There’s no good evidence against bonesmashing

[nordsmog]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

 

[hopecel]

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

it would make everyone's face more asymmetrical

 

[nordsmog]

it would make everyone's face more asymmetrical

I’ve already addressed this though

 

[Lonenely sigma]

I mean, I don't want to be the one recommending it to anyone and I can't see how anyone else can take that risk.


Idk if you remember (or if you saw it in the first place) but there was this one idiot who actually broke his face bc of that forum schizo james

Message to @curlyheadjames

@curlyheadjames I am writing to you in regards to the incident that occurred last week. The bonesmashing you recommended, resulted in a fracture of my zygomatic bone. As you can imagine, this has been a very difficult time for me. The pain has been almost unbearable, and I have been unable to...

looksmax.org

In either case, even if bones won't grow, you could maybe get a scar tissue, but I can see this working in the chin only, as in any other part of the face gravity would migrate it. Again, I ain't doing this anyway; just a theory.

 

[lucifer6969]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.
View attachment 2958594
View attachment 2958595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

View attachment 2958650


(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

View attachment 2958656

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5
View attachment 2958658

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)
View attachment 2958685
View attachment 2958688

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

Read every single molecule , tldr?

 

[nordsmog]

I mean, I don't want to be the one recommending it to anyone and I can't see how anyone else can take that risk.


Idk if you remember (or if you saw it in the first place) but there was this one idiot who actually broke his face bc of that forum schizo james

Message to @curlyheadjames

@curlyheadjames I am writing to you in regards to the incident that occurred last week. The bonesmashing you recommended, resulted in a fracture of my zygomatic bone. As you can imagine, this has been a very difficult time for me. The pain has been almost unbearable, and I have been unable to...

looksmax.org

In either case, even if bones won't grow, you could maybe get a scar tissue, but I can see this working in the chin only, as in any other part of the face gravity would migrate it. Again, I ain't doing this anyway; just a theory.

Should work for all bone in theory, but the risks of damaging a nerve or blood vessel are going to be higher/lower depending on where you’re smashing. I don’t fully understand the logistics and risks of this, but it’s important to consider that people with well above average strength, speed, and mass already regularly exchange punches with their full body weight in boxing and other fighting sports. This is several magnitudes more powerful than hitting yourself with little momentum from your body weight to cause microfractures in a controlled manner

 

[nordsmog]

I mean, I don't want to be the one recommending it to anyone and I can't see how anyone else can take that risk.


Idk if you remember (or if you saw it in the first place) but there was this one idiot who actually broke his face bc of that forum schizo james

Message to @curlyheadjames

@curlyheadjames I am writing to you in regards to the incident that occurred last week. The bonesmashing you recommended, resulted in a fracture of my zygomatic bone. As you can imagine, this has been a very difficult time for me. The pain has been almost unbearable, and I have been unable to...

looksmax.org

In either case, even if bones won't grow, you could maybe get a scar tissue, but I can see this working in the chin only, as in any other part of the face gravity would migrate it. Again, I ain't doing this anyway; just a theory.

Yep, and just goes back to a skill issue. The fact is that you need to do the research and control how much force you’re applying to the bones.

 

[nigkook]

my sweet little ehren
but like
wasnt it a meme since start

 

[betty]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.
View attachment 2958594
View attachment 2958595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

View attachment 2958650


(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

View attachment 2958656

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5
View attachment 2958658

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)
View attachment 2958685
View attachment 2958688

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

hopefuel

read this 5 minuets after bonesmashing

 

[nordsmog]

my sweet little ehren
but like
wasnt it a meme since start

Meme or not, it should work in theory

 

[Lonenely sigma]

Should work for all bone in theory, but the risks of damaging a nerve or blood vessel are going to be higher/lower depending on where you’re smashing. I don’t fully understand the logistics and risks of this, but it’s important to consider that people with well above average strength, speed, and mass already regularly exchange punches with their full body weight in boxing and other fighting sports. This is several magnitudes more powerful than hitting yourself with little momentum from your body weight to cause microfractures in a controlled manner

Yeah but you'd have to smash very hard in order to make a difference. Training box ain't going to do shit. The fact ppl who train it look like ogres is bc they can take more punches; its not that they look like ogres bc they got punched.


In either case, I think it could still work, but it certainly wouldn't be more than a mm or 2, maybe 3 during many years. Sure, mms are kms on a face but you'd have to do it religiously

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

Good job my nigga will read

 

[betty]

the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads.

so progressively overload the force you exert onto ur bones

 

[joonla]

did read, will smash

 

[Lonenely sigma]

Yep, and just goes back to a skill issue. The fact is that you need to do the research and control how much force you’re applying to the bones.

yeah but still. It doesn't just come back to skill issue, bc in order to know if you are doing it wrong or right you'd have to see results first, which as I said will take years; in case you actually lose bone bc you smashed waayy too hard, its just that you couldn't get any skill in the first place since you had no previous experience.


If it works its still in huge part down to luck, not even including the luck to have good bone recovery genes in the first place.

 

[nordsmog]

Yeah but you'd have to smash very hard in order to make a difference. Training box ain't going to do shit. The fact ppl who train it look like ogres is bc they can take more punches; its not that they look like ogres bc they got punched.


In either case, I think it could still work, but it certainly wouldn't be more than a mm or 2, maybe 3 during many years. Sure, mms are kms on a face but you'd have to do it religiously

Why should you have to smash very hard to cause a difference? I mean even the user in the article you just sent actually accidentally fractured his cheekbone. You’d want to tone down the forces applied for the very reason that the chances of accidentally fracturing the bone are there, and do this over a longer time period to minimize risk.

 

[nordsmog]

yeah but still. It doesn't just come back to skill issue, bc in order to know if you are doing it wrong or right you'd have to see results first, which as I said will take years; in case you actually lose bone bc you smashed waayy too hard, its just that you couldn't get any skill in the first place since you had no previous experience.


If it works its still in huge part down to luck, not even including the luck to have good bone recovery genes in the first place.

You wouldn’t though, it would be as simple as hitting both sides a roughly equal amount. At worst, you’d just end up with larger bones as asymmetrical as they were before you started smashing. At best, you can actually fix these asymmetries by applying more force/sessions to the less prominent side of your face.

 

[nordsmog]

so progressively overload the force you exert onto ur bones

Yes I would imagine so, minimizes the risk of fracturing by starting off too hard while also allowing for actual gains as the bone continues to gain strength.

 

[smallman]

Is that what you did

 

[nordsmog]

yeah but still. It doesn't just come back to skill issue, bc in order to know if you are doing it wrong or right you'd have to see results first, which as I said will take years; in case you actually lose bone bc you smashed waayy too hard, its just that you couldn't get any skill in the first place since you had no previous experience.


If it works it’s still in huge part down to luck, not even including the luck to have good bone recovery genes in the first place.

Iirc, bone loss happens when you create microfractures and don’t support the new potential growth with proper nutrients. I’ve also heard and seen good evidence for hitting too soft in the past, however I can’t recall any of the information or reasoning behind this. Hitting too hard will only have the risk of causing damage to the bone or underlying nerves/arteries

 

[Lonenely sigma]

Why should you have to smash very hard to cause a difference? I mean even the user in the article you just sent actually accidentally fractured his cheekbone. You’d want to tone down the forced applied for the very reason that the chances of accidentally fracturing the bone are there, and do this over a longer time period to minimize risk.

The whole premise is that you have one shot (haha) at it. Since it takes many years, by the time you see the results it will either result in something great, something very bad, or possibly - in nothing at all.


And yes, there were talks here for quite a while about the "range" of amount of force in which your bone will grow. Put too little or too much and you could actually lose bone. So you can't just do it and see after a while since by then it'd be too late.


This entire reply is just meant at "skill issue" part, to which I don't agree since I think it does come down to luck. I agree with everything else tho

 

[nordsmog]

yeah but still. It doesn't just come back to skill issue, bc in order to know if you are doing it wrong or right you'd have to see results first, which as I said will take years; in case you actually lose bone bc you smashed waayy too hard, its just that you couldn't get any skill in the first place since you had no previous experience.


If it works its still in huge part down to luck, not even including the luck to have good bone recovery genes in the first place.

