SayNoToRotting
Kraken
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2019
- Posts
- 8,994
- Reputation
- 11,890
Method: Biting down on peanut sized pieces of mastic gum with my premolars, canines and lateral incisors. To distribute stress onto my maxilla and to prevent counterclockwise rotation of the maxilla (as it has been proven to happen during conventional chewing on gum)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My ramal height has gone through the roof, as I knew it would.
The ramus is the one bone in the human skull that has to endure the most pressure while masicating, and that's also why most CT scans of bruxism victims display remarkably long ramuses (rami ?).
Second most noticalble change is my head breadth.
It's not a remarkably noteworthy change though, since a lot of that breadth increase also comes from musculature. (However, the zygomatic arch is second to the ramus one of the most stress-exposed bone region while masticating, so it stands to reason that my zygomatic arch has also increased, the bulging masseter and temporalis merely take away the focus on it.
My incisor tilt and chin portrusion have not changed, at least not noticably enough to report a difference after the very few months I have beeen doing this.
Ancient skulls pre agriculture tend to have a near edge to edge bite with staring incisors (both upper and lower).
The mandible doesn't really have growth plates, so it has the potential to grow in length well into one's 30s.
So my hopes of achieving that perfect pre agriculture bite still prevail.
Interpupilary distance (more directly nasal bridge breadth) hasn't (noticably) increased either, which was the main focus of my very unconventional chewing method. I haven't given up on it though.
Now, one of the most interesting changes has occured in my browridge.
Although it has already been proven that the browridge plays little to no part in mastication, mine has actually slightly changed in shape.
It has always been very portruding, projecting well beyond my eyes. However it was somehow still very level with my vertical forehead and my very tall nosebridge (these details will be important later).
But now it kind of has developed a subtle bump, and the transition between browridge and nasal bridge has become less smooth, more curved.
I have an explanation for why this has occured even though many studies say that the browridge takes no part in withstanding masticatory loads.
It's because most of these studies (mostly done on apes) dodn't take into consideration that it could look quite different in (some) humans who have more vertically aligned browridges, fitting more into the "scaffold"-function of the entire skull, as it has been proposed in one study that I can somehow recall.
And would you know it, that's very evidently the case when we look at this stress distribution map:
Now, my skull and browridge/forehead portrusion have more resemblence with the guy in the left corner at the bottom than with the inuits/asians on the top (although obviously not quite as chaddy), but I assume that the alignment between nasal bridge and browridge have a greater effect on how stress is distributed on the browridge than the portrusion of the browridge on its own.
Skulls with very unlevel browrdige and nasal bridge experience the least pressure on the browridge and vice versa.
It should also be noted that the glabella is only a very thin bone in humans and apes alike, even in gorillas it doesn't seem to be thicker than 5 mms.
So the primary thing that seems to affect the shape and "dimorphism" of a browridge is not actually mass, but mere morphology.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My ramal height has gone through the roof, as I knew it would.
The ramus is the one bone in the human skull that has to endure the most pressure while masicating, and that's also why most CT scans of bruxism victims display remarkably long ramuses (rami ?).
Second most noticalble change is my head breadth.
It's not a remarkably noteworthy change though, since a lot of that breadth increase also comes from musculature. (However, the zygomatic arch is second to the ramus one of the most stress-exposed bone region while masticating, so it stands to reason that my zygomatic arch has also increased, the bulging masseter and temporalis merely take away the focus on it.
My incisor tilt and chin portrusion have not changed, at least not noticably enough to report a difference after the very few months I have beeen doing this.
Ancient skulls pre agriculture tend to have a near edge to edge bite with staring incisors (both upper and lower).
The mandible doesn't really have growth plates, so it has the potential to grow in length well into one's 30s.
So my hopes of achieving that perfect pre agriculture bite still prevail.
Interpupilary distance (more directly nasal bridge breadth) hasn't (noticably) increased either, which was the main focus of my very unconventional chewing method. I haven't given up on it though.
Now, one of the most interesting changes has occured in my browridge.
Although it has already been proven that the browridge plays little to no part in mastication, mine has actually slightly changed in shape.
It has always been very portruding, projecting well beyond my eyes. However it was somehow still very level with my vertical forehead and my very tall nosebridge (these details will be important later).
But now it kind of has developed a subtle bump, and the transition between browridge and nasal bridge has become less smooth, more curved.
I have an explanation for why this has occured even though many studies say that the browridge takes no part in withstanding masticatory loads.
It's because most of these studies (mostly done on apes) dodn't take into consideration that it could look quite different in (some) humans who have more vertically aligned browridges, fitting more into the "scaffold"-function of the entire skull, as it has been proposed in one study that I can somehow recall.
And would you know it, that's very evidently the case when we look at this stress distribution map:
Now, my skull and browridge/forehead portrusion have more resemblence with the guy in the left corner at the bottom than with the inuits/asians on the top (although obviously not quite as chaddy), but I assume that the alignment between nasal bridge and browridge have a greater effect on how stress is distributed on the browridge than the portrusion of the browridge on its own.
Skulls with very unlevel browrdige and nasal bridge experience the least pressure on the browridge and vice versa.
It should also be noted that the glabella is only a very thin bone in humans and apes alike, even in gorillas it doesn't seem to be thicker than 5 mms.
So the primary thing that seems to affect the shape and "dimorphism" of a browridge is not actually mass, but mere morphology.
Last edited:
