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.
@greensmoothies I get the expression. I'm trying to understand what you are referring to with it. When users correct the technique of another user, what is the particular goalpost that is being changed? Given how no one has been suggesting that when you press harder your technique should suddenly change, if someone is achieving undesirable results, would it not be a reasonable assumption that they must not be posturing their tongue in a way that Orthotropicists and myofunctional therapists guide?
As I have emphasized, tongue posture is the same exact posture regardless of the intensity it is performed with. Whether you are posturing hard or gently, undesirable results would in both cases mean that you are doing something wrong, no?
@greensmoothies I get the expression. I'm trying to understand what you are referring to with it. When users correct the technique of another user, what is the particular goalpost that is being changed? Given how no one has been suggesting that when you press harder your technique should suddenly change, if someone is achieving undesirable results, would it not be a reasonable assumption that they must not be posturing their tongue in a way that Orthotropicists and myofunctional therapists guide?
As I have emphasized, tongue posture is the same exact posture regardless of the intensity it is performed with. Whether you are posturing hard or gently, undesirable results would in both cases mean that you are doing something wrong, no?
Unsure how I can further clarify beyond my previous post, apologies.
2nd bold point - An issue here I'm seeing is: we are discussing results alone at the exclusion of other factors some may wish to consider (eg: injury potential, emotional and physical energy investment, potential for slowed results, possibly other things).
My experience starting at a low imw, 29mm, is that it was impossible to engage the posterior 3rd of the tongue. So it is commonly accepted this is not ideal tongue posture, but yet the only way out is through somehow. Mike Mew said in OP "function causes change." I also believe that change (increasing imw, perhaps other factors) permits function. As time has gone on, key concepts of mewing have been introduced. Mike Mew didn't introduce the suction hold technique until 2 years after I began mewing. So again, doing it wrong, though unavoidably so save for getting a device to help me through the dysfunction, an approach that didn't occur to me when it counted.
BTW this is also a reason I cooked up in my head in favour of hard mewing. Applying more force I would really be giving my best effort and then I'd get from point A to B faster. But now looking back I have no way of knowing if that's what truly happened. Worse yet, perhaps my results were even slowed since there exists some evidence to suggest this such as abdulrahman's experience, some suggestion from studies and what the FAGGA dentist mentions here.
I'd also like to add there isn't much consideration being made for emotional and physical investment, but it could be a mistake to consider results at the exclusion of such other notable factors. My results doubled after introducing hard mewing, but how can I be sure if hard mewing is what did this? There are other things to consider such as what I was alluding to above, that change permits function, and possibly additional practices confusing the result (I began to try to sleep mew at around the same time as beginning to hard mew). To do this hard mewing is simply more effort than regular mewing and we do not know if it's worth that extra effort. As it is it's already quite difficult to climb out of oral dysfunction. Yes, hard mewing worked for me if you just consider that my progress increased, doubled the next year even. But at what cost? Did I perhaps narrowly escape injury? And then consider I would be constantly thinking about pressing my tongue which is super annoying. Or reluctant to open my mouth at times to speak because I had a good hard mew goin' on. Someone may pipe in about balance in all things or some other esoteric platitude, when Jamo and so many other hard mewer advocates spoke about... guess what? You've got to fight for it. And these kind of go big or go home type sentiments. Now there is some romanticising the endeavour of hard mewing as being some kind of pioneer, well... maybe I'm guilty of sciencism, but I'd prefer to find out what is optimal from experts or prominent researchers established in relevant fields like osteopathy, dentistry etc and adjust my actions based on what I glean from their knowledge base after falling for the hard mewing meme. Once bitten twice shy, I guess. It was desperation and ignorance that got me in to hard mewing, and a burden I regret placing on myself.
Remember this pain... and let it activate you.
Anything is of course possible. People risk their wellbeing in everything they choose to do regardless of whether their methods stand on current scientific understanding or their subjective conclusions.
Polyunsaturated fats were long hailed as the healthiest forms of fat, because research showed that they lowered cholesterol. Decades later, it is learned that they also cause a variety of illnesses from hormonal imbalances to cancer. Someone going by their intuition could have realized this long time ago: PUFA oils taste terrible, thus they can't be that good for the body.