As demonstrated in the articles though, remodeling should apply to a broad range of people and genetics

 

[Lonenely sigma]

As demonstrated in the articles though, remodeling should apply to a broad range of people and genetics

Ok so do you believe there is no way in which you can hit too hard and lose a bone? How about too often?

 

[nordsmog]

The whole premise is that you have one shot (haha) at it. Since it takes many years, by the time you see the results it will either result in something great, something very bad, or possibly - in nothing at all.


And yes, there were talks here for quite a while about the "range" of amount of force in which your bone will grow. Put too little or too much and you could actually lose bone. So you can't just do it and see after a while since by then it'd be too late.


This entire reply is just meant at "skill issue" part, to which I don't agree since I think it does come down to luck. I agree with everything else tho

I don’t see any evidence or reasoning for how you could actually lose bone by hitting too hard, unless you can provide some yourself. “Luck” doesn’t exist, what you’re probably trying to say here is that there’s too many factors to take into account and/or the factors are too difficult to control. This doesn’t necessarily seem to be the case here, the margin for error is broad

 

[nordsmog]

Ok so do you believe there is no way in which you can hit too hard and lose a bone? How about too often?

I’m not sure, I just haven’t seen any evidence or reasoning for this. Yes, in the sense that by smashing too much could keep the bone from healing and recovering properly much like with muscle hypertrophy. This can be easily regulated though, and probably isn’t what you’re referring to

 

[Lonenely sigma]

I don’t see any evidence or reasoning for how you could actually lose bone by hitting too hard, unless you can provide some yourself. “Luck” doesn’t exist, what you’re probably trying to say here is that there’s too many factors to take into account and/or the factors are too difficult to control. This doesn’t necessarily seem to be the case here, the margin for error is broad

Give me a few minutes, I have to find a thread. I've been through this rabbithole back in 2022, idk if its still here

 

[future_]

time to smash boyos

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.
View attachment 2958594
View attachment 2958595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

View attachment 2958650


(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

View attachment 2958656

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5
View attachment 2958658

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)
View attachment 2958685
View attachment 2958688

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

 

[nordsmog]

Yeah but you'd have to smash very hard in order to make a difference. Training box ain't going to do shit. The fact ppl who train it look like ogres is bc they can take more punches; its not that they look like ogres bc they got punched.


In either case, I think it could still work, but it certainly wouldn't be more than a mm or 2, maybe 3 during many years. Sure, mms are kms on a face but you'd have to do it religiously

You're missing the point though, I’m trying to help you visualize the general risks/logistics of damaging a blood vessel or nerve from bonesmashing rather than use fighter’s faces as evidence the punches caused remodeling.

 

[xegigi]

do you plan on bonesmashing though? and/or have you started bonesmashing already?

 

[Lonenely sigma]

You're missing the point though, I’m trying to help you visualize the general risks/logistics of damaging a blood vessel or nerve from bonesmashing rather than use fighter’s faces as evidence the punches caused remodeling.

Alright, I found one of the threads I wanted to share:

The mechanostat theorem (bonesmashing theory)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanostat The mechanostat theorem is a refinement of Wolfs law. This picture sums it up quite well. Showing that small strain on the bone actually leads to bone loss !! This would support hard smashing, where you literally try to smash your bones very close to...

looksmax.org

This picture over here is important. I swear I saw a different version of this pic in which bone loss was shown in too much force as well, but in either case, I think its still important.


As you can see, if you smash with too little force you will actually lose bone. Obviously, as you said, you can damage nerves and blood vessels by smashing too hard. I can't know how much that is for each bone, but I do wonder if the required amount for a significant bone growth is outside of the range that will fuck your nerves/blood vessels up or not.


If it is above this range, meaning the force needed to increase the bonemass is greater than the one that will ruin your nerves, it will screw everything up. If you wish to calculate what it is, in particular for some "risky" bones (aka. orbitals and zygos) you have to take into account that there is a limited force between causing an actual boneloss and causing a permanent damage to your health

 

[nordsmog]

do you plan on bonesmashing though? and/or have you started bonesmashing already?

