CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio Osteopathy

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Sam,

 

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my letter.

 

I want to address some of the issues that you raise,

and then to follow, I am reprinting a short article

that Dr. Upledger wrote in 1995 specifically

explaining the differences between CO and CST.

 

 

 

Except for my friend, in my experience, the

similarities and differences between CST and Cranial

> Osteopathy tend to be obscured by politics and turf

> battles.

 

 

This is indeed a problem, that we face. Just as tuina

is a problem for our " other hat " as licensed

acupuncturists and practitioners of CM relative to

chiropractors. I find that until I actually work on

osteopaths, or trade treatments with them, that they

feel I am unqualified to treat craniosacrally. Yet,as

you will see in Dr. Upledger's article below, indeed

there are significant differences, and not just style.

 

 

>

> Let me start with one or two issues..

>

> > The essence of CST is following the guidance of

> the

> > patient's inner wisdom

>

> Most therapies I've encountered claim this,

> including CO. I don't see

> this as a CST vs CO difference.

 

 

Three points to add here: 1.The touch in CST is very

light, 2. The guidance that we receive is not

esoteric, nor " energetic " (I hate that term!) but

rather proprioceptorial. Meaning, when, using very

light touch, I feel a therapeutic pulse, a change in

temperature, my patient sighs, or other signs of

release, I am guided to go deeper. 3. Because of the

fascial network that traverses the entire body, I can

feel the CS rhythm and treat the patient through that

process anywhere in the body, not just on the cranium,

the spine or the sacrum.

 

 

> > and rather than looking for a

> > diagnosis and viewing the patient as " an other "

>

> This might be important.

> I understand this as placing emphasis on a treatment

> protocol, with

> the protocol guiding your decisions, rather than

> making a diagnosis,

> and letting that diagnosis guide your decisions.

>

> I agree, a wrong diagnosis creates a barrier between

> you and the

> patient. I also believe treatment based on an

> average of all patients

> (i.e treatment based on protocol) creates a

> barrier betwen you and

> THIS patient.

> I believe the key is the ability to make good

> diagnoses, based on

> palpatory sensitivity and anatomical knowledge.

> What would CST teach?

 

 

We are guided by this palpatory process of releasing

" energetic cysts " that I described previously, along

with intuition: learning to view the patient without

any preconceptions, remaining neutral without an

agenda, and opening ourselves up to follow the

direction that we pick up from the patient, rather

than what we want to do, including knowing when to

stop. What's also important to point out is that we

are not treating the patient mechanically, following a

specific protocol (though new therapists are

encouraged initially to follow a 10-step protocol),

with specific manipulations maneuvers or adjustments

as an osteopath or chiropractor would, but rather are

addressing in a much more integrated way, the

body/mind/emotional interaction. This is the essence

of SomatoEmotional release, and is tapped into when a

" stillpoint " occurs during therapy.

 

 

> > follows the instructions received from within,

> without

> > an agenda, ever sensitive to anamolies in the CS

> > rhythm in terms of symmetry, rate, amplitude and

> > quality.

>

> I think this is also important. I've met people who

> are real

> psychics, who can select herbs, acupuncture points,

> etc based on their

> inner contact with the patients. I've met more

> people I've thought

> were listening more to their own inner dialogue,

> biases, hopes and wishes.

 

 

I agree with you. I have a former patient who

insisted on checking all the herbs I had included in a

prescription with her friend who used a pendulum. For

example, she would say, take out #12 or #17, I would

give her the list of possible alternative herbs to

include until we came up with an approved formula. I

went along, once, twice, but at a certain point I

said, " let her treat you, if you think she knows

better than I what's good for you " . Yes, there are

certain very high souls who are able to tune in to

others in a very high sense, but they don't need

gimmicks, and they don't discount training or

experise, rather, they incorporate it. What I am

saying, though, is something else: Just as a patient

with ADHD is unable to discriminate between the myriad

of sounds that bombard his consciousness, and

therefore is easily distracted, so too, I have found

that we can be trained to better tune in, focus, and

listen to what our patients bodies, or better, their

" higher wisdom " as manifested by their bodies, are

saying.

 

 

> If I understand you correctly, that CST uses " inner

> contact " rather

> than or as much as palpatory findings to make

> treatment decisions,

> then we have an important issue to clarify.

>

> Therefore because we don't " force " or

> > " trick " the body to make changes, the soma's

> natural

> > guardedness and inhibition cease to be a barrier

> for

> > change. T

> >

> I believe precise treatment, based on good diagnosis

> is EXACTLY what

> the body craves.

 

A different route to the same destination. Of course

a good therapist is able to develop this technical

skill to release this guardedness and inhibition. I

think that a patient can tell right away, intuitively,

whether they can trust the physician, and the

inner-wisdom absolutely opens the door to allowing the

treatment to take place-- indeed, craving it.

 

 

I you have to " trick " or " force " ,

> you're not giving

> the body what it wants. Note this is not saying

> " Always use minimal

> effort " Sometime the body wants and a lot of force,

> sometimes almost

> nothing. If you can't make a good diagnosis, then

> yeah, err on the

> side of less force.

 

 

Believe it or not, we agree here as well! Many times

I intuitively feel that the patient's inner-physician

is telling me, " keep going! " , but the patient tells me

to stop. I usually negotiate a compromise, either

silently or out loud thus empowering the patient.

Usually, I will lighten up slightly, and ask the

patient for permission to continue, telling them to

signal me if I need to lighten up more, but never

forcing them without their permission. And we always

get to the other side. BTW, this is one of the great

things about combining CST and acupuncture. I find

that the acupuncture dramatically speeds up the

process.

____

(Reprinted with Permission)

 

Differences Separate CranioSacral Therapy from Cranial

Osteopathy

 

 

John E. Upledger, D.O., O.M.M.

 

CranioSacral Therapy, which I developed as a

practicing osteopath and researcher, is frequently

confused with cranial osteopathy, a totally different

modality. While they share a common historical

thread, the therapies differ broadly, not just in

technique but also in therapeutic focus.

 

Cranial Osteopathy: A Radical Idea

What was to become cranial osteopathy began as the

idea of an osteopathic student in Kirksville, Missouri

in the early 1900s. Dr. William G. Sutherland saw

that the bones of the skull were designed to provide

the opportunity for movement in relationship to one

another. For more than 20 years, he pondered the

prospect of movable bones in the adult skill. That

radical idea flew in the face of anatomy textbooks,

which taught that the skull bones fuse together before

adulthood. To test his theory, Dr. Sutherland filled

a skull with dry beans to which he added water. This

caused the skull bones to move along the suture lines

and, ultimately, to disarticulate.

 

He also performed makeshift experiments on himself

with helmet-like devices designed to impose variable

controlled and sustained pressures on different parts

of his head. His wife then recorded personality

changes he displayed in response to different pressure

applications. He described symptoms such as head

pains and problems with coordination related to the

varied pressures in different locations.

 

Under a pseudonym, Dr. Sutherland published the first

article about his work in the early 1930s. Based on

his experiments, Dr. Sutherland developed a system of

examination and treatment for the bones of the skull.

With some patient success, he organized a small group

of osteopaths to study cranial work with him, and his

system became known as cranial osteopathy. Because so

little was known about how it worked and results with

patients seemed at times to be miraculous, Dr.

Sutherland's system acquired an esoteric reputation.

 

Observation & Tenacity Lead to the Development of

CranioSacral Therapy

Conversely, the origin of CranioSacral Therapy can be

traced to the accidental discovery of the craniosacral

system during a seemingly routine surgery in 1970.

During the surgery, I had a rather unique view of the

dura mater—the outer layer of the meningeal membrane

in the neck. The dura mater, which is ordinarily

compromised as part of surgical procedure, was

deliberately left intact during this surgery to

prevent any risk of meningeal infection.

 

My task as a surgical assistant was to hold the dura

mater still while the surgeon scraped a calcium plaque

off its surface. I was unable to hold it still; the

membrane rhythmically moved at a rate of about 10

cycles per minute. No member of the surgical team,

none of my colleagues, nor any of the medical tests I

consulted had an explanation for this observation.

 

Still curious about what I had seen, In enrolled two

years later in a seminar that explained Dr.