The point I am making is that choosing to rely heavily on either objective knowledge or subjective intuition is always risky. It is good to try to maintain a healthy balance between the two. If intuition is unsupported by knowledge, or if knowledge is unsupported by intuition, there is often a cause for concern.
We are in agreement that we are being our own lab experiments. We both understand that we're walking on uncharted territory (I can only hope others understand this too). You prefer entering this territory through careful examination, taking a step forward only after you have confirmed that your previous step landed on solid ground. I prefer going forward and figuring things out in real time, being vigilant for the first signs of danger. Both approaches are fine in my eyes. They just have different kind of drives behind them.
Tell me about it. I spent years suffering from poor medical advice given by doctors and my health only improved when I decided to take things into my own hands, but there is a catch. I still had to rely on doctors for knowledge, except this time I was very selective from who I get it.
Good doctors were for a long time questioning the research that vilified natural fats such as butter in favor of PUFA oils. I see Dr. Mike Mew as the same, he is questioning the status quo and trying to provide alternatives. His father achieved that with children.
To be clear, what do you view as the original goal post in this case?
The original goal post was for people to get their tongue on the roof of their mouth and have it stick there and because many did not understand the steps Dr. Mew explained (he could do better in that regard) or it was too hard to perform, they started improvising and slowly "hard mewing" came about as a diversion.
I say diversion because it has not helped people posture the tongue correctly, it just created a new thing. And this thing is in stark contrast to natural, gentle, and subconscious tongue posturing.
Following the analogy "you didn't do it right" one can say people resorted to "hard mewing" because they struggled to mew correctly. They didn't have good body posture, didn't know how to perform functional exercises, struggled with tongue posturing techniques, maybe had a tongue tie, were severely limited in their palate width, etc.
Whatever the reason they just "didn't do it right" and resorted to "hard mewing" as a solution. Except Dr. Mike Mew seems to be saying in the Q&A above that "hard mewing" is fundamentally wrong.
my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/
Basically everyone has three choices:
1)Hard mew at their own peril
2)Soft mew at their own peril
3)Stop mewing at their own peril
@greensmoothies I get the expression. I'm trying to understand what you are referring to with it. When users correct the technique of another user, what is the particular goalpost that is being changed? Given how no one has been suggesting that when you press harder your technique should suddenly change, if someone is achieving undesirable results, would it not be a reasonable assumption that they must not be posturing their tongue in a way that Orthotropicists and myofunctional therapists guide?
As I have emphasized, tongue posture is the same exact posture regardless of the intensity it is performed with. Whether you are posturing hard or gently, undesirable results would in both cases mean that you are doing something wrong, no?
Unsure how I can further clarify beyond my previous post, apologies.
2nd bold point - An issue here I'm seeing is: we are discussing results alone at the exclusion of other factors some may wish to consider (eg: injury potential, emotional and physical energy investment, potential for slowed results, possibly other things).
My experience starting at a low imw, 29mm, is that it was impossible to engage the posterior 3rd of the tongue. So it is commonly accepted this is not ideal tongue posture, but yet the only way out is through somehow. Mike Mew said in OP "function causes change." I also believe that change (increasing imw, perhaps other factors) permits function. As time has gone on, key concepts of mewing have been introduced. Mike Mew didn't introduce the suction hold technique until 2 years after I began mewing. So again, doing it wrong, though unavoidably so save for getting a device to help me through the dysfunction, an approach that didn't occur to me when it counted.
BTW this is also a reason I cooked up in my head in favour of hard mewing. Applying more force I would really be giving my best effort and then I'd get from point A to B faster. But now looking back I have no way of knowing if that's what truly happened. Worse yet, perhaps my results were even slowed since there exists some evidence to suggest this such as abdulrahman's experience, some suggestion from studies and what the FAGGA dentist mentions here.