Yeah I have on/off for a few years now the goal is to continue to look into the subject and figure out mainly the risk of damaging blood vessels or nerves

 

[nordsmog]

Alright, I found one of the threads I wanted to share:

The mechanostat theorem (bonesmashing theory)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanostat The mechanostat theorem is a refinement of Wolfs law. This picture sums it up quite well. Showing that small strain on the bone actually leads to bone loss !! This would support hard smashing, where you literally try to smash your bones very close to...

looksmax.org

View attachment 2958804

This picture over here is important. I swear I saw a different version of this pic in which bone loss was shown in too much force as well, but in either case, I think its still important.


As you can see, if you smash with too little force you will actually lose bone. Obviously, as you said, you can damage nerves and blood vessels by smashing too hard. I can't know how much that is for each bone, but I do wonder if the required amount for a significant bone growth is outside of the range that will fuck your nerves/blood vessels up or not.


If it is above this range, meaning the force needed to increase the bonemass is greater than the one that will ruin your nerves, it will screw everything up. If you wish to calculate what it is, in particular for some "risky" bones (aka. orbitals and zygos) you have to take into account that there is a limited force between causing an actual boneloss and causing a permanent damage to your health

Right, same chart I saw too. Yes the actual risks of damaging nerves/blood vessels should be the last piece of the puzzle here

 

[Lonenely sigma]

Right, same chart I saw too. Yes the actual risks of damaging nerves/blood vessels should be the last piece of the puzzle here

If there was one region of the face on which I'd have to bet that bonesmashing would work, its the chin. There are no blood vessels nor nerves anywhere close, so it'd be very hard to injure them. On the other hand, you'd likely be screwing up your teeth tho so idk.



The worst ones, and the ones almost destined to fail, are orbitals and the browridge. Risk, pain, everything just goes fully against you. No point in trying that at all

 

[nordsmog]

If there was one region of the face on which I'd have to bet that bonesmashing would work, its the chin. There are no blood vessels nor nerves anywhere close, so it'd be very hard to injure them. On the other hand, you'd likely be screwing up your teeth tho so idk.



The worst ones, and the ones almost destined to fail, are orbitals and the browridge. Risk, pain, everything just goes fully against you. No point in trying that at all

Totally agree, chin would have by far the lowest risk and is far from the vulnerable eyes + surrounding nerves. You could get around the teeth issue, if it is an issue, with a mouthguard or some other material like gum to soften the impact

 

[Klaas Vaaker]

This also backs up chewing since you are easily applying more then 20kg of force. Nice post.

 

[bradpittshairline]

theres not much evidence against vaping either nigga

 

[shewantsme]

Good thread

 

[nordsmog]

theres not much evidence against vaping either nigga

There’s an overwhelming amount of evidence for bonesmashing though, I’m not appealing to ignorance here ie “there’s no evidence against it so it must be true”

 

[bradpittshairline]

There’s an overwhelming amount of evidence for bonesmashing though, I’m not appealing to ignorance here ie “there’s no evidence against it so it must be true”

no studies that confirm aesthetically significant increase in bone mass at site of trauma

 

[Deleted member 42956]

So whats a good routine? How long should the bonesashing sessions be and how many times per day?

 

[Deleted member 70102]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.
View attachment 2958594
View attachment 2958595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

View attachment 2958650


(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

View attachment 2958656

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5
View attachment 2958658

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)
View attachment 2958685
View attachment 2958688

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

cheekbone nerve damage

retard

 

[Rigged]

I’ve looked through all the major articles opposed to bonesmashing (bar an NCBI one because it required a log-in cba), and been in the community long enough to see the extent of the arguments from both sides. The problem i’ve noticed is that all of the issues brought up against bone smashing either rely on denying the actual process behind bone remodeling (it only makes the bones denser not larger, the microfractures don’t grow bone, etc) or some sort of complaint that essentially boils down to a skill issue. There seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence and even simple reasoning against these arguments. So I’ll briefly go through the arguments commonly used against bonesmashing, provide a few sources, and reasoning behind my claims.

How do we know bone can remodel, how do we know this is what Wolff’s Law is claiming and if the law is even true or not?

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Wolff’s law is not only true, but applies to a broader range of people than a lot of users will claim. I’ve linked a few articles below provided by Christopher Ruff, who has a PHD in biological anthropology and has been studying skeletal morphology for years. His information/credentials will also be linked below, keep in mind this is not the full extent of the evidence and I encourage you to do research of your own.
View attachment 2958594
View attachment 2958595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20371

Christopher Ruff (Credentials)

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022464

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2274
https://doi.org/10.1056%2FNEJMoa022464

How do we know applied force will increase the actual physical dimensions of a bone, and not just the density of it?

