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.

Has anyone seen results?  

Page 3 / 4
  RSS
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Francybe92
Posted by: Progress

@francybe92 Well, you are free to maintain your stance. I don't see any avenue for further discussion in this regard.

I Understand @Progress, we ave a copmletly different point of view. I cannot see how you can spot any difference in those before/after and you are probably wondering how i can't see the difference.

It's hard to be constructive when the points of view are so distant.

At least we are in agreement with that, ha. I hope you will eventually get what you want. I think I'm nearing a point where the changes are becoming significant enough to start appearing in pics. The question is, how to align the pictures in a way that gives the strongest and most honest demonstration of these changes? I used to align ears, then ears and eyes. I don't know if there is a better way to do it, since everything in the cranium is subject to change. The whole dynamic of the skull is changing. If it was only maxilla that changed, it would be easy to superimpose the pics. This is basically the closest I can get to with my way of taking pics:

It's not very satisfying.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 30/12/2018 10:45 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

Can you elaborate on why you view this as an unacceptable comparison? I tried to align the points located at her ears and ramus. To me, the difference in her face is far greater than what such small difference in camera angle could possibly create:

This women appears to be rotating her head inward (chin tucking) in the before picture and outward in the after picture. A classic trick to make the face look more forward.

To confirm this, does anyone have her before and after pictures without all the dots and lines she added?

Edit: never mind my request, I found the before and after. 

 

What's your view on the extent to which her chin moves away from her ears? By rotating the head upward, the ears rotate with the head. The forementioned realtionship should not change, should it?

Posted by: Francybe92

Now i'm reaserching if it is possible or not to change the shape  and position of any of the bones of the human body in adulthood.

Till now i found only this practice that have something in common with Mewing (constant force over long period of time)

Do you think it's relevant with Mewing or am i out of track?

Immagine correlata

Immagine correlata

 

I think the facial bones have different bone matrix than the rest of the skeleton. The bones are more porous, and thus more receptive.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 30/12/2018 10:49 pm
Sclera
Estimable Member

@francybe92 - You're better off looking at the effects of modern-day corset wearers, who are usually adult women who begin wearing corsets once their bones have fully developed. Women in the mid-1800s with steel-boned corsets began training as children, which had an effect on bone growth. Even reed and whale boning of the 1500s to early 1800s had an effect, though not as severe. A lot of those old diagrams were exaggerated propaganda from moralists, but I've seen Victorian-era skeletons with similar results.

My understanding is for modern day women, tight-lacing and waist training has an effect on soft tissue, can temporarily squeeze the ribs, and can bruise and crack ribs at the extreme, over time atrophies muscles to the point of losing necessary core strength, but doesn't alter their form as the Victorian examples do.

Some corrective braces for adult scoliosis patients are used to aid soft tissue (there it is again!) in manipulating the spine to align more properly and assist the muscles themselves in maintaining corrections. Results are across the board for that, as so many factors go into an individual case, including severity of the dysfunction, and consistency and diligence of form from the patient.

But I feel like me chiming in about my soft tissue results created a bit of a stir, and I want to address a couple things.

As far as I'm aware, "mewing" is just another way to say "oral posture". The point of adult-beginning oral posture is not to move the maxilla forward or to stimulate remodeling. It might be one point, it might be the only point for many, but it's not the only-point-end-of-story. The foundation of oral posture is simply to maintain proper positioning of the tongue, lips, and teeth. And even if maxillary growth is the only point of mewing, it's not the only point of this forum.

The subject of the post was "Has anyone seen results?", and from the original post it seemed broad enough for my own experience to be a valid contribution. I have seen results from oral posture. Whether those results were what people wanted, they're still simple results. The very simple act as a class ii of improving my overjet affects the placement of the mandible, which falls in line with your discussion of the positioning of bone. Is that placement due to muscle? Yes, but it's still a result.

I am definitely guilty of not providing photographic evidence to support my soft tissue claims, and I'm not going to defend that.

That said, I think it's interesting that Progress offered to post further photographs, but the offer went unacknowledged.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 30/12/2018 10:56 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member

Thanks for the replies.

 

I first rotated the after picture to match the before at the A point. That's the point right under the nose that is used in cephalometric and photometric analysis to determine the forward position of the upper jaw. Notice how the nose matched in both pictures so do many other features. 

 

Also, notice how the neck changes so much it's as if she was chin tucking in the before.

Now I plotted a little angle to check the forward growth. This angle is inspired by the cephlometic SNA measurment with the only difference is we have no access to the sella (S) point without an x-ray so I substitute it with the Tragus of the ear.

 

 

Both angles are the same. This person had no forward growth in her upper jaw and her lower jaw doesn't appear to have changed either. Look back above at the lips and how they did not change relation. It's all head rotation to make the face, especially the lower jaw, look more forward.

She is pushing her head back and in as if doing a chin tuck in the before and then doing the complete opposite in the after.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 30/12/2018 10:56 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress

At least we are in agreement with that, ha. I hope you will eventually get what you want. I think I'm nearing a point where the changes are becoming significant enough to start appearing in pics. The question is, how to align the pictures in a way that gives the strongest and most honest demonstration of these changes? I used to align ears, then ears and eyes. I don't know if there is a better way to do it, since everything in the cranium is subject to change. The whole dynamic of the skull is changing. If it was only maxilla that changed, it would be easy to superimpose the pics. This is basically the closest I can get to with my way of taking pics:

It's not very satisfying.

I see better consistency in lighting here. Can you please post the still pictures?

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 30/12/2018 11:17 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

At least we are in agreement with that, ha. I hope you will eventually get what you want. I think I'm nearing a point where the changes are becoming significant enough to start appearing in pics. The question is, how to align the pictures in a way that gives the strongest and most honest demonstration of these changes? I used to align ears, then ears and eyes. I don't know if there is a better way to do it, since everything in the cranium is subject to change. The whole dynamic of the skull is changing. If it was only maxilla that changed, it would be easy to superimpose the pics. This is basically the closest I can get to with my way of taking pics:

It's not very satisfying.

I see better consistency in lighting here. Can you please post the still pictures?

https://imgur.com/a/kNbcLNH  

You may notice how my head is located at slightly different parts of the shot. This also seems to affect the facial proportions in unpredictable ways. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 12:04 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress

https://imgur.com/a/kNbcLNH  

You may notice how my head is located at slightly different parts of the shot. This also seems to affect the facial proportions in unpredictable ways. 

I see what you are doing, you are using the phone flash for lighting. That's at least giving consistent light but the direction of the light is unnecessarily making your under eye support flatter.

Well, I ran the angles and you are not going to like this, you came out more recessed in the after. The before was 86° while the after was 83°. Now obviously this is not a real change, just due to change of picture angle.

This underscores the importance of consistency in taking pictures. consider getting a basic tripod with a built in phone mount. It will make your picture so much more consistent.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00SHXQ9YS/ref=psdc_499310_t3_B014PPC7JM

Or better get this 60" tripod and add to it a separate phone mount so you can have the extra height. It's best to have the phone at the same level as your head.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005KP473Q/ref=psdc_499310_t2_B014PPC7JM

https://www.amazon.com/DaVoice-Compatible-Adjustable-Smartphone-Attachment/dp/B00OS9E6AO

 

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 1:29 am
mewchew
New Member

what about achilles results? looks like pretty convincing upswing of the mandible to me. Am i missing something?

https://imgur.com/KL68xrr

https://imgur.com/7apAape

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 4:05 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

To me Progress doesn't look more recessed in the after shot. His midface and nose become shorter as if his face lifted up. His lips coming back still makes it look like his maxilla went upwards which is what shortens the face.

If you look carefully you can literally see his Mew line decrease as the distance from the upper lip to nose gets shorter. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 8:36 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

To me Progress doesn't look more recessed in the after shot. His midface and nose become shorter as if his face lifted up. His lips coming back still makes it look like his maxilla went upwards which is what shortens the face.

If you look carefully you can literally see his Mew line decrease as the distance from the upper lip to nose gets shorter. 

Progress face looks like it's moving back in the after picture. Look at the gif he posted, his lips and nose move back. Facial growth doesn't just go up as you are suggesting you are seeing in the picture, it also goes forward. I think he just took a picture in an awkward position and it made him look recessed when in reality he did not change, except for the beard of course.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 9:30 am
Ayla31
Trusted Member

I aligned Progress ears, since I think it's better to compare the pictures that way (I didn't resize). They are still not in the exact same place, but at least it doesn't look like he is recessing.

I hope it's okay.