I'd also like to add there isn't much consideration being made for emotional and physical investment, but it could be a mistake to consider results at the exclusion of such other notable factors. My results doubled after introducing hard mewing, but how can I be sure if hard mewing is what did this? There are other things to consider such as what I was alluding to above, that change permits function, and possibly additional practices confusing the result (I began to try to sleep mew at around the same time as beginning to hard mew). To do this hard mewing is simply more effort than regular mewing and we do not know if it's worth that extra effort. As it is it's already quite difficult to climb out of oral dysfunction. Yes, hard mewing worked for me if you just consider that my progress increased, doubled the next year even. But at what cost? Did I perhaps narrowly escape injury? And then consider I would be constantly thinking about pressing my tongue which is super annoying. Or reluctant to open my mouth at times to speak because I had a good hard mew goin' on. Someone may pipe in about balance in all things or some other esoteric platitude, when Jamo and so many other hard mewer advocates spoke about... guess what? You've got to fight for it. And these kind of go big or go home type sentiments. Now there is some romanticising the endeavour of hard mewing as being some kind of pioneer, well... maybe I'm guilty of sciencism, but I'd prefer to find out what is optimal from experts or prominent researchers established in relevant fields like osteopathy, dentistry etc and adjust my actions based on what I glean from their knowledge base after falling for the hard mewing meme. Once bitten twice shy, I guess. It was desperation and ignorance that got me in to hard mewing, and a burden I regret placing on myself.
Yo I'm with those guys. Started out about 8 months ago with a very deformed face with craniofacial dystrophy (I made a thread) and I've been mewing hard to restore my proper form and function and now for the first time since I was a kid I can breath through both nostrils ( I had a septoplasty at 19 and it barely helped, I'm almost 26 now ). I started off at such a bad point that hard mewing was the only option and it took me out of the hole I was in.
@greensmoothies I get the expression. I'm trying to understand what you are referring to with it. When users correct the technique of another user, what is the particular goalpost that is being changed? Given how no one has been suggesting that when you press harder your technique should suddenly change, if someone is achieving undesirable results, would it not be a reasonable assumption that they must not be posturing their tongue in a way that Orthotropicists and myofunctional therapists guide?
As I have emphasized, tongue posture is the same exact posture regardless of the intensity it is performed with. Whether you are posturing hard or gently, undesirable results would in both cases mean that you are doing something wrong, no?
Unsure how I can further clarify beyond my previous post, apologies.
2nd bold point - An issue here I'm seeing is: we are discussing results alone at the exclusion of other factors some may wish to consider (eg: injury potential, emotional and physical energy investment, potential for slowed results, possibly other things).
My experience starting at a low imw, 29mm, is that it was impossible to engage the posterior 3rd of the tongue. So it is commonly accepted this is not ideal tongue posture, but yet the only way out is through somehow. Mike Mew said in OP "function causes change." I also believe that change (increasing imw, perhaps other factors) permits function. As time has gone on, key concepts of mewing have been introduced. Mike Mew didn't introduce the suction hold technique until 2 years after I began mewing. So again, doing it wrong, though unavoidably so save for getting a device to help me through the dysfunction, an approach that didn't occur to me when it counted.
BTW this is also a reason I cooked up in my head in favour of hard mewing. Applying more force I would really be giving my best effort and then I'd get from point A to B faster. But now looking back I have no way of knowing if that's what truly happened. Worse yet, perhaps my results were even slowed since there exists some evidence to suggest this such as abdulrahman's experience, some suggestion from studies and what the FAGGA dentist mentions here.
I'd also like to add there isn't much consideration being made for emotional and physical investment, but it could be a mistake to consider results at the exclusion of such other notable factors. My results doubled after introducing hard mewing, but how can I be sure if hard mewing is what did this? There are other things to consider such as what I was alluding to above, that change permits function, and possibly additional practices confusing the result (I began to try to sleep mew at around the same time as beginning to hard mew). To do this hard mewing is simply more effort than regular mewing and we do not know if it's worth that extra effort. As it is it's already quite difficult to climb out of oral dysfunction. Yes, hard mewing worked for me if you just consider that my progress increased, doubled the next year even. But at what cost? Did I perhaps narrowly escape injury? And then consider I would be constantly thinking about pressing my tongue which is super annoying. Or reluctant to open my mouth at times to speak because I had a good hard mew goin' on. Someone may pipe in about balance in all things or some other esoteric platitude, when Jamo and so many other hard mewer advocates spoke about... guess what? You've got to fight for it. And these kind of go big or go home type sentiments. Now there is some romanticising the endeavour of hard mewing as being some kind of pioneer, well... maybe I'm guilty of sciencism, but I'd prefer to find out what is optimal from experts or prominent researchers established in relevant fields like osteopathy, dentistry etc and adjust my actions based on what I glean from their knowledge base after falling for the hard mewing meme. Once bitten twice shy, I guess. It was desperation and ignorance that got me in to hard mewing, and a burden I regret placing on myself.