According to Zhang’s law of dynamic deformation, applied forces can not only change the density of a bone, but also the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment before and after skeletal maturity.

“According to Wolff's law, bones in the living body will adapt to mechanical loads under which they are placed.[1] If loads on a particular bone increase, the bone will remodel to become thicker and stronger to resist the loads. The inverse is also true; if loads on a bone decrease, the bone will become thinner and weaker.“

“According to Zhang's law of dynamic deformation of bone, the morphology of bone in a living body, including the shape, diameter, length, curve and alignment of the bone, adapt to long-term loads both before and after skeletal maturity. According to the magnitude of strain, the mode of action, the location site, and the quality of bone, the resulting deformations and rates are different.“

View attachment 2958650


(The original sources are in Chinese, so I just linked an English NCBI article)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/#:~:text=According%20to%20Wolff's%20law%2C%20bones,will%20become%20thinner%20and%20weaker.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/

View attachment 2958656

Okay, but can I really hit my bones hard enough to cause these microfractures and remodeling?


https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/84613-overview?form=fpf#a5
View attachment 2958658

So bit of quick math, an average adult male’s hand is ~1 pound, and can punch at 3-7 m/s with a typical impact time of .01 seconds. I got lazy and ran the calculations through chatgpt, which I’ll list below and appears to be accurate nonetheless.

(Mind that the input of the data, particularly the punch speed, is skewed a bit higher than the average here but notice that it’s well above the 50g required for an actual full fracture of the zygoma (cheekbones), let alone the much less significant force needed for microfractures)
View attachment 2958685
View attachment 2958688

Calculations aside, it only stands to reason that if I can already take a hammer and hit + fully or partially fracture a bone on my face, I can apply less force and get a tiny fraction of that. Much of this is backed up in previous articles I sent, microfractures do not require an inordinate amount of force even in day to day activity.

What if it causes assymetry? How can you control how much bone mass is created?

This sort of goes back to the “skill issue” point I was eluding to earlier, all of these problems can be worked around with a solid amount of research and planning. Remember that YOU control which bone and what part of it is getting hit, YOU control how much force is being applied.

The fact is we are all ALREADY asymmetrical and this is not a massive problem for most. The process of smashing and remodeling your bone structure will take months or years, smashing too much on one side for a day will not be significant in the grand scheme of things. It’s akin to training your dominant arm more than your non dominant arm every so often, the difference is not significant and can even just simply be corrected for with more remodeling on the less prominent side.

Anyways, I’ve spent a bit of time on this research and I encourage discussion and objections. It’s very possible I’m missing something here, so feel free to let me know of any faults in my reasoning

Great post everything here is correct

 

[Rigged]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6846251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6213826/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15741603/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22344441/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21489921/

 

[20/04/2008]

Do you think they gonna do

no studies that confirm aesthetically significant increase in bone mass at site of trauma

a study where they hit people in the face really hard with a hammer then measure theur bones tf

 

[bradpittshairline]

Do you think they gonna do

a study where they hit people in the face really hard with a hammer then measure theur bones tf

If youve ever been to a MMA gym nigga they literally teach u to hit ur shins with hard rubber tyres and other hard blunt objects to make them stronger, so they can literally run studies on before after bone mass there

 

[alpslover]

If youve ever been to a MMA gym nigga they literally teach u to hit ur shins with hard rubber tyres and other hard blunt objects to make them stronger, so they can literally run studies on before after bone mass there

yeah but its different, healing and remodeling process differs in the tibia from the facial bones so a study on that couldnt effectively prove anything about aesthetic gains on bonesmashing (although it could support/disprove the theory)

 

[bradpittshairline]

youre better off just getting surgery for controlled results

niggas playing Russian rouette with their health for subpar nonexistent delusional results instead of getting actual stugery

 

[Deleted member 46941]

The burden of proof is on you to provide actual results from bonesmashing, not on us to provide evidence against it

 

[iblamesols]

you did all that research but still touch to little kids