I also have the feeling that the after picture is slightly smaller than the before one. But I could be wrong.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 9:34 am
AlphaMinus
Estimable Member
Posted by: mewchew

what about achilles results? looks like pretty convincing upswing of the mandible to me. Am i missing something?

https://imgur.com/KL68xrr

https://imgur.com/7apAape

Apart from the fact that both photos are taken in completely different lighting with different poses (not to mention the beard growth) and are therefore completely and utterly unscientific, it also looks to me like he's jutting his mandible in the after photo.  He's also lifting his head to compensate for a high gonial angle. When you have a high gonial angle, jutting the mandible results in a significant increase in vertical chin height, and that seems to be the case here. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 12:26 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: EddieMoney

To me Progress doesn't look more recessed in the after shot. His midface and nose become shorter as if his face lifted up. His lips coming back still makes it look like his maxilla went upwards which is what shortens the face.

If you look carefully you can literally see his Mew line decrease as the distance from the upper lip to nose gets shorter. 

Progress face looks like it's moving back in the after picture. Look at the gif he posted, his lips and nose move back. Facial growth doesn't just go up as you are suggesting you are seeing in the picture, it also goes forward. I think he just took a picture in an awkward position and it made him look recessed when in reality he did not change, except for the beard of course.

In someone with more bimax style symptoms, the face wouldn't go forward when the maxilla goes up but rather further back. Either way, the Mew indicator line would decrease but by a different mechanism (up and back vs up and forward ). Looking by his before shot, you can see how he had an elongated "muzzle" like face but now the face has gotten shorter as his maxilla and whole skull moved upward. 

It's exactly as he described in the thread about expansion = recession . When the face lifts up the maxilla does come back but because it moves up his Mew indicator line actually shortened. In other words he was recessed but it seems his face fell down and forward simultaneously . Just like bimax symptoms.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 5:17 pm
mewchew
New Member
Posted by: AlphaMinus
Posted by: mewchew

what about achilles results? looks like pretty convincing upswing of the mandible to me. Am i missing something?

https://imgur.com/KL68xrr

https://imgur.com/7apAape

Apart from the fact that both photos are taken in completely different lighting with different poses (not to mention the beard growth) and are therefore completely and utterly unscientific, it also looks to me like he's jutting his mandible in the after photo.  He's also lifting his head to compensate for a high gonial angle. When you have a high gonial angle, jutting the mandible results in a significant increase in vertical chin height, and that seems to be the case here. 

Yes I concede that the before and after photos arent perfect in terms of lighting,. However I dont think he is jutting in the before pic (the one with a beard). When i jut my jaw out my lip allignment changes so that the bottom lip is forward of the top lip. His pictures seem to maintain the same lip alignment. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 5:19 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: AlphaMinus
Posted by: mewchew

what about achilles results? looks like pretty convincing upswing of the mandible to me. Am i missing something?

https://imgur.com/KL68xrr

https://imgur.com/7apAape

Apart from the fact that both photos are taken in completely different lighting with different poses (not to mention the beard growth) and are therefore completely and utterly unscientific, it also looks to me like he's jutting his mandible in the after photo.  He's also lifting his head to compensate for a high gonial angle. When you have a high gonial angle, jutting the mandible results in a significant increase in vertical chin height, and that seems to be the case here. 

The bearded picture where it seems like he is jutting his mandible forward is actually the before picture. To me it seems like his face is changing in similar way as mine is, with the jaws giving the illusion of having moved up and back instead of up and forward. For both of us, the base/underside of the nose is tilting to a more horizontal angle, which should imply that the maxilla is getting closer to the height it's meant to reside at.

Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

https://imgur.com/a/kNbcLNH  

You may notice how my head is located at slightly different parts of the shot. This also seems to affect the facial proportions in unpredictable ways. 

Well, I ran the angles and you are not going to like this, you came out more recessed in the after. The before was 86° while the after was 83°. Now obviously this is not a real change, just due to change of picture angle. 

I can see why you'd think that, but I don't agree with the terminology you use. It's not recession as defined in the context of craniofacial dystrophy. Here the face is kind of drawn towards the eyes in a concave-like manner, with both above-eye and under-eye support increasing. The face gets more compact. This compression means that some parts of the face are, inevitably, going to appear as if they were receding in relation to the rest of the skull. In addition, @SUGR1 was of the opinion that many people with downgrown faces are in a situation that could be considered a form of bimaxillary protrusion. If this is the case for me, then the backward movement of the jaws isn't be that surprising.

Note that the angles and markers you use are largely arbitrary, with most of their utility being intended for quantifying the results of surgical operations. The proportional consequences of fixing CFD through the body's own mechanisms are far more complex and unknown than those of surgically moving the maxilla up and forward. I hope you understand that the methods you use to measure changes are not really intended to quantify the kind of process we are undergoing. When the dynamics of the whole cranium are changing, a couple of angles will not convey much of useful information.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 5:36 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

In someone with more bimax style symptoms, the face wouldn't go forward when the maxilla goes up but rather further back. Either way, the Mew indicator line would decrease but by a different mechanism (up and back vs up and forward ). Looking by his before shot, you can see how he had an elongated "muzzle" like face but now the face has gotten shorter as his maxilla and whole skull moved upward. 

It's exactly as he described in the thread about expansion = recession . When the face lifts up the maxilla does come back but because it moves up his Mew indicator line actually shortened. In other words he was recessed but it seems his face fell down and forward simultaneously . Just like bimax symptoms.

Where does Dr. Mew, which I am assuming is your source, indicate that Bimaxillary Protrusion can be fixed with mewing? It is a phenotypical feature.

When Dr. Mew talks about correcting the face he always talks about the maxilla moving up and forward, never in one direction only. 

The thread you are referring to had awful looking face changes that looked so unnatural. Those in no way represent the kind of change Dr. Mew talks about nor that most people aspire for.

Be my guest to show the mew vertical indicator line on this picture. Just keep in mind without access to the teeth that's impossible. Plus there is no valid way to measure the difference between different pictures.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 10:54 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress

I can see why you'd think that, but I don't agree with the terminology you use. It's not recession as defined in the context of craniofacial dystrophy. Here the face is kind of drawn towards the eyes in a concave-like manner, with both above-eye and under-eye support increasing. The face gets more compact. This compression means that some parts of the face are, inevitably, going to appear as if they were receding in relation to the rest of the skull. In addition, @SUGR1 was of the opinion that many people with downgrown faces are in a situation that could be considered a form of bimaxillary protrusion. If this is the case for me, then the backward movement of the jaws isn't be that surprising.

That protrusion SUGR was referring to in that specific context was alveolar. If you had any change in that area you would know. Your teeth and gum in the front will recessed back on an angle. Your lips would flare less. Your lips are flaring the same in both pictures. You just appear to have recessed face in the after picture because of the way you are posing.

Posted by: Progress

Note that the angles and markers you use are largely arbitrary, with most of their utility being intended for quantifying the results of surgical operations. The proportional consequences of fixing CFD through the body's own mechanisms are far more complex and unknown than those of surgically moving the maxilla up and forward. I hope you understand that the methods you use to measure changes are not really intended to quantify the kind of process we are undergoing. When the dynamics of the whole cranium are changing, a couple of angles will not convey much of useful information.

Dr. John Mew was referring to growing children when he mentioned that point. All of their bones are growing, which makes sense. The size and shape of your head will not change. Even if it did most of the change occurs in the face. You are not going to look different better if your face does not move forward of your cranium.

Beside, all of those angles and planes from cephalometric and photometric analysis are made to measure change in the face no matter how it happens (surgery, head gear, etc).

If your mewing can't show a change in the teeth and in those tests then it has  produced no change.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 11:09 pm
Slinky
Trusted Member

what about this one? seems like her skull got shorter

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 11:35 pm
Martinez
Active Member
The proportional consequences of fixing CFD through the body's own mechanisms are far more complex and unknown than those of surgically moving the maxilla up and forward. I hope you understand that the methods you use to measure changes are not really intended to quantify the kind of process we are undergoing. When the dynamics of the whole cranium are changing, a couple of angles will not convey much of useful information.