Yo I'm with those guys. Started out about 8 months ago with a very deformed face with craniofacial dystrophy (I made a thread) and I've been mewing hard to restore my proper form and function and now for the first time since I was a kid I can breath through both nostrils ( I had a septoplasty at 19 and it barely helped, I'm almost 26 now ). I started off at such a bad point that hard mewing was the only option and it took me out of the hole I was in.
@greensmoothies I get the expression. I'm trying to understand what you are referring to with it. When users correct the technique of another user, what is the particular goalpost that is being changed? Given how no one has been suggesting that when you press harder your technique should suddenly change, if someone is achieving undesirable results, would it not be a reasonable assumption that they must not be posturing their tongue in a way that Orthotropicists and myofunctional therapists guide?
As I have emphasized, tongue posture is the same exact posture regardless of the intensity it is performed with. Whether you are posturing hard or gently, undesirable results would in both cases mean that you are doing something wrong, no?
Unsure how I can further clarify beyond my previous post, apologies.
2nd bold point - An issue here I'm seeing is: we are discussing results alone at the exclusion of other factors some may wish to consider (eg: injury potential, emotional and physical energy investment, potential for slowed results, possibly other things).
My experience starting at a low imw, 29mm, is that it was impossible to engage the posterior 3rd of the tongue. So it is commonly accepted this is not ideal tongue posture, but yet the only way out is through somehow. Mike Mew said in OP "function causes change." I also believe that change (increasing imw, perhaps other factors) permits function. As time has gone on, key concepts of mewing have been introduced. Mike Mew didn't introduce the suction hold technique until 2 years after I began mewing. So again, doing it wrong, though unavoidably so save for getting a device to help me through the dysfunction, an approach that didn't occur to me when it counted.
BTW this is also a reason I cooked up in my head in favour of hard mewing. Applying more force I would really be giving my best effort and then I'd get from point A to B faster. But now looking back I have no way of knowing if that's what truly happened. Worse yet, perhaps my results were even slowed since there exists some evidence to suggest this such as abdulrahman's experience, some suggestion from studies and what the FAGGA dentist mentions here.
I'd also like to add there isn't much consideration being made for emotional and physical investment, but it could be a mistake to consider results at the exclusion of such other notable factors. My results doubled after introducing hard mewing, but how can I be sure if hard mewing is what did this? There are other things to consider such as what I was alluding to above, that change permits function, and possibly additional practices confusing the result (I began to try to sleep mew at around the same time as beginning to hard mew). To do this hard mewing is simply more effort than regular mewing and we do not know if it's worth that extra effort. As it is it's already quite difficult to climb out of oral dysfunction. Yes, hard mewing worked for me if you just consider that my progress increased, doubled the next year even. But at what cost? Did I perhaps narrowly escape injury? And then consider I would be constantly thinking about pressing my tongue which is super annoying. Or reluctant to open my mouth at times to speak because I had a good hard mew goin' on. Someone may pipe in about balance in all things or some other esoteric platitude, when Jamo and so many other hard mewer advocates spoke about... guess what? You've got to fight for it. And these kind of go big or go home type sentiments. Now there is some romanticising the endeavour of hard mewing as being some kind of pioneer, well... maybe I'm guilty of sciencism, but I'd prefer to find out what is optimal from experts or prominent researchers established in relevant fields like osteopathy, dentistry etc and adjust my actions based on what I glean from their knowledge base after falling for the hard mewing meme. Once bitten twice shy, I guess. It was desperation and ignorance that got me in to hard mewing, and a burden I regret placing on myself.
