I think Weston Price's research is spot on but his views has been grossly misapplied since. Faces are how humans show reproductive fitness so they're sensitive to overall health. One of the biggest factors affecting facial development now is dysfunctional immune systems and the chronic nasal congestion it causes in early childhood. But it's only responsible for the acute disorders that most of the extreme cases that many of us face, specifically the long face syndrome. The two prime suspects in allergy development are hygiene and microbiome. The microbiome is imprinted mostly from parents and I think populations are dwindling with each successive generation, a Pottenger's cat-like effect. Poor hygiene both stimulates the immune system and replenishes the micrbiome with new strains of bacteria. There was an interesting study published just this week comparing two primitive groups in America (one Amish, I forget the other), one had severe allergy problems and the other has none. They've identified proximity to cows in particular as the factor that distinguishes them, other bacterial exposure seemed less significant. So the point is, simply eating a primitive diet isn't going to fix these problems which is where the followers are being misled. That's just the largest factor, the nutritional status of the mother, quality of sleep (where growth hormones occur), pollution and other hormone disruptors, all those things have the potential to alter normal development too but are harder to pin down. My n=1, my second kid was raised fully paleo and actually has no sign of allergies and even though I have well developed arches his are pretty crowded. He was exlcusively breast fed for one year. My first had allergy problems the first two years but they cleared up by age 5, allergist couldn't find anything to treat! She has an open bite now and I don't think it'll close, she'll need surgery. Mom had an overbite growing up fixed with headgear, which she claims she didn't wear that much but who knows. I don't think we're going to fix these problems with lifestyle changes, even though a big upset would probably do the trick. We're going got need therapeutic intervention at some point. There's a lot of interesting research on these topics but not from people like Weston Price or Dr Mew, look at orthodontics graduate thesis and people with Phds. Even the one chapter summary of facial development was way over my head in one of the oral surgery textbooks and I even have the medical school basics down and a lot of experience reading medical literature (the author, as it happens, is just a random dentist in NM who doesn't attract much attention otherwise).
I have the same feeling about augmentations too. In general it takes about 3mm to make a noticeable difference on a face but you're not gonna make a radical difference. I saw one patient on the FB group who had an exceptional amount of work done and she was definitely prettier afterwards but it was a small difference for a lot of invasiveness. Last I heard she had a bunch of swelling that extended to her and throat and freaked her out but I think she was ok in the end, could be unrelated. The one exception I'd say is the infraorbital rims because it's the difference between having notable eye bags and not. The augmentation itself isn't too visible.
I do wonder the same about testosterone btw. Actually I'm surprised oral surgeons don't check levels before surgery because it's an important hormones for bones. I would guess women are more likely to have mal-union complications than men. But then most orthodontics don't even check for medications that increase the risk of root resorption, 85% don't even bother to collect a ceph for a treatment plan. Just like Realtors, they're all about volume.