Sutherland's ideas and taught some of the evaluation

and treatment techniques. Coupling my scientific

background with tactile sensitivity, I surmised that

the rhythmical motion could have been caused by a

hydraulic-type system, functioning inside a membranous

sac encased within the skull and canal of the spinal

column. After further study and research, I refined

Dr. Sutherland's techniques and successfully

incorporated them into my private medical practice.

 

In 1975, I was invited to join the College of

Osteopathic Medicine at Michigan State University as a

clinician-researcher and professor in the Department

of Biomechanics. I worked with a multi-disciplinary

research team made-up of anatomists, physiologists,

biophysicists, and bioengineers through the maze of

research that first established the scientific basis

for the craniosacral system. The team was able to

explain in scientific and practical terms the function

of the craniosacral system, and how it could be used

to evaluate and correct a myriad of health problems

that previously were misunderstood.

 

Unlike Dr. Sutherland's cranial osteopathy, I had

uncovered the scientific basis for Craniosacral

Therapy. However, the prevailing viewpoint that

cranial bones could not move was a remaining obstacle

to wide-spread acceptance of CranioSacral Therapy. A

lecture I gave to physicians and scientists at a

hospital in Haifa, Israel, in 1978 at first astonished

me, then validated my viewpoint. Accustomed to a

battery of questions concerning the movement of the

skull bones, I came prepared with slides of

microscopic views of the skull bone sutures. I was

surprised, however, that the audience didn't question

me about my presentation. Mentioning this to one of

the physicians, he showed me an Italian medical text

published in 1920 that stated that skull bones

continue to move in relationship to one another

throughout life except under abnormal and/or

pathologic conditions. The idea that skull bones

moved as not new to physicians who studied Italian

anatomy texts. However, the British texts, which are

the basis for American reference books, asserted that

the skull bones are fused.

 

The Differences Between Cranial Osteopathy and CST

One major difference between cranial osteopathy and

CranioSacral Therapy is the quality of touch.

Practitioners of CranioSacral Therapy use a light

touch that has been scientifically measured at between

5 and 10 grams or 1/16 to 1/3 of an ounce. That's

about the weight of a nickel resting in the palm of

the hand. No invasive or directive forces are used in

CranioSacral Therapy. This gentle quality often

belies the effectiveness of the therapy as most

clients report feeling nothing more than subtle

sensations during a typical session. In general, the

manipulations used in cranial osteopathy are sometimes

heavier and more directive.

 

Also, in cranial osteopathy, the focus is on the

sutures of the skull bones. CranioSacral Therapy,

however, focuses more upon the dura mater membrane

system and the hydraulics of the craniosacral system

as primary causes of dysfunction. Since the dura

mater attaches to the bones of the skull, these bones

serve as handles for the therapist to access the

craniosacral system membrane. Both CranioSacral

Therapy and cranial osteopathic techniques involve the

sacrum and coccyx, in addition to the cranium.

 

Who can do this work?

In 1985, The Upledger Institute, Inc., was established

as a clinical and education resource center. Since

then, more than 20,000 healthcare professionals

representing a wide range of disciplines have studied

the therapeutic value of the craniosacral system. (now

50,000-yf)

 

However, the first CranioSacral Therapy training

session was in 1976 during my research at Michigan

State. While preparing a project involving the use of

CranioSacral Therapy for learning-disabled children in

the Michigan public school system, I realized that

there were not enough osteopaths in the area trained

in CranioSacral Therapy. One of the county

supervisors of special education estimated that one in

20 children enrolled in the school system had some

sort of brain function problem such as seizures,

autism, learning disabilities, concentration problems,

retardation, speech and/or motor problems. I

estimated that 50 percent of brain dysfunction

problems might be helped by CranioSacral Therapy.

 

Faced with this dilemma, I obtained permission from

the university to teach professionals at the

children's school to do evaluations while I performed

the treatment. Physical therapists, occupational

therapists, registered nurses, school psychologists,

and special education teachers enrolled in the course.

They learned the craniosacral system evaluation

techniques exceedingly well.