Yo I'm with those guys. Started out about 8 months ago with a very deformed face with craniofacial dystrophy (I made a thread) and I've been mewing hard to restore my proper form and function and now for the first time since I was a kid I can breath through both nostrils ( I had a septoplasty at 19 and it barely helped, I'm almost 26 now ). I started off at such a bad point that hard mewing was the only option and it took me out of the hole I was in.
I am just curious, you read my post you replied to, yes? And you saw the links I posted. Perhaps even clicked on them, perused the content. So how is it that when presented with scientific evidence that suggests hard mewing is counterproductive, and the experiences people posted here in this thread about their negative experience with hard mewing, that you have no comment toward this? It is suggestive of cognitive dissonance. I've been through dysfunction too and know now that it was impossible for me to think clearly during the dysfunction, but at the time I was incapable of recognising this. Simply said, you don't know what you don't know. I had true-believer syndrome when it came to hard mewing. After realising how effective simply adhering to mewing's ancillary techniques are when consistently applied, but with a fraction of the effort investment compared to hard mewing, I could understand that I was vulnerable and lead down the garden path. Perhaps it can be said that this hard mewing concept was presented in good faith, I deserved to waste my time and energy with hard mewing for being so gullible, desperate etc and maybe that is fair enough. But how is it good faith for these prominent hard mewers to present their results in a way which is quite frankly misleading? And you have no comment toward that, either.
Remember this pain... and let it activate you.
I was just sharing anecdotal evidence on my journey. One day I'll finish dental school and make a difference with what I know, but first I need to make myself an example like Mike mew. I don't always hard mew btw, I try to maintain correct posture throguhout the day and hardmew at times like when I lift or am watching a YouTube video.
I was just sharing anecdotal evidence on my journey. One day I'll finish dental school and make a difference with what I know, but first I need to make myself an example like Mike mew. I don't always hard mew btw, I try to maintain correct posture throguhout the day and hardmew at times like when I lift or am watching a YouTube video.
So you hard mew little during the day but your initial post implies you believe it made your progress, in your words it was the "only option and it took [you] out of the hole [you're] in."
It's seemingly natural to push with the tongue as if in counter balance to forces from lifting objects, walking/running etc. I've wondered if tongue posture could be a missing link for runners that over time develop a worsened facial appearance.
But to sit and hard mew isn't natural, why not devote the YouTube video time to tougue chewing instead?
Remember this pain... and let it activate you.
Mew likes to extrapolate a lot without backing things up. Although he is ultimately right bc he says this will take several years and so... sort of an insurance, who the h3ll got years for this?
People with nerve damage are one extreme of the negative, who the hell says the exactly opposite will take place with exact opposite forces? Why the majority of the changes happens in the first couple of months? You hit a diminishing return point very fast with this, so people are eager to think this is the real deal and go to gospel about it. You get a new stimuli you adapt to it and soon the inside architecture the form the thickness adapt to better resist with the least ammount of resources. He cites blood vessels forming canals in the bone and attributes the small compression over a lot of time creating that groove. I dunnobouthat
Why Mew decline to answer the question of bone vs sutural growth? bc he knows whats up. Pretty much all he says is spot on minus a few things.
If you don't use your bones you become osteoporotic but when do you use the bones of your cranium? Some of you folks should hit a wall with thy foreheads several times a day and see what happens, boxers have thicker skulls right? Thicker humerii as well. But I'm guessing there's a discrepancy between how the humerus and skull thickness were "achieved". Functional matrix theory but with some caveats.
Mew likes to extrapolate a lot without backing things up. Although he is ultimately right bc he says this will take several years and so... sort of an insurance, who the h3ll got years for this?
People with nerve damage are one extreme of the negative, who the hell says the exactly opposite will take place with exact opposite forces? Why the majority of the changes happens in the first couple of months? You hit a diminishing return point very fast with this, so people are eager to think this is the real deal and go to gospel about it. You get a new stimuli you adapt to it and soon the inside architecture the form the thickness adapt to better resist with the least ammount of resources. He cites blood vessels forming canals in the bone and attributes the small compression over a lot of time creating that groove. I dunnobouthat
Why Mew decline to answer the question of bone vs sutural growth? bc he knows whats up. Pretty much all he says is spot on minus a few things.
If you don't use your bones you become osteoporotic but when do you use the bones of your cranium? Some of you folks should hit a wall with thy foreheads several times a day and see what happens, boxers have thicker skulls right? Thicker humerii as well. But I'm guessing there's a discrepancy between how the humerus and skull thickness were "achieved". Functional matrix theory but with some caveats.
I can move my maxilla up. It's not friggen brain science... or maybe it is. But why the crap would you. LeFort 1 doesn't just jam it up! There's precious cargo up there. So the whole premise this is founded on is junk science gone wrong. All of it. He jumps WAY too much to conclusions. It's a family nightmare of outrageous proportion. And everyone is following him around like a God. Here's the thjng. Nobody wants to hear this. You eat healthy and you exercise. We want a pill, though or an internet forum of great lengths to get out of what we know we need to do. Seriously! I think this is my best post yet. Do you think trained athletes mouth breathe at night?! How many people eat veggies?! Best post ever!
People with nerve damage are one extreme of the negative, who the hell says the exactly opposite will take place with exact opposite forces? Why the majority of the changes happens in the first couple of months? You hit a diminishing return point very fast with this, so people are eager to think this is the real deal and go to gospel about it. You get a new stimuli you adapt to it and soon the inside architecture the form the thickness adapt to better resist with the least ammount of resources. He cites blood vessels forming canals in the bone and attributes the small compression over a lot of time creating that groove. I dunnobouthat
That pretty much summarizes the basis of his theory about skeletal bone change. It's not really much, nor does he have any evidence it works. The one adult case he shows is for Dafne where he proclaims "no one is going to tell me her maxilla didn't change".
Sorry it didn't. Excluding the forward projection of the alveolar bone, there is no visible difference in her skeletal bones. For him to make such a vague claim tells me he is making people confused because they do understand that changes to alveolar bone are always possible.
If you correct your oral posture and function, you will see results in that area, but he mixes that with skeletal bones.
By the way, anyone notice the video he released then removed where he proclaimed his work to be "pioneering", the timing makes it look as if he was trolling this topic, lol. Did he ever proclaim himself a pioneer in any previous video?
my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/
I'm going to hard mew anyways. I know it's not at all scientific, but it just feels "right" when I do it. All forms of mewing are obviously better than not mewing at all, but hard mewing definitely feels like it's doing something impactful. I'll post pictures if I ever get decent results.
I'm going to hard mew anyways. I know it's not at all scientific, but it just feels "right" when I do it.
You know what feels right, nothing. When you have your tongue on the roof of the mouth and you don't feel anything, no effort or pressure, that's when it's right.
All forms of mewing are obviously better than not mewing at all,
This is not true.
but hard mewing definitely feels like it's doing something impactful.
That's exactly why I always called "hard mewing" an illusion because it gives the sense that you are achieving something versus correct tongue posturing which feels passive.
my story: http://www.aljabri.com/blog/my-story/
We know this is the way for children to not grow effed up. So don't drop them on the head, make them have good oral posture and function, don't feed them mercury nor lead. Some of you will have a hard time following these instruction but i believe in you
Hard mewing seems to be making massive changes to my resting tongue posture. In the last few days I've made a concerted effort to hard mew, my "soft mew" resting position has reached deeper and more consistently than ever before.
Regardless what you might believe about how effective hard mewing really is when it comes to moving the maxilla, it seems to have an effect on strengthening the mind-body connection that other exercises don't. Take what you will from my anecdotal experience so far.
Thanks for this conformation, I can breathe very easily in a full chin tuck and after a cheesy swallow hold, but I have been questioning if the hard force on the roof of the mouth feeling going away was my tongue being two weak. But now I see I have been fighting against my subconscious taking over my tongue posture all along and fighting the natural feeling of having the tongue become one with the face. My journey starts HERE!
Doesent hard mewing allow you at first to strengthen and train the back 3rd so that it can rest at the top on its own? when I hard mew fully I can feel the base of the tongue working like a weak mustle working out.
That seems plausible to some, me included. However, we can’t say for sure at this moment, as it is only a hypothesis. Another possible benefit from hard mewing could just be that it may make you more conscious and/or diligent about mewing, thus achieving better results.
@achilles1 What, in your opinion, is the best way to chew gum to increase masseter volume.
