The authors presented an interesting study performed on 30 healthy volunteers, with a cross-over design. The findings support that both experimental bracing and trusting cause immediate painful and non-painful symptoms, with almost complete recovery after 24 hours.
In general, the manuscript addresses an interesting topic that is relevant to the readership of the journal. The study design is appropriate, the manuscript is very well-written and the conclusions drawn are supported by the data. Findings are discussed properly in the light of current literature and limitations of the study are pointed out.

Below the reviewer's comments:
Abstract: Page 3, line 41 - I do not understand what "P<0.008" represents. I would expect a different p-value for each assessed variable. However, if word count represents a limit for reporting the current information, consider skipping it.
Introduction:
- Page 4, line 50 - Due to parallelism with TMD pain, it seems that the authors are suggesting that "non-painful symptoms might be predictors for bruxism onset?" This concept is unclear to the reviewer. Can you please further explain the mechanism underlying this assumption?
- Please formulate a hypothesis
Methods:
- Please add a description of the recruitment. In particular, it is important for the readers to know where were the participants recruited. For instance, if they were recruited among university staff and students, they might be more aware of the concept of bruxism, compared to the general population.
- Did the authors also considered disk displacement with reduction among the exclusion criteria? I would expect that repetitive jaw protrusion might be particularly annoying for individuals with anteriorly displaced disks.
- Please describe how was the randomization procedure performed
- Was any sample size calculation performed?
- In the statistical analysis, Page 9 line 9 to 20 seems a repetition as the authors already described how they will deal with normally distributed and non-normally distributed data.
Results:
- all the p values are reported in a non-consistent way. I would suggest using either ranges (p<0.05, p<0.01, p<0.001) or exact p values (e.g. p=0.032). I don't clearly understand reporting such as P > 0.218 or P<0.038. Please carefully review the reporting throughout the results section.
Discussion:
-I'm surprised that no DOMS effect was elicited. Can you speculate a possible mechanism for that? (maybe the type of muscle contraction?)
-Also, I would further stress in the discussion that in the development of painful sensation also psychological factors play a critical role. This was not investigated in the current study and might have an important role when dealing with patients
Table: Please specify what is the measurement unit used for MVPF in Table 2.

The authors have successfully addressed all reviewer's comments. The manuscript is suitable for publication.