 

When it became apparent that I could not treat all

candidates for CranioSacral Therapy, I began teaching

the treatment techniques to the school staff when they

accompanied children to the clinic. Soon, the

university sponsored my teaching of night courses in

craniosacral system evaluation and treatment to anyone

with diagnostic or therapeutic credentials to work

with children.

 

During that time, I learned that the requirements to

do CranioSacral Therapy were dedication, compassion,

and sensitivity. The requisites were not organic

chemistry, neurology, materia medica, and other

science courses. More than 20 years later, healthcare

professionals are finding CranioSacral Therapy to be a

valuable complement to their practice. Because it

deals more with soft tissues, as compared to bones,

CranioSacral Therapy has been embraced by physical,

occupational, and massage therapists in addition to

osteopaths, chiropractors, medical doctors, dentists,

nurses, doctors of oriental medicine, and

psychologists. As the director of multi-disciplinary

healthcare centers, I have observed these

professionals practicing CranioSacral Therapy and

achieving largely equivalent results. Patient

satisfaction has been outstanding.

 

Over the past 25 years, my views on the requirements

for practicing CranioSacral Therapy have changed very

little. I believe that the most important requisites

are proprioceptive sensivitity, willingness to work

hands-on, uninterrupted, with a patient or client for

30 to 90 minutes, and a strong sense of the artistic

qualities of body function. Most body workers qualify

in these areas. Massage therapists seem to qualify

exceptionally well and seem to train easily. I

suspect that this is because of the development of

manual skills and proprioceptive sensitivity that is

require of them.

 

While CranioSacral Therapy and cranial osteopathy have

differences, they are linked in history by two

osteopaths who trusted their observations and

continued undaunted on their quest to prove their

theories.

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yehuda

This article by Upledger is so over simplified it would be like me saying

Chinese acupuncture never uses the skill of palpation and Japanese acupuncture

is highly sensitive and demand palpation skill. Osteopathic manipulation in the

cranial field or the primary respiratory mechanisms has many different

approaches depending on palpatory findings. There are several sutural approaches

(which i use the most) there are fluid approaches, dural and membraness

approaches among several others. There are techniques that utilize extremely

light touch both direct and indirect, there are some that use a heavier touch

both direct and indirect, these are all dependent on training and on the

patient's condition. The fact that the primary respiratory mechanism can be felt

anywhere in the body is obviously part of osteopathic technique, both

diagnostically and therapeutically.

When i teach someone to feel cranial movement i usually have my hand somewhere

on the pt body (not head) and then i guide the student letting them know when

flexion and extension switches so that they can feel it.

To do good pelvic work one must know where sacral, cranial and lower extremity

axis are.

Good osteopathy never has protocols in any of its modalities including cranial.

I once took an Upledger muscle energy course and what struck me was the fact

that they teach a protocol which goes against everything Mitchell Sr has taught

all his life and against what Mitchell Jr and Ed Styles teach today. I have

never taken an Upledger cranial class but some of the criticism i have heard is

this lack of diagnostic approach and teaching protocols.Of course the DOs say

he does this because his student do not have the anatomy and medical background

needed to learn it as they teach it. And obviously there is a lot of politics

and resentment that he teaches " none physicians. " This however has changed and

now a legal opinion forced the osteopaths to open their courses to anyone with

appropriate license, including LAc.

Lastly, his historical statements in the article are only partly true as others

besides Upledger researched and developed cranial techniques many of which are

not sutural. Some are just as dural or membraneness.

Also his statement that he discovered the scientific rational for the cranial

system is ridiculous because we still do not know were the cranial movement

comes from. There are several theories.

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

-

yehuda frischman

Wednesday, June 21, 2006 7:59 PM

CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio Osteopathy

 

 

Dear Dr. Sam,

 

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my letter.

 

I want to address some of the issues that you raise,

and then to follow, I am reprinting a short article

that Dr. Upledger wrote in 1995 specifically

explaining the differences between CO and CST.

 

Except for my friend, in my experience, the

similarities and differences between CST and Cranial

> Osteopathy tend to be obscured by politics and turf

> battles.

 

This is indeed a problem, that we face. Just as tuina

is a problem for our " other hat " as licