Notifications
Clear all

NOTICE:

DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website are not engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. Do not use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. Do not begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision.

Conclusions after a year and 4 months of reading this forum and practicing mewing  

  RSS
Wellwellwell
Active Member

I started mewing on Feb of last year after finding out Mike Mew's videos on youtube, probably like most people.

The reasoning behind mewing seemed logical and I quickly bought into the idea of micro changes adding up to a real skeletal change.

One very important thing that I think is often disregarded with mewers is tracking exact measurements. I think many of us understand that people can look vastly different in different photos and it is very hard to tell the exact position of the head from still photos, not to mention weight loss/gain that can occur  over several months.

So right from the start I measuring the one thing that is easy to measure at home, IMW. 

I started at around 35mm of IMW and lo and behold now after a year and 4 months I am exactly 35mm. I think that many of the posters need to drop the photos and move to a more 'precise' way of measuring.

You might understand now, that I lost a lot if not all faith in mewing working.

It is one thing to say that a big change is possible, but if a big change is built from a series of micro changes then these micro changes are trackable as well. Even if it would've been a 0.25mm change, then I should've been able to see that and I don't.

So I am sorry, but I do not think mewing works. From my experience it didn't make a single difference and I find most if not all of the success stories lacking in detail at the very least.

So if you agree with what I am saying, then mewing did not prove itself and we are now left with appliances. Appliances are proven to make an actual difference in IMW but we are not sure if this change is skeletal or teeth tipping. For that we need more objective cases instead of the existing case studies posted by the companies that push their appliances. The problem is that there is not nearly as much hype about these appliances as there is about mewing so we don't get as many posts and the people who use these appliances aren't nearly as active as mewers. It is understandable because mewing is easier to start with because all you need is your tongue, but I just no longer believe that it works.

One interesting appliance seems to be the DNA appliance from VIVOS another is homeblock appliance. I think we need to encourage more posts about these and see if that direction works.

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

Quote
Posted : 11/06/2020 4:26 am
ayla mao
Active Member

You need to mew harder if you want tangible results!

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 7:12 am
krollic
Reputable Member

I've only ever achieved results via hard mewing. Have not experienced any expansion with soft mewing despite good posture and excellent resting muscle tone of tongue/jaw + constant suction hold.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 8:02 am
ayla mao and Adam liked
Wellwellwell
Active Member

Then define what hard mewing is. I haven't seen a clear answer to that. 

 

Also this article is interesting and debunks a lot of the myths floating around, it's also pretty short and written by a duke professor. https://www.sylvainchamberland.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/MYTHS_THAT_PERSIST_ABOUT_OROFACIAL_MYOLOGY_article_-_IJOM_2011.10.20.pdf

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 10:22 am
krollic
Reputable Member
Posted by @loliboly

Hard mewing

Hard mewing is generally understood as deliberate pushing of the tongue into the palate. The direction of the push may be forwards, upwards or in both directions. Forwards movement seems to be what causes the infamous bulge beneath the chin. May be more effective to speed up facial growth. It has been hinted that Mike Mew, while being a proponent of soft mewing, thinks hard mewing may be an effective way to ingrain the habit of proper tongue posture.

There are different forms of hard mewing. The differences between them has to do with what part of the tongue that is in contact with the upper palate and what parts exert the pushing force.

1. Hard tip/incisive mewing

As in incisive mewing, only the tip is in contact with the upper palate and pushes hard into the n-spot. The rest of the tongue lies at the floor of the mouth.

 

2. Hard intermediate mewing

As in intermediate mewing, the tip and middle of the tongue is in contact with the upper palate. There are three versions.

a) The force is focused solely on the tip

b) The force is focused solely on the middle

c) The focus is focused on both the tip and the middle.

@Azrael reported splitting his mid palatal suture with technique a), combined with block mewing. 

https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/midpalatal-suture-split/

 

3. Hard back mewing

The whole tongue is in contact with the upper palate. The force is focused solely or mostly on the posterior third. This is the technique @helmutstrebl has reported to be using.

 

4. Full hard mewing

The whole tongue in in contact with, and pushes hard into the whole of the upper palate.

 

Block mewing

An extreme kind of hard mewing. Is also found on the extreme end on the continuum along breath and snore mewing. After swallowing, the tongue is kept in place and pushing hard into the roof of the mouth, thus completely blocking the airway. May induce various kinds of sensations in the the whole of the face. 

@Azrael reported splitting his mid palatal suture with this technique, combined with hard intermediate mewing(version a). 

https://the-great-work.org/community/main-forum/midpalatal-suture-split/

 

Hard mewing 2.0

Combination of the infinite swallow/active hard suction, center mewing and hard back mewing/full hard mewing. A very intense version of hard mewing. In addition to all the sensation its constituents induces, it also makes it feel like the cranium is being lifted away from the cranium. While somewhat different, @achilles1 described a similar technique in his 18 month progress report.

Personally, I do "block mewing" or maybe HM 2.0 i.e keeping the very back of the tongue/hyoid forcibly raised in-between breaths

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 11:36 am
auxiliary
Estimable Member

I mean studies on humans show significant expansion in ICW in months, why didn't you change technique if during this time? 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 12:51 pm
Wellwellwell
Active Member

He is just offended because I say something in contradiction to a thing he believes strongly in. It's ok 🙂

@auxiliary I changed techniques, didn't seem to work. I don't think there is enough proof to believe mewing works.

I have seen the success stories, most of them are people who had good development prior who just stood in a different posture.

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 1:43 pm
drunkwithcoffee
Estimable Member

Keep in mind most people who learned mewing from the internet are likely not mewing correctly.

The learning curve is huge, both in getting the technique down and developing the mind/body connection + discipline necessary to maintain that technique.

For starters, does the area under your chin lift up/tighten when you position your tongue to where it should be?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 3:50 pm
Michael_101
Active Member

@ramont he said 1 year 4 months

ReplyQuote
Posted : 11/06/2020 11:13 pm
Yusu
 Yusu
Eminent Member

I also started februar last year and the most important thing I learnd: Most guya don't mew correctly or efficient. Mewing is not one thing  that everybody does similiar. Even after 16 months my posture is not that good and the back of my tongue is still not up.

Although I have seen changes.

Do you use your tongue as a balloon? I think this could help with imw

 

And yes, we should not compare with pictures. Tiny changes in camera, lightning, posture and face fat etc. can make huge changes in a snapshot. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 2:13 am
Wellwellwell
Active Member

I think that mewing as a theory had enough time to prove itself. We should've seen more clear cut and documented success stories by now as it has gotten mainstream attention years ago.

I have seen many posters talk about how they rediscovered mewing after doing it wrong for all this time, I just think that this reasoning is not valid. Mewing needs to be proven right and not proven wrong (proving something wrong is almost always impossible).

I myself changed my technique many times, I tried to hard mew as well as taping my mouth at night also did thumb pulling and many of the endless suggestions surrounding this topic. I think that there is a time when we will need to drop the theory and move on to the next as hard as it may be. If this entire community as a whole will do that then maybe we will be able to find something great, but right now we are stuck on something that just doesn't seem to work.

 

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 5:59 am
Tatsumi liked
auxiliary
Estimable Member
Posted by: @wellwellwell

He is just offended because I say something in contradiction to a thing he believes strongly in. It's ok 🙂

@auxiliary I changed techniques, didn't seem to work. I don't think there is enough proof to believe mewing works.

I have seen the success stories, most of them are people who had good development prior who just stood in a different posture.

What do you mean there's not enough proof to believe mewing works? There's literally a scientific journal showing like 3-4mm expansion in 8 months from proper tongue posture. There's a lot of people here with documented changed. I went from 38mm to 45mm IMW in about 2 years...

At 35mm you're going to have rapid expansion, either your bone turnover is bad or your technique is bad.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 6:40 am
Wellwellwell
Active Member

@auxiliary Sorry maybe I missed this scientific journal, can you link it here?

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 8:20 am
auxiliary
Estimable Member
Posted by: @wellwellwell

@auxiliary Sorry maybe I missed this scientific journal, can you link it here?

You didn't. It's just tedious to post the sources every single time to ever single poster that hasn't seen it.

Here is a good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296637/

Here is another good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4130916/

And here is the study I was talking about :

https://symbiosisonlinepublishing.com/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy35.php

In this retrospective study a total of 141 women and men above the age of 18, treated by the Coulson Institute of Orofacial Myology, with no simultaneous orthodontic therapy, were included. All subjects have participated in a myofunctional therapy program for at least 8 months. The training consisted of various muscle exercises for the lips, cheeks, tongue and body posture and breathing. Additionally, the patients put a small dissolvable gelatine pad onto the palate three times a day to assist the swallowing function. Throughout therapy the length of the philtrum, intercanine distance and overjet were measured.

After 8 sessions the average intercanine distance increased by 3.2 mm, the philtrum elongated by 5.4 mm and the overjet decreased by 1.2 mm.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 1:06 pm
Loliboly
Estimable Member
Posted by: @auxiliarus
 
I went from 38mm to 45mm IMW in about 2 years...

At 35mm you're going to have rapid expansion, either your bone turnover is bad or your technique is bad.

Great to hear you have expanded that much! Would you mind describing your routine? Also, was the expansion linear or exponential?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 7:34 pm
Michael_101
Active Member

@auxiliarus are your sure that you just didn’t tip you tip teeth by your tongue?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 12/06/2020 9:29 pm
Wellwellwell
Active Member

Here is a good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296637/

It's funny that you include this article, because I have read it before. One of the main objectives of this article is to assess the quality of the studies done on myofunctional therapy as a supporting method for orthodontic treatment. They found the studies to be severely lacking.

Here is another good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4130916/

This study is about a single patient who had a relapse after orthodontic work. He had a tongue tie and refused to go under surgery so they used an appliance called a tongue elevator to treat him. 

This is a quote from the same article:

Nonetheless, despite the promising results, a lack of standardized and quantified diagnostic tools for tongue abnormalities exists. Therefore, a prospective study should be developed to enable precise diagnosis of the tongue, and to evaluate the forces generated in various tongue positions.

The use of an appliance makes this too weakly correlated to mewing. This was also done on a single patient who eventually relapsed again after 3 years.

 

And here is the study I was talking about :

https://symbiosisonlinepublishing.com/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy35.php

This study was is about 141 patients treated in a single clinic owned by Sandra Coulson between 1998 and 2012.

I found several problems with relating this study directly to mewing working:

1. What is the gelatine pad that they have been using?

2. Why did the patients start rapidly dropping after the 8th session? They mention in the article that the sessions were done in monthly intervals so 8 sessions amount to 8 months total. This is much less than regular orthodontic treatment and thus patients number shouldn't drop so rapidly especially if the treatment was working.

3. The entire study was done on a single clinic owned by Sandra Coulson. She also did the measuring and had a strong motive in this case. She is however indeed a very impressive person https://www.sandracoulson.com/meet-our-team/

4. How is it possible that over 14 years an entire clinic had only 141 patients that meet the criteria. This is not nearly enough. Her clinic consists of several doctors.

- Age: 30
- Started soft mewing on 12 Feb 2019. Have not seen any real results or changes.
- Starting IMW: 35 mm
- Current IMW: 35 mm

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/06/2020 4:16 am
auxiliary
Estimable Member
Posted by: @loliboly
Posted by: @auxiliarus
 
I went from 38mm to 45mm IMW in about 2 years...

At 35mm you're going to have rapid expansion, either your bone turnover is bad or your technique is bad.

Great to hear you have expanded that much! Would you mind describing your routine? Also, was the expansion linear or exponential?

It was logarithmic. Routine was just mewing with focus on side of the tongue being up everywhere.

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/06/2020 10:21 am
Loliboly liked
auxiliary
Estimable Member
Posted by: @michael_101

@auxiliarus are your sure that you just didn’t tip you tip teeth by your tongue?

Yeah I'm sure, my bite is normal right now, I have pictures of my teeth here.

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/06/2020 10:21 am
auxiliary
Estimable Member
Posted by: @wellwellwell

Here is a good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296637/

It's funny that you include this article, because I have read it before. One of the main objectives of this article is to assess the quality of the studies done on myofunctional therapy as a supporting method for orthodontic treatment. They found the studies to be severely lacking.

Here is another good read :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4130916/

This study is about a single patient who had a relapse after orthodontic work. He had a tongue tie and refused to go under surgery so they used an appliance called a tongue elevator to treat him. 

This is a quote from the same article:

Nonetheless, despite the promising results, a lack of standardized and quantified diagnostic tools for tongue abnormalities exists. Therefore, a prospective study should be developed to enable precise diagnosis of the tongue, and to evaluate the forces generated in various tongue positions.

The use of an appliance makes this too weakly correlated to mewing. This was also done on a single patient who eventually relapsed again after 3 years.

 

And here is the study I was talking about :

https://symbiosisonlinepublishing.com/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy/dentistry-oraldisorders-therapy35.php

This study was is about 141 patients treated in a single clinic owned by Sandra Coulson between 1998 and 2012.

I found several problems with relating this study directly to mewing working:

1. What is the gelatine pad that they have been using?

2. Why did the patients start rapidly dropping after the 8th session? They mention in the article that the sessions were done in monthly intervals so 8 sessions amount to 8 months total. This is much less than regular orthodontic treatment and thus patients number shouldn't drop so rapidly especially if the treatment was working.

3. The entire study was done on a single clinic owned by Sandra Coulson. She also did the measuring and had a strong motive in this case. She is however indeed a very impressive person https://www.sandracoulson.com/meet-our-team/

4. How is it possible that over 14 years an entire clinic had only 141 patients that meet the criteria. This is not nearly enough. Her clinic consists of several doctors.

 

1) They didn't find the studies lacking, why don't you quote directly from their words?

Search strategy resulted in the retrieval of 355 publications, only four of which fulfilled the eligibility criteria and qualified for final analysis. All papers selected had a high risk of bias.

The findings of the present systematic review demonstrate the scarcity of consistent studies and scientific evidence supporting the use of OMT in combination with orthodontic treatment to achieve better results in the correction of dentofacial disorders in individuals with orofacial abnormalities.

I highlighted their conclusion in bold for you, they didn't find enough studies to fulfill the eligibility criteria and the ones they did find, still didn't fit their criteria.

Here are some quotes from the 3 studies they selected(there were 4, but the masseter thickness one is irrelevant):

1) Combination of OMT and orthodontic treatment was more successful in correction of resting lip posture than OMT alone.

2) Group A: Reduction in overjet from 3.5 to 2.6 mm; angle of base of mandible reduced from 30° to 28.31°; ANB angle reduced from 4.4° to 2.7°; statistically significant changes; better results with correction of overbite, which was normalized from a mean of -2.46 to 3.06 mm
Control group (A): 13 8/17
Treated with OMT alone 15 Payne test - Group B: Reduction in overjet from 6.6 to 2.6 mm; overbite improved from mean of -1.2 to +2.9 mm; angle of base of mandible reduced from 31.2° to 27.8°; ANB angle reduced from 7.3° to 3.7°

3) Relapse was 0.5 mm in experimental group and 3.4 mm in control group (significant difference). OMT combined with orthodontic treatment was more effective in closure and maintenance of closure of anterior open bite in comparison to orthodontic treatment alone

 

2) They patient relapsed when he didn't use the tongue elevator, you make it sound like he relapsed anyhow. When he used the tongue elevator, no relapse is seen. Mewing is basically elevation of the tongue, so.

 

3)

a. If you've read a lot of orthodontic material then you know they use gelatine/candy to train the tongue to stay upwards, letting it slowly dissolve on the palate.

b. The study is done on patients that were already treated at the clinic, no one dropped out, they can't drop out, their information is already there it just needs to be processed. I'd imagine there are many possible reasons for the patients falling out of criteria, I think the biggest one would be no orthodontic treatment.

c. That's how it usually goes, study is done at one clinic...

d. Because the criteria is quite strict, "The patient population of 141 was fully treated by Sandra Coulson between 1998 and 2012. Requirements of age 18 at treatment start and a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 10 sessions without accompanied orthodontic therapy had to be met. Further it was mandatory, that each patient who was chosen for the study had signed a waiver to acquiesce in a research-study. Therapy itself solely consisted of the facial muscle exercises and putting a gelatine 'spot' about 5 mm behind the upper incisors onto the palate three times a day".

According to the study they only had thousands of patients during 1998 to 2012, 141 is a pretty good rate for patients who didn't even know they were going to be studied.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/06/2020 10:49 am
RamonT
Trusted Member
Posted by: @wellwellwell

I started mewing on Feb of last year after finding out Mike Mew's videos on youtube, probably like most people.

The reasoning behind mewing seemed logical and I quickly bought into the idea of micro changes adding up to a real skeletal change.

One very important thing that I think is often disregarded with mewers is tracking exact measurements. I think many of us understand that people can look vastly different in different photos and it is very hard to tell the exact position of the head from still photos, not to mention weight loss/gain that can occur  over several months.

So right from the start I measuring the one thing that is easy to measure at home, IMW. 

I started at around 35mm of IMW and lo and behold now after a year and 4 months I am exactly 35mm. I think that many of the posters need to drop the photos and move to a more 'precise' way of measuring.

You might understand now, that I lost a lot if not all faith in mewing working.

It is one thing to say that a big change is possible, but if a big change is built from a series of micro changes then these micro changes are trackable as well. Even if it would've been a 0.25mm change, then I should've been able to see that and I don't.

So I am sorry, but I do not think mewing works. From my experience it didn't make a single difference and I find most if not all of the success stories lacking in detail at the very least.

So if you agree with what I am saying, then mewing did not prove itself and we are now left with appliances. Appliances are proven to make an actual difference in IMW but we are not sure if this change is skeletal or teeth tipping. For that we need more objective cases instead of the existing case studies posted by the companies that push their appliances. The problem is that there is not nearly as much hype about these appliances as there is about mewing so we don't get as many posts and the people who use these appliances aren't nearly as active as mewers. It is understandable because mewing is easier to start with because all you need is your tongue, but I just no longer believe that it works.

One interesting appliance seems to be the DNA appliance from VIVOS another is homeblock appliance. I think we need to encourage more posts about these and see if that direction works.

My sincere  Apologies to you, I misread the title, and when I started reading your post, I overlooked Feb from last year.

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/06/2020 3:08 pm
spidey
Active Member

I have mewed for over 5 years now. My IMW has remained the same. I even got it measured by a well known orthotropist. I may not have mewed perfectly, however I certainly mewed well enough that it I was a child I would have made change. I started at 19, and have not made change. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 17/06/2020 7:07 pm
PaperBag
Estimable Member

@spidey Were you only going for a difference in IMW? No other part of your face changed either?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 17/06/2020 9:45 pm
spidey
Active Member

@paperbag

I was hoping for general upswing and rotation of my face. Have my maxilla and mandible come forward, basically everything good haha. No significant change! You’d think after 5 years there would be. I pretty much look the same. I don’t think mewing is useless, however. I certainly have prevented my face from getting worse. Plus, I think my breathing improved. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/06/2020 12:40 am