Sorry @progress, but where did you get this information from? I'm very curious.
Anyway, it's quite easy to solve this debate. if you think that your whole skull is changing why don't you get a CT scan now and another in 6 to 12 month?
This will be very useful for you and for us.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 31/12/2018 11:37 pm
Sceriff liked
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Slinky

what about this one? seems like her skull got shorter

Its hard to check because the pictures are too small. It also seems the head in the "after omt" front view picture is smaller because the camera is zoomed out more. Nonetheless, the improvement in facial muscle balance and lower jaw position is very clear.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 1:39 am
Martinez
Active Member
Posted by: Slinky

Yes, I saw this girl before and I remember being impressed by her results even if I can not spot what exactly has changed.
 
his face seems shorter, but I agree with Abdul that the zoom could be deceiving
 
It seems she has become more healthy  and more beautiful in general don't know how to explain.
I'll pay for sure to obtain such resuts. (if real and lasting of course)

Noticed almost the same thing for all the Honor Franklin patients. They generally look better but i dont know why. Maybe is just the way they are posing. 

Can't see any maxillary movment anyway.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 2:43 am
Francybe92
Active Member
Posted by: Sclera

@francybe92 - You're better off looking at the effects of modern-day corset wearers, who are usually adult women who begin wearing corsets once their bones have fully developed. Women in the mid-1800s with steel-boned corsets began training as children, which had an effect on bone growth. Even reed and whale boning of the 1500s to early 1800s had an effect, though not as severe. A lot of those old diagrams were exaggerated propaganda from moralists, but I've seen Victorian-era skeletons with similar results.

My understanding is for modern day women, tight-lacing and waist training has an effect on soft tissue, can temporarily squeeze the ribs, and can bruise and crack ribs at the extreme, over time atrophies muscles to the point of losing necessary core strength, but doesn't alter their form as the Victorian examples do.

Some corrective braces for adult scoliosis patients are used to aid soft tissue (there it is again!) in manipulating the spine to align more properly and assist the muscles themselves in maintaining corrections. Results are across the board for that, as so many factors go into an individual case, including severity of the dysfunction, and consistency and diligence of form from the patient.

I have done some research and yes you are 100% correct on everything. How did you know all those things on corset?

But I feel like me chiming in about my soft tissue results created a bit of a stir, and I want to address a couple things.

As far as I'm aware, "mewing" is just another way to say "oral posture". The point of adult-beginning oral posture is not to move the maxilla forward or to stimulate remodeling. It might be one point, it might be the only point for many, but it's not the only-point-end-of-story. The foundation of oral posture is simply to maintain proper positioning of the tongue, lips, and teeth. And even if maxillary growth is the only point of mewing, it's not the only point of this forum.

Sorry, but what are the other points of this forum? Why we set up a Q/A whit doc Mew. The only questions i have heard from this community was only about the possibility of skeletal improvements. Practically every thread on this forum it's all about: opening sutures, growing chin, moving maxilla, expanding zygos…. and so on.

Why should i keep a good oral posture without those benefits? Why we are here? Really…. what are those other points?

The subject of the post was "Has anyone seen results?", and from the original post it seemed broad enough for my own experience to be a valid contribution. I have seen results from oral posture. Whether those results were what people wanted, they're still simple results. The very simple act as a class ii of improving my overjet affects the placement of the mandible, which falls in line with your discussion of the positioning of bone. Is that placement due to muscle? Yes, but it's still a result.

I must admit that i was a bit rude, but I'm a bit tired to hear that with mewing you can move your maxilla when no one was able to do it. I'm tired to hear Doc Mew saying that he believes that you can gain significant result, but he has no proof of that. I'm tired hearing people talking about bone remodeling when bone remodeling doesn't work the way they think, I'm tired to hear that in 3 month someone has shortened his face and doubled his ball size. I'm tired of people who takes pic in strangest and awkward positions.

I just want to find the truth, and if these things of the oral posture is true i want to find the best and fastest way to achieve those results. But if we keep saying that we are having "great" result when there are actually none we will not do any progress.

I believe in your results and as long as you are happy with them I'm happy for you, but you are right, since Mike Mew promised us skeletal changes that what I'm expecting.

This forum has the potential to be a great work or a psychological support group for people whit a BDD

I prefer the first one.

I am definitely guilty of not providing photographic evidence to support my soft tissue claims, and I'm not going to defend that.

That said, I think it's interesting that Progress offered to post further photographs, but the offer went unacknowledged.

I really appreciated the photos of progress, and certainly there was an aesthetic improvement, but how do I determine if this improvement is there or not? if the changes are so minimal at the skeletal level but decisive in the perception of beauty, it would be interesting to post different photos with different angles and present them without saying wich are the before and which are the after. Anyone can look better or worse in a  single picture, but not  in all right?
ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 5:29 am
Sceriff liked
Sclera
Estimable Member

I have done some research and yes you are 100% correct on everything. How did you know all those things on corset?

@francybe92 I wear historical and modern corsets myself. Also, I'm just generally interested in "women's history" and "domestic history" and these kinds of facts fascinate me.

Sorry, but what are the other points of this forum? Why we set up a Q/A whit doc Mew. The only questions i have heard from this community was only about the possibility of skeletal improvements. Practically every thread on this forum it's all about: opening sutures, growing chin, moving maxilla, expanding zygos…. and so on.

The forum lists these two points on the Corrective Methods - "Discussion about development of Facial, Cranial, and Spinal, and Pelvic bones in healthy growth. Discussion about improper growth patterns and strains in the bones and muscle, and the solutions to growth problems."

Discussion about strains in the bones and muscle. This has manifested in this forum as discussions about body posture, correct swallowing, chewing, and oral posture, as well as other areas.

Yes, there were Q & As with Mike Mew. There are also discussions with others, including Sarah Hornsby who does not deal with maxilla forward movement/growth, who is very clear that in her opinion she doesn't believe skeletal miracles will occur without assistance with appliances, but how to use oral posture to still improve function. That Q & A thread generated pretty lively discussion as well (kind of flipped from this one), but her answers had great contribution to the purpose of this forum.

I think it's unfortunate that so many questions and informative discussions are kind of lost in the 11 pages of topics, and buried within the topics themselves. But I assure you, there are people on this forum discussing other things, or smaller aspects of this whole endeavor that might have an impact.

Why should i keep a good oral posture without those benefits? Why we are here? Really…. what are those other points?

You might be saying this as a rhetorical, but it's a really good question. It makes me think, though, that you haven't really read the last half of this topic, and the additional benefits available from oral posture. But I'll repeat some of them again:

  • At the very least, it can stop or delay further deterioration as time goes on.
  • Soft tissue improvement, relieving strain, helping muscle work to their intended function, is better than nothing whatsoever.
  • As class ii, the mandible has a better chance at more proper placement.
  • Health benefits if done properly. Dismiss that one all you want as a lowered standard. But do you want to have to carry a C-PAP with you every time you're spending the night somewhere else? Or deal with your jaw slipping and popping painfully every time you chew food?

I continue to practice oral posture for all of these things, but I also have hope that I'll learn something new to improve even further.

As to the question of "Why are we here?", you might want to consider that even if everyone arrived at this forum with the hope of maxilla forward of growth with tongue alone, not everyone here has stayed for only that reason.

Do I still hope that my maxilla can upswing? Yes, I do. Would it be great if it was with just my tongue? Yes. But I don't expect that ONLY tongue is MY answer. And I'm here because I want to learn.

I must admit that i was a bit rude, but I'm a bit tired to hear that with mewing you can move your maxilla when no one was able to do it. I'm tired to hear Doc Mew saying that he believes that you can gain significant result, but he has no proof of that. I'm tired hearing people talking about bone remodeling when bone remodeling doesn't work the way they think, I'm tired to hear that in 3 month someone has shortened his face and doubled his ball size. I'm tired of people who takes pic in strangest and awkward positions.

I just want to find the truth, and if these things of the oral posture is true i want to find the best and fastest way to achieve those results. But if we keep saying that we are having "great" result when there are actually none we will not do any progress.

I believe in your results and as long as you are happy with them I'm happy for you, but you are right, since Mike Mew promised us skeletal changes that what I'm expecting.

I understand, and I can get tired too of other things that go on here. I even took a couple months break from posting, partly for similar reasons.

I think a lot of optimists and pessimists come here and to other places with the hope that the adult maxilla can be corrected by tongue power alone. A lot of people say a lot of things. A lot of people believe a lot of things, or demand proof before they even begin, inside and outside of this subject. But this specific area has not been practiced or explored by many people, or for very long compared to other fields. We're in new territory, and there are things people might believe but need to find out are true, or that they were false -- but we're still working on proving or finding a definitive answer. I know in the beginning of my process I got very excited from progress photos and interpreted things that I no longer claim. Proof of that is in my post history. 

But there's a very divided faction when it comes to mewing. Someone looking for dramatic results has a large potential to miss the subtler ones. Someone who sees subtle results has a chance to make a bigger deal out of it than it is. It sometimes takes effort to find accurate or potentially accurate information.

Working toward your own progress can include how to disseminate information and internalize it.

This forum has the potential to be a great work or a psychological support group for people whit a BDD

I prefer the first one.

And I would say, why can't it be both? A support group helps people in reasonable and healthy ways to reach a place of healing, and that includes helping people reconcile to their reality.

A lot of people have deep-seeded issues and anger at their dysfunction. I for one had to deal with a lot of anger at my dad and orthodontist for putting me in a worse position, anger at myself for not knowing about proper oral posture as a child. I can be guilty of finding changes where there are none, and then getting depressed when I realize it.

But once I work through that, I have a better grasp at the reality in the present moment, intrigue in the possibilities of the future, and a more grounded and settled appreciation of who I am, how I'm doing now, and how I'm looking now.

And I feel like that mindset sets me up in a healthy way to look for more answers on how to improve my function.

The human drive to learn is as equally emotional as it is intellectual. Why not make a space that respects both?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 10:38 am
Mewb, Apollo and Ayla31 liked
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: EddieMoney

In someone with more bimax style symptoms, the face wouldn't go forward when the maxilla goes up but rather further back. Either way, the Mew indicator line would decrease but by a different mechanism (up and back vs up and forward ). Looking by his before shot, you can see how he had an elongated "muzzle" like face but now the face has gotten shorter as his maxilla and whole skull moved upward. 

It's exactly as he described in the thread about expansion = recession . When the face lifts up the maxilla does come back but because it moves up his Mew indicator line actually shortened. In other words he was recessed but it seems his face fell down and forward simultaneously . Just like bimax symptoms.

Where does Dr. Mew, which I am assuming is your source, indicate that Bimaxillary Protrusion can be fixed with mewing? It is a phenotypical feature.

When Dr. Mew talks about correcting the face he always talks about the maxilla moving up and forward, never in one direction only. 

The thread you are referring to had awful looking face changes that looked so unnatural. Those in no way represent the kind of change Dr. Mew talks about nor that most people aspire for.

Be my guest to show the mew vertical indicator line on this picture. Just keep in mind without access to the teeth that's impossible. Plus there is no valid way to measure the difference between different pictures.

Bimax is not a phenotypical feature of anyone. It is CFD . You also once stated that bimax is excessive forward growth which is inaccurate in and of itself. Bimax is present when the palate is very narrown and a tongue thrust causes the incisors to procline. In people whose palate is wide and have proclined incisors, the mandible is in an ideal position and no bimax is present. Bimax = a downward grown face with teeth flaring. None of that is phenotypical .

It is present in many Asian populations but most of this is due to lifestyle and not genetics. No one is just simply born with bimax.

Also, if the maxilla is moving UP then the gonial angle is decreasing and teeth are getting closer to the nose. Did you not see midfacial shortening in the pic of Progress? I sure did. But this is the point I am making. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 1:17 pm
Apollo
Reputable Member
Posted by: Slinky

what about this one? seems like her skull got shorter

I posted more information and pictures from this case here:

https://the-great-work.org/community/case-discussions/your-success-story/#post-5148

She had braces and tonsillectomy in addition to myofunctional therapy.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 2:59 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

I can see why you'd think that, but I don't agree with the terminology you use. It's not recession as defined in the context of craniofacial dystrophy. Here the face is kind of drawn towards the eyes in a concave-like manner, with both above-eye and under-eye support increasing. The face gets more compact. This compression means that some parts of the face are, inevitably, going to appear as if they were receding in relation to the rest of the skull. In addition, @SUGR1 was of the opinion that many people with downgrown faces are in a situation that could be considered a form of bimaxillary protrusion. If this is the case for me, then the backward movement of the jaws isn't be that surprising.

That protrusion SUGR was referring to in that specific context was alveolar. If you had any change in that area you would know. Your teeth and gum in the front will recessed back on an angle. Your lips would flare less. Your lips are flaring the same in both pictures. You just appear to have recessed face in the after picture because of the way you are posing. (1)

Posted by: Progress

Note that the angles and markers you use are largely arbitrary, with most of their utility being intended for quantifying the results of surgical operations. The proportional consequences of fixing CFD through the body's own mechanisms are far more complex and unknown than those of surgically moving the maxilla up and forward. I hope you understand that the methods you use to measure changes are not really intended to quantify the kind of process we are undergoing. When the dynamics of the whole cranium are changing, a couple of angles will not convey much of useful information.

Dr. John Mew was referring to growing children when he mentioned that point. All of their bones are growing, which makes sense. The size and shape of your head will not change. (2)Even if it did most of the change occurs in the face. You are not going to look different better if your face does not move forward of your cranium. (3)

Beside, all of those angles and planes from cephalometric and photometric analysis are made to measure change in the face no matter how it happens (surgery, head gear, etc). (4)

If your mewing can't show a change in the teeth and in those tests then it has  produced no change. (5)

(1) You have no way of concluding this. If you reject the possibility of changes on the basis of the non-identicality of the pics, you must also reject the possibility of no changes for the same reason. Otherwise your conclusion is biased. More fair, from your part, would be to say that no conclusion can be made from the pics I posted. And I would agree. Note that the pics were not originally posted with the intention of demonstrating change (otherwise I would've shaved my hair & beard), but to demonstrate the difficulty of superimposing progress pics.

(2) The relationship between the cranial bones is not absolute, (even if the size and shape of the individual bones was). Throughout your age, change in their relative position will occur based on the stress that is placed on the individual bones. Trauma to the head can instantly compress the cranium and affect the dynamic of the cranial bones. This is not some theory, but a commonly known fact. The only speculative aspect of this question is whether or not lack of postural habits can, over time, lead to similar compression of the cranium, and whether or not such change can be reversed by readapting proper posture. I'm not aware of anything that suggest that this could not be possible.

(3) That is completely subjective and will depend on your definition of better. I'm not interested in such argument.

(4) Note the bolded part and revisit my point. When the whole cranium is changing (I know, it's a premise you reject), then by looking at the face only, you fall to the same trap orthodontists do who, when evaluating malocclusion, only focus on the crowded teeth, instead of the big picture of the maxillary maldevelopment. As we know, it's a limited point of view that does everyone disservice. I fear you are sabotaging your understanding of the complexities of CFD by only focusing on measuring facial change.

(5) In my case, my intermolar width has increased from 34mm to 44 mm in the past two years.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 4:10 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Martinez
The proportional consequences of fixing CFD through the body's own mechanisms are far more complex and unknown than those of surgically moving the maxilla up and forward. I hope you understand that the methods you use to measure changes are not really intended to quantify the kind of process we are undergoing. When the dynamics of the whole cranium are changing, a couple of angles will not convey much of useful information.

Sorry @progress, but where did you get this information from? I'm very curious.
Anyway, it's quite easy to solve this debate. if you think that your whole skull is changing why don't you get a CT scan now and another in 6 to 12 month?
This will be very useful for you and for us.

If you are looking for a singular, comprehensive source, I'm sorry to let you down. The points I share are knowledge I have synthesized by myself from my own experiences and the information & anecdotes shared by others. If you have specific questions in mind about my conclusions, I will gladly entertain them. If you can show me where I'm mistaken - that's even better. My conclusions are constantly evolving. They are not intended as absolute truths, but rather as the most likely explanations in the light of the current pool of information available to me.

As for not getting a CT scan, I have multiple reasons, which you are likely to find cop outs:

1) I'm poor and unemployed

2) I'm disinterested in systematically proving things to others. Even more so if I have to pay huge sums of money for it.

3) I already know that I'm right and that I'm getting results.

4) There will always be people who find a way to question whatever proof is brought forth for them. I'm not interested in catering to the demands of these people.

5) Whatever changes appear down the road, should be able to be seen in plain, imperfect pictures. If someone desires to scientifically quantify the precise change that is taking place, they can do it on their own skull. Such detailed data offers no value to me. 

It is what it is. You must understand that I'm not trying to please you. What you conclude by yourself is of complete irrelevance to me. The only purpose for my presence on this forum is to offer people a chance to see what is possible, and to help them achieve it. I respect your free will enough not to try to convince you that I must be right.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 4:59 pm
Martinez
Active Member
Posted by: Progress

As for not getting a CT scan, I have multiple reasons, which you are likely to find cop outs:

1) I'm poor and unemployed

2) I'm disinterested in systematically proving things to others. Even more so if I have to pay huge sums of money for it.

3) I already know that I'm right and that I'm getting results.

4) There will always be people who find a way to question whatever proof is brought forth for them. I'm not interested in catering to the demands of these people.

5) Whatever changes appear down the road, should be able to be seen in plain, imperfect pictures. If someone desires to scientifically quantify the precise change that is taking place, they can do it on their own skull. Such detailed data offers no value to me. 

It is what it is. You must understand that I'm not trying to please you. What you conclude by yourself is of complete irrelevance to me. The only purpose for my presence on this forum is to offer people a chance to see what is possible, and to help them achieve it. I respect your free will enough not to try to convince you that I must be right.

Why are you so upset? I have never asked you to please me and i don't pretend it. I have just proposed you a simple way to demostrate that your protocol works. If you dont want to provide us proofs ok. each of us will draw his own conclusions.

To me, a bit rude for a simple question.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 7:34 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Martinez
Posted by: Progress

As for not getting a CT scan, I have multiple reasons, which you are likely to find cop outs:

1) I'm poor and unemployed

2) I'm disinterested in systematically proving things to others. Even more so if I have to pay huge sums of money for it.

3) I already know that I'm right and that I'm getting results.

4) There will always be people who find a way to question whatever proof is brought forth for them. I'm not interested in catering to the demands of these people.

5) Whatever changes appear down the road, should be able to be seen in plain, imperfect pictures. If someone desires to scientifically quantify the precise change that is taking place, they can do it on their own skull. Such detailed data offers no value to me. 

It is what it is. You must understand that I'm not trying to please you. What you conclude by yourself is of complete irrelevance to me. The only purpose for my presence on this forum is to offer people a chance to see what is possible, and to help them achieve it. I respect your free will enough not to try to convince you that I must be right.

Why are you so upset? I have never asked you to please me and i don't pretend it. I have just proposed you a simple way to demostrate that your protocol works. If you dont want to provide us proofs ok. each of us will draw his own conclusions.

To me, a bit rude for a simple question.

I apologize if I came across in such way. My intent was not to hurt you, but to clearly and thoroughly answer your question. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 8:58 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

Bimax is not a phenotypical feature of anyone. It is CFD . You also once stated that bimax is excessive forward growth which is inaccurate in and of itself. Bimax is present when the palate is very narrown and a tongue thrust causes the incisors to procline. In people whose palate is wide and have proclined incisors, the mandible is in an ideal position and no bimax is present. Bimax = a downward grown face with teeth flaring. None of that is phenotypical .

It is present in many Asian populations but most of this is due to lifestyle and not genetics. No one is just simply born with bimax.

Also, if the maxilla is moving UP then the gonial angle is decreasing and teeth are getting closer to the nose. Did you not see midfacial shortening in the pic of Progress? I sure did. But this is the point I am making. 

Bimaxillary protrusion is a phenotypial feature, other wise what do you call this on the black fighter? 

There is a video lecture of Dr. Derek Mahoney where he describes Bimax protrusion and why it's impossible to fix. I will post it if I can find it.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 10:00 pm
mewchew
New Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: EddieMoney

Bimax is not a phenotypical feature of anyone. It is CFD . You also once stated that bimax is excessive forward growth which is inaccurate in and of itself. Bimax is present when the palate is very narrown and a tongue thrust causes the incisors to procline. In people whose palate is wide and have proclined incisors, the mandible is in an ideal position and no bimax is present. Bimax = a downward grown face with teeth flaring. None of that is phenotypical .

It is present in many Asian populations but most of this is due to lifestyle and not genetics. No one is just simply born with bimax.

Also, if the maxilla is moving UP then the gonial angle is decreasing and teeth are getting closer to the nose. Did you not see midfacial shortening in the pic of Progress? I sure did. But this is the point I am making. 

Bimaxillary protrusion is a phenotypial feature, other wise what do you call this on the black fighter? 

There is a video lecture of Dr. Derek Mahoney where he describes Bimax protrusion and why it's impossible to fix. I will post it if I can find it.

I am a WASP caucasian and  I have alveolar bimax protrusion with a gummy smile. I have straight teeth with no tipping of the teeth. None of my family has bimax protrusion, so how do you explain this?

Dr mew's video on the subject might be of interest : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5S1P1IIYHY

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 10:44 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: mewchew

I am a WASP caucasian and  I have alveolar bimax protrusion with a gummy smile. I have straight teeth with no tipping of the teeth. None of my family has bimax protrusion, so how do you explain this?

Dr mew's video on the subject might be of interest : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5S1P1IIYHY

Thanks for the link, it's a blast from the past.

In this video Dr. Mew is discussing bimax protrusion in the the teeth and alveolar bone. This is a functional condition and theoretically can be fixed by providing more space for the tongue. 

The condition I am illustrating in the picture above is a phenotypical feature. Unlike Caucasians,  some other racial groups have the skeletal bone extend from right under the nose (A point) forward on an angle.

It creates protrusion in the lips and it's completely normal. I know this picture is small, but look at the skull of black people under the nose and see how it slopes forward. That's what I am referring to.

EDIT:

By the way towards the middle of the video he vaguely references differences between racial groups and implys that it's all caused (bimax protrusion) by holding the tongue in different positions. That's of course not true, because if you look at primitive tribes living in isolation you will find that many of them exhibit bimax protrusion while having fully forward grown faces with perfect teeth.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/01/2019 11:10 pm
mewchew
New Member

So theoretically mewing can help the bimax protrusion thats related to improper tongue position. Whenever i suction the posterior of my tongue up to the palate I can feel a slight vacuum effect on my lips and a pressure on my top and bottom teeth. Is this lip vacuuming/suctioning working to pull the front teeth/alveolar back whilst the tongue simultaneously widens the palate?

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 2:19 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: mewchew

So theoretically mewing can help the bimax protrusion thats related to improper tongue position. Whenever i suction the posterior of my tongue up to the palate I can feel a slight vacuum effect on my lips and a pressure on my top and bottom teeth. Is this lip vacuuming/suctioning working to pull the front teeth/alveolar back whilst the tongue simultaneously widens the palate?

 

Yes the lips and facial muscles are responsible for pushing the teeth inward, so if you have more space they might be able to reduce alveolar protrusion. But, if you notice from Dr. Mew's video he says the solution to this condition is for the face to move up and forward. This will give extra space to the tongue, removing the cause for tongue thrusting.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 2:53 am
Slinky
Trusted Member

Found this on reddit

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 3:02 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress

(1) You have no way of concluding this. If you reject the possibility of changes on the basis of the non-identicality of the pics, you must also reject the possibility of no changes for the same reason. Otherwise your conclusion is biased. More fair, from your part, would be to say that no conclusion can be made from the pics I posted. And I would agree. Note that the pics were not originally posted with the intention of demonstrating change (otherwise I would've shaved my hair & beard), but to demonstrate the difficulty of superimposing progress pics.

(2) The relationship between the cranial bones is not absolute, (even if the size and shape of the individual bones was). Throughout your age, change in their relative position will occur based on the stress that is placed on the individual bones. Trauma to the head can instantly compress the cranium and affect the dynamic of the cranial bones. This is not some theory, but a commonly known fact. The only speculative aspect of this question is whether or not lack of postural habits can, over time, lead to similar compression of the cranium, and whether or not such change can be reversed by readapting proper posture. I'm not aware of anything that suggest that this could not be possible.

(3) That is completely subjective and will depend on your definition of better. I'm not interested in such argument.

(4) Note the bolded part and revisit my point. When the whole cranium is changing (I know, it's a premise you reject), then by looking at the face only, you fall to the same trap orthodontists do who, when evaluating malocclusion, only focus on the crowded teeth, instead of the big picture of the maxillary maldevelopment. As we know, it's a limited point of view that does everyone disservice. I fear you are sabotaging your understanding of the complexities of CFD by only focusing on measuring facial change.

(5) In my case, my intermolar width has increased from 34mm to 44 mm in the past two years.

1. I rejected the possibility of a recession because the pictures have been taken in different angles. I rejected the possibility of a change because your bones are not made of plastic. When I see two pictures of the same face with different looks I assume they are so because the person was in a different state or the pictures were taken from different angles, not that their bones changed.

2. Where do you get that mewing changes the head to the extent that forward growth can't be measured, which is what you are arguing against? Your previous comment was about a point about children. The whole Orthotropic debate is about getting the face up and forward, of what? The head.

3. The overwhelming majority are interested to look better, especially in view of the opposite gender. But as Dr. Mew argues health gains in the face should produce esthetic gains. Trust me, if that does not prove true, most of the traffic in this forum will dry up, you will still see me though 🙂 

4. I don't reject it entirely, I reject it would be to the extent that the face would not be visibly upward and forward of the head. To the point it can't be measured. Just look at Dr. Mike Mew's animation of faces moving up and forward or vice versa. Do you see the cranium changing as much as the face? Can you see how much the face extends forward of the cranium in the forward "good looking" face?

https://youtu.be/1-XkAno_290?t=42

Look at those two face and the two SNA angles they produce, exactly like Dr. John Mew's tracing of the modern versus ancient man, to the single digit. Forward growth shows in the face absolutely.

Exactly the same measurements Dr. Mew provides:

 

5. I wish you had the chance to document that.

Point in case some people try to use your pictures as evidence of forward growth and they are not.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 5:02 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

In cease you are interested:

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 5:15 am
MeMeMe
Eminent Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

In cease you are interested:

 

What was the timespan?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 8:27 am
Francybe92
Active Member
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

Thanks Slinky i always appreciate new before and after.

To me, same old story, different angle, different lighting, different head tilt. No skeletal movement and no result.

I think we really need a Q/A with Orthopedic to try to understand what bones are really capable of.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 2:03 pm
AlphaMinus
Estimable Member
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

Looking at this guy's pictures, I'm fascinated by the difference in people's ear/jaw position. Look how his ramus disappears into the ear like that. Mine extends upwards in front of the ear, it's as if my ear is set further back relative to the jaw. Is it that his lower jaw is severely recessed? Because mine is recessed (I can feel the bones moving in my ear and I have TMJ problems) even with the ramus extending up ahead of the ear - his looks like there must be horrible bone crunching and popping right in his ear. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 4:24 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

(1) You have no way of concluding this. If you reject the possibility of changes on the basis of the non-identicality of the pics, you must also reject the possibility of no changes for the same reason. Otherwise your conclusion is biased. More fair, from your part, would be to say that no conclusion can be made from the pics I posted. And I would agree. Note that the pics were not originally posted with the intention of demonstrating change (otherwise I would've shaved my hair & beard), but to demonstrate the difficulty of superimposing progress pics.

(2) The relationship between the cranial bones is not absolute, (even if the size and shape of the individual bones was). Throughout your age, change in their relative position will occur based on the stress that is placed on the individual bones. Trauma to the head can instantly compress the cranium and affect the dynamic of the cranial bones. This is not some theory, but a commonly known fact. The only speculative aspect of this question is whether or not lack of postural habits can, over time, lead to similar compression of the cranium, and whether or not such change can be reversed by readapting proper posture. I'm not aware of anything that suggest that this could not be possible.

(3) That is completely subjective and will depend on your definition of better. I'm not interested in such argument.

(4) Note the bolded part and revisit my point. When the whole cranium is changing (I know, it's a premise you reject), then by looking at the face only, you fall to the same trap orthodontists do who, when evaluating malocclusion, only focus on the crowded teeth, instead of the big picture of the maxillary maldevelopment. As we know, it's a limited point of view that does everyone disservice. I fear you are sabotaging your understanding of the complexities of CFD by only focusing on measuring facial change.

(5) In my case, my intermolar width has increased from 34mm to 44 mm in the past two years.

1. I rejected the possibility of a recession because the pictures have been taken in different angles. I rejected the possibility of a change because your bones are not made of plastic. When I see two pictures of the same face with different looks I assume they are so because the person was in a different state or the pictures were taken from different angles, not that their bones changed.

2. Where do you get that mewing changes the head to the extent that forward growth can't be measured, which is what you are arguing against? Your previous comment was about a point about children. The whole Orthotropic debate is about getting the face up and forward, of what? The head.

3. The overwhelming majority are interested to look better, especially in view of the opposite gender. But as Dr. Mew argues health gains in the face should produce esthetic gains. Trust me, if that does not prove true, most of the traffic in this forum will dry up, you will still see me though 🙂 

4. I don't reject it entirely, I reject it would be to the extent that the face would not be visibly upward and forward of the head. To the point it can't be measured. Just look at Dr. Mike Mew's animation of faces moving up and forward or vice versa. Do you see the cranium changing as much as the face? Can you see how much the face extends forward of the cranium in the forward "good looking" face?

https://youtu.be/1-XkAno_290?t=42

Look at those two face and the two SNA angles they produce, exactly like Dr. John Mew's tracing of the modern versus ancient man, to the single digit. Forward growth shows in the face absolutely.

Exactly the same measurements Dr. Mew provides:

 

5. I wish you had the chance to document that.

Point in case some people try to use your pictures as evidence of forward growth and they are not.

1. No further points from me. I acknowledge your view, but disagree for the forementioned reasons.

2. Sorry if I'm being hard to interpret - I'm not trying to imply that forward growth can't be measured. I'm arguing that markers of forward growth are not sufficient for quantifying change on the scale of the whole cranium. Much can change in the cranial structure without actual forward growth taking place. For me, the maxilla is moving upward, since I'm generating upward pressure against the sphenoid. I have no idea whether real forward growth can be achieved by mewing in adults, BUT I am 100% sure real cranial restructuring can be. Such restructuring may or may not result in the illusion of increased forward projection.

3. With that I agree. Yet, I understood that your point was that if my face is only moving upward and not forward, I'm not becoming better looking. This judgement depends on your subjective aesthetic sense, which while I respect, find to be of minimal conversational value.

4. I think it's fair to assume that in this comparison Mew's intention was to demonstrate the most obvious changes in facial structure, rather than the whole skull. As Mike has said, he currently has next to no understanding regarding the rest of the cranium and the changes that occur elsewhere in the skull during mewing. In the light of this, expecting such animation to highlight anything else than the facial changes would be unwise. Once again, I'm not arguing whether or not forward growth can be measured in the face, I'm arguing that forward growth is not the end all and be all of measuring cranial change. 

5. I have taken pics of my palate and smile, but these wouldn't have any value to you, or what do you think?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 6:21 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

In cease you are interested:

What program are you using to measure angles? I want to get this angle measured, based on superimposing the green angles there should be 5-10 degrees of difference:

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 6:35 pm
Francybe92
Active Member
Posted by: Progress

What program are you using to measure angles? I want to get this angle measured, based on superimposing the green angles there should be 5-10 degrees of difference:

From the lines you have drawn:

Regarding the software you can use Image J. Simple. It's is easy to use free and portable.

https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/download.html

Alternatively

Digimizer
https://www.digimizer.com/download.php

Always free, a bit more complete, installation required.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 7:38 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Francybe92
Posted by: Progress

What program are you using to measure angles? I want to get this angle measured, based on superimposing the green angles there should be 5-10 degrees of difference:

From the lines you have drawn:

Regarding the software you can use Image J. Simple. It's is easy to use free and portable.

https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/download.html

Alternatively

Digimizer
https://www.digimizer.com/download.php

Always free, a bit more complete, installation required.

Thanks.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 7:48 pm
Francybe92
Active Member

Astro Sky 6+ years mewing progress (from 16 to 22/23)

Pic found on a forum called looksmax

https://looksmax.org/threads/about-my-paid-programs.6165/#post-106518  

46003587_193090141626620_3194625493995356160_n.jpg42441907_155308448738123_8929577410312011776_o.jpg48369801_221138258821808_926146398154391552_o.jpg37884192_2189329288022508_1526124656203923456_n.jpg

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 8:53 pm
Slinky
Trusted Member
Posted by: Francybe92

Astro Sky 6+ years mewing progress (from 16 to 22/23)

Pic found on a forum called looksmax

https://looksmax.org/threads/about-my-paid-programs.6165/#post-106518  

46003587_193090141626620_3194625493995356160_n.jpg42441907_155308448738123_8929577410312011776_o.jpg48369801_221138258821808_926146398154391552_o.jpg37884192_2189329288022508_1526124656203923456_n.jpg

 

i dont see any midface reduction. He looks better due to lower BF and hypertrophied masseter muscles

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 11:41 pm
Slinky
Trusted Member
Posted by: MeMeMe
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Slinky

Found this on reddit

In cease you are interested:

 

What was the timespan?

3 months

https://www.reddit.com/r/orthotropics/comments/abq2on/20m_3_months_progress/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 02/01/2019 11:44 pm
Francybe92
Active Member
Posted by: Slinky
Posted by: Francybe92

Astro Sky 6+ years mewing progress (from 16 to 22/23)

Pic found on a forum called looksmax

https://looksmax.org/threads/about-my-paid-programs.6165/#post-106518  

46003587_193090141626620_3194625493995356160_n.jpg42441907_155308448738123_8929577410312011776_o.jpg48369801_221138258821808_926146398154391552_o.jpg37884192_2189329288022508_1526124656203923456_n.jpg

 

i dont see any midface reduction. He looks better due to lower BF and hypertrophied masseter muscles

Yes ,that's exactly what I thought. No changes in keys areas. Anyway, I have to say that (at least to me) his bones has grown a lot during this time span. Probably its just genetic. I saw this happened a thousand of times with people that i personally know between the age of 16 to 25. Completely unrecognizable and of course they didn't know anything about mewing.

Anyway, he is also a falim gum chewer and no one can say for sure if chewing + mewing had some impact on his bone growth.

To me, he definitely looks better. In doubt, I will continue to chew and mew 😆 

Brad Pitt 16

Risultati immagini per brad pitt 16 years old

Brad Pitt… i don't know probably between 25-30

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 12:45 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress

1. No further points from me. I acknowledge your view, but disagree for the forementioned reasons.

2. Sorry if I'm being hard to interpret - I'm not trying to imply that forward growth can't be measured. I'm arguing that markers of forward growth are not sufficient for quantifying change on the scale of the whole cranium. Much can change in the cranial structure without actual forward growth taking place. For me, the maxilla is moving upward, since I'm generating upward pressure against the sphenoid. I have no idea whether real forward growth can be achieved by mewing in adults, BUT I am 100% sure real cranial restructuring can be. Such restructuring may or may not result in the illusion of increased forward projection.

3. With that I agree. Yet, I understood that your point was that if my face is only moving upward and not forward, I'm not becoming better looking. This judgement depends on your subjective aesthetic sense, which while I respect, find to be of minimal conversational value.

4. I think it's fair to assume that in this comparison Mew's intention was to demonstrate the most obvious changes in facial structure, rather than the whole skull. As Mike has said, he currently has next to no understanding regarding the rest of the cranium and the changes that occur elsewhere in the skull during mewing. In the light of this, expecting such animation to highlight anything else than the facial changes would be unwise. Once again, I'm not arguing whether or not forward growth can be measured in the face, I'm arguing that forward growth is not the end all and be all of measuring cranial change. 

5. I have taken pics of my palate and smile, but these wouldn't have any value to you, or what do you think?

2. You are making so many assumptions there based on one comment by Dr. John Mew that's taken out of context. Plus, the mid face does not shorten without both upward and forward displacement of the maxilla taking place. That's what causes the apparent length of the mid face to shorten. 

3. You don't look different in the pictures. I expect that you would look better when your face moves up and forward.

4. No, because he traced them to actual heads (see picture) and you can see the cranium changing.

5. Actually this, and muscle tone changes to the lower third, are more important to share because it would prove the value of mewing. Those two changes can make a big difference on peoples esthetics and health as well.

I hope we can we agree that skeletal movement in the maxilla is a theory and not easy to achieve. If achieved, it should be clear to identify and measure, just like the results of surgery or growth correction on children.

When Doctors help a patient achieve forward growth they dont relay on appearance or teeth only to confirm this. They take x rays that show an increase in SNA angle or any other appropriate measurement.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 2:09 am
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: Progress
Posted by: Francybe92
Posted by: Progress

What program are you using to measure angles? I want to get this angle measured, based on superimposing the green angles there should be 5-10 degrees of difference:

From the lines you have drawn:

Regarding the software you can use Image J. Simple. It's is easy to use free and portable.

https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/download.html

Alternatively

Digimizer
https://www.digimizer.com/download.php

Always free, a bit more complete, installation required.

Thanks.

I use photoshop, but as @Francybe92 said there are simpler and free programs that can do this.

The angle you are measuring is called gonail angle, it's never measured in photometric soft tissue analysis, because the whole area is movable. A person can change the angle by slightly opening his jaws without the his lips coming apart. Instead the the lower third angle is used in this case. It's angle D in the attached illustration.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 2:18 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: mewchew

I am a WASP caucasian and  I have alveolar bimax protrusion with a gummy smile. I have straight teeth with no tipping of the teeth. None of my family has bimax protrusion, so how do you explain this?

Dr mew's video on the subject might be of interest : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5S1P1IIYHY

Thanks for the link, it's a blast from the past.

In this video Dr. Mew is discussing bimax protrusion in the the teeth and alveolar bone. This is a functional condition and theoretically can be fixed by providing more space for the tongue. 

The condition I am illustrating in the picture above is a phenotypical feature. Unlike Caucasians,  some other racial groups have the skeletal bone extend from right under the nose (A point) forward on an angle.

It creates protrusion in the lips and it's completely normal. I know this picture is small, but look at the skull of black people under the nose and see how it slopes forward. That's what I am referring to.

EDIT:

By the way towards the middle of the video he vaguely references differences between racial groups and implys that it's all caused (bimax protrusion) by holding the tongue in different positions. That's of course not true, because if you look at primitive tribes living in isolation you will find that many of them exhibit bimax protrusion while having fully forward grown faces with perfect teeth.

The research of Weston Price says otherwise. In tribal people with perfect palates and teeth no bimax is present at all but rather it is West Africans exposed to modern diets that exhibit those features. Take a look at the difference between Africans, Caucasian, and Asians

Neither if more forward grown at all. What happens is that Africans have larger dentition with smaller mandibles (thus more neotenous) than Europeans. In addition to this the pogonion of the African is very small compared to the European. This isn't bimaxillary protrusion but rather just differences in millimeters of bone in the mandible and in the teeth.

In addition to thus Africans have absent brow protrusion (due to enhanced facial neoteny) and more rounded bulbous foreheads. This makes their soft tissue protrude more because the brow isn't there to balance it out. This is also why the African profile is fleshy protrusive while the European is bony protrusive .

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 4:30 pm
Progress
Member Moderator
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: Progress

1. No further points from me. I acknowledge your view, but disagree for the forementioned reasons.

2. Sorry if I'm being hard to interpret - I'm not trying to imply that forward growth can't be measured. I'm arguing that markers of forward growth are not sufficient for quantifying change on the scale of the whole cranium. Much can change in the cranial structure without actual forward growth taking place. For me, the maxilla is moving upward, since I'm generating upward pressure against the sphenoid. I have no idea whether real forward growth can be achieved by mewing in adults, BUT I am 100% sure real cranial restructuring can be. Such restructuring may or may not result in the illusion of increased forward projection.

3. With that I agree. Yet, I understood that your point was that if my face is only moving upward and not forward, I'm not becoming better looking. This judgement depends on your subjective aesthetic sense, which while I respect, find to be of minimal conversational value.

4. I think it's fair to assume that in this comparison Mew's intention was to demonstrate the most obvious changes in facial structure, rather than the whole skull. As Mike has said, he currently has next to no understanding regarding the rest of the cranium and the changes that occur elsewhere in the skull during mewing. In the light of this, expecting such animation to highlight anything else than the facial changes would be unwise. Once again, I'm not arguing whether or not forward growth can be measured in the face, I'm arguing that forward growth is not the end all and be all of measuring cranial change. 

5. I have taken pics of my palate and smile, but these wouldn't have any value to you, or what do you think?

2. You are making so many assumptions there based on one comment by Dr. John Mew that's taken out of context. Plus, the mid face does not shorten without both upward and forward displacement of the maxilla taking place. That's what causes the apparent length of the mid face to shorten. 

3. You don't look different in the pictures. I expect that you would look better when your face moves up and forward.

4. No, because he traced them to actual heads (see picture) and you can see the cranium changing.

5. Actually this, and muscle tone changes to the lower third, are more important to share because it would prove the value of mewing. Those two changes can make a big difference on peoples esthetics and health as well.

I hope we can we agree that skeletal movement in the maxilla is a theory and not easy to achieve. If achieved, it should be clear to identify and measure, just like the results of surgery or growth correction on children.

When Doctors help a patient achieve forward growth they dont relay on appearance or teeth only to confirm this. They take x rays that show an increase in SNA angle or any other appropriate measurement.

2. Mew's views are not related to this statement. It's my own view. I don't see reason to assume forward and upward movement to be so inter-dependent on each other, especially if inter-maxillary sutural growth is involved. I maintain that the change occurring from mewing is dependable on the rest of the cranial structure, and the extent to which growth from various cranial sutures has already taken place by the time tongue posture is adapted. I could, of course, be wrong, but this is not evident yet.

3. Technically I DO LOOK different in the pictures. That's the point. I already explained this to you: I'm not claiming that those pictures demonstrate actual change, but the difficulty of superimposing pics in a useful way, which is an issue I'm growing more aware of day by day.

4. You don't though, not to any meaningful extent. The only thing you see in the pic is a few shapes and a loose illustration of one form of CFD. It's not a comprehensive explanation. It does not even attempt to capture the subtleties of the issue. Which is is understandable: Mew is, above all, an orthodontist, not a craniologist.

"I hope we can we agree that skeletal movement in the maxilla is a theory and not easy to achieve. If achieved, it should be clear to identify and measure, just like the results of surgery or growth correction on children."

Definitely. However, such changes will have to be massive before they become undeniable in pics taken at home. I know, it's a shame that I don't have better means to document my case with. I do what I can. If others get value from the things I share, it's a net benefit. If they don't, nothing is lost.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 5:08 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

The research of Weston Price says otherwise. In tribal people with perfect palates and teeth no bimax is present at all but rather it is West Africans exposed to modern diets that exhibit those features. Take a look at the difference between Africans, Caucasian, and Asians

 

Neither if more forward grown at all. What happens is that Africans have larger dentition with smaller mandibles (thus more neotenous) than Europeans. In addition to this the pogonion of the African is very small compared to the European. This isn't bimaxillary protrusion but rather just differences in millimeters of bone in the mandible and in the teeth.

In addition to thus Africans have absent brow protrusion (due to enhanced facial neoteny) and more rounded bulbous foreheads. This makes their soft tissue protrude more because the brow isn't there to balance it out. This is also why the African profile is fleshy protrusive while the European is bony protrusive .

 

 

Where is this research from Dr. Price that specifically says bi-maxilliry protrusion is never present in perfectly grown faces? Below is a picture of two men from a primitive tribe living in West Papua New Guinea exactly as people did 10,000 years ago. He and his entire tribe have skeletal protrusion. You can read more about primitive tribes in my post about proof for Craniofacail Dystrophy.

http://www.aljabri.com/blog/what-is-the-proof-that-craniofacial-dystrophy-is-real/

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 10:24 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: Abdulrahman
Posted by: EddieMoney

The research of Weston Price says otherwise. In tribal people with perfect palates and teeth no bimax is present at all but rather it is West Africans exposed to modern diets that exhibit those features. Take a look at the difference between Africans, Caucasian, and Asians

 

Neither if more forward grown at all. What happens is that Africans have larger dentition with smaller mandibles (thus more neotenous) than Europeans. In addition to this the pogonion of the African is very small compared to the European. This isn't bimaxillary protrusion but rather just differences in millimeters of bone in the mandible and in the teeth.

In addition to thus Africans have absent brow protrusion (due to enhanced facial neoteny) and more rounded bulbous foreheads. This makes their soft tissue protrude more because the brow isn't there to balance it out. This is also why the African profile is fleshy protrusive while the European is bony protrusive .

 

 

Where is this research from Dr. Price that specifically says bi-maxilliry protrusion is never present in perfectly grown faces? Below is a picture of two men from a primitive tribe living in West Papua New Guinea exactly as people did 10,000 years ago. He and his entire tribe have skeletal protrusion. You can read more about primitive tribes in my post about proof for Craniofacail Dystrophy.

http://www.aljabri.com/blog/what-is-the-proof-that-craniofacial-dystrophy-is-real/

Same as before . NOT bimax. Humans across the world have nasolabial angles like this no matter what phenotype. The difference here is 1)pogonion strength. Besides, the term for this is prognathism which is found in ALL human populations from Africa to Asia and all points between.

This above is not genetic. It is CFD. Teeth flaring forward isn't the only issue here. This face is downward grown. Prognathism basically is just teeth angulation. By itself with a healthy palate width and vertical height it actually is aesthetic. Aka with a short face.

 

Europeans (or Americans of descent) with prognathism . All that changes is pogonion length .

ReplyQuote
Posted : 03/01/2019 11:15 pm
tgw
 tgw
Active Member

It looks like your cranium and face both rotated in a clockwise direction and your face looks flatter. Since your beard is covering your ramus, we can't see how it rotated.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 2:09 am
mewchew
New Member

would it be fair to say the difference between CFD bimax protrusion and normal growth seen in tribes in africa is downward growth and a gummy smile?

Or is there evidence to show that a gummy smile is genetic?

And is this a result of narrow palate?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 2:19 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: mewchew

would it be fair to say the difference between CFD bimax protrusion and normal growth seen in tribes in africa is downward growth and a gummy smile?

Or is there evidence to show that a gummy smile is genetic?

And is this a result of narrow palate?

Basically . Bimax like the above is not normal development . All human populations have prognathic jaws naturally. The difference is that Africans have a weaker chin so the soft tissue makes the upper lip protrude more and the nasolabial angle acute. This does happen in bimax except that bimax comes with lip incompetence and teeth that can poke out of the mouth at times. Tribal Africans have no such thing. With perfect teeth their profile is still straight even if the teeth angle forward. Bimax profiles are not straight and have the nasolabial angle incredibly acute and have the face angled oddly in favor of the upper lip. 

Healthy African profiles on the other hand have a balance between fleshy features and youthful bone development (weak brow and chin). The jaws are protrusive in a healthy way, unlike bimax. For example you can tell this man's face is not collapsed unlike the bimax girl above. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 12:13 pm
Ayla31 liked
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Tribal Africans always have better facial development than their "modern" and urban cousins. 

Notice the short and round/ neotenous faces of the tribal Africans compared to the elongated and gummy smile faces with bimax of the modern ones.

The tribal faces resemble the African skull below much better anyway. Notice the profile is still straight as human profiles are intended to be with optimal development. 

 

Notice how all phenotypes have "prognathic" faces when the average skulls are considered . Actually, both the European and African have a vertically short maxilla. The Asian has a long maxilla vertically due to the colder climate adaptation (air has more time to be warmed if it enters the face vertically vs horizontal like European and African faces).

The African and Asian seem to constitute ends of metric extremes and the European (basically Mediterranean) skull constitutes a metric intermediate it seems. The European has the facial height of the African but the lower jaw more similar to the Asian pogonion. 

Basically the tropically adapted African is the short round faced extreme while the dry steppe adapted Asian is the square and long faced extreme. Long ffaces are more suited to the steppe climate due to the cold air being warmed by entering the nostrils directly underneath the nose. Tropical warm air allows the face to stay short as the it is already warm and can be breathed horizontal. Now between this lies the Mediterranean/ oceanic more moderate climate adapted European (explaining the traits shared between them and the other two phenotypes). This is why the features are intermediate. So these differences do exist. For example some people's natural midface is meant to be longer. However we can all be deficient some way. 

No matter the climactic adaptations all profiles are forward grown natural faces.  Bimax lengthens the face. It doesn't move it forward. What happens is that bad neck posture is adapted and the face appears more inclined. But a good profile has a natural incline in a chin tuck. A bimax profile will always have the jaw weakly projecting when posture is corrected. A natural prognathic profile will show the jaw as strong. 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 4:35 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

Same as before . NOT bimax. Humans across the world have nasolabial angles like this no matter what phenotype. The difference here is 1)pogonion strength. Besides, the term for this is prognathism which is found in ALL human populations from Africa to Asia and all points between.

This above is not genetic. It is CFD. Teeth flaring forward isn't the only issue here. This face is downward grown. Prognathism basically is just teeth angulation. By itself with a healthy palate width and vertical height it actually is aesthetic. Aka with a short face.

Europeans (or Americans of descent) with prognathism . All that changes is pogonion length .

That's bimaxlliry protrusion, and it is phenotypical of the tribesman racial group. People do not look like that in other racial groups, why? Because as the picture I previously posted illustrates their bones shape and dimensions are different. The placement of teeth and bony landmark is different. Research the different phenotypes in cephalometric analysis to learn this. 

Look at your own examples that you post of Caucasians with so called bimaxlliry protrusion. They are nothing like the tribes man or the Asian woman. Not even a strong pogonion point can hide that. In fact the tribes man has a strong pogonion. If you were to check it would extend well past his teeth roots but you don't notice it because of his phenotypical bimaxlliry protrusion.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 11:36 pm
Abdulrahman
Reputable Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

Healthy African profiles on the other hand have a balance between fleshy features and youthful bone development (weak brow and chin). The jaws are protrusive in a healthy way, unlike bimax. For example you can tell this man's face is not collapsed unlike the bimax girl above. 

That's text book example of bimaxlliry protrusion. And if you notice his A point and Pog point line up which indicated good mandible and chin position. People with his condition, especially Asians, go to the doctors all the time asking for the lips to be brought back even though their occlusion would be perfect.

Doctors label this case prototypical bimaxlliry protrusion and explain to the patient that there is nothing wrong with them and that if they were to have teeth extractions to fix this problem they would be worse off from an orthodontic perspective.

my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/01/2019 11:42 pm
Page 3 / 4