack with a blog, attempting to cash in on spam links. Quite possible Caitlin MacKenna is famous and I just haven't heard of her, though. Commented Oct 27, 2015 at 12:59
  • 10
    As the article describes that the technique she proposes is a taoist technique called "female deer exercise". If you google that term you will find other sources making same or a similar claim. To me that's enough for the claim to be worthy of debunking if it is false.
    – Christian
    Commented Oct 27, 2015 at 13:12
  • 10
    Anecdotal evidence: I have heard generic claims from Japanese sources, of fiction and non-fiction works, promoting that "women who want to make their breasts size larger should massage their breasts" and sometimes varied by "[...] should [let their partner to] massage their [women] breasts".
    – user29319
    Commented Oct 27, 2015 at 19:08
  • 1
    Plenty of more (similar) quackery in this online new-age book
    – Sklivvz
    Commented Sep 13, 2018 at 6:15
  • 7
    @ChrisInEdmonton - sounds like a claim guys would make, under the pretense of "wanting to help." Commented Jan 28, 2019 at 18:12

1 Answer 1


There is limited evidence to support the idea that it does the opposite in postpartum mothers. One meta-study found that massages reduce engorgement, meaning that they decrease the size1. This effect remained when combined with other treatments like acupuncture and counseling, but because the studies specifically looked at mothers with engorged breasts, the results here shouldn't be interpreted too broadly.

Although external manipulation can increase the size of a woman's breasts, the type of treatment (usually involving vacuum suction) is totally different from a massage2,3. Furthermore, most protocols recommend for that to be done for 6-10 hours per day, which is far in excess of the time a massage would take.

The original claim asserts that breast massages increase prolactin, but there is only mixed evidence of that since some studies have found that massage alone doesn't increase prolactin levels4, unless combined with other stimuli like a suckling baby.

Overall, there is insufficient clinical evidence to show that massages cause breast enlargement.

  1. Farshidfar, Bahar, et al. "The effect of massage and acupressure on breast engorgement: A review." International Journal of Pediatrics 8.5 (2020): 11127-11232.
  2. Schlenz, Ingrid, and Alexandra Kaider. "The Brava external tissue expander: is breast enlargement without surgery a reality?." Plastic and reconstructive surgery 120.6 (2007): 1680-1689.
  3. Kardorff, Bernd, Maria Kardorff, and Peter Dorittke. "Nonsurgical breast enlargement using a vacuum brassiere for tissue expansion." Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft= Journal of the German Society of Dermatology: JDDG 2.4 (2004): 289-293.
  4. Yokoyama, Yuji, et al. "Releases of oxytocin and prolactin during breast massage and suckling in puerperal women." European Journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 53.1 (1994): 17-20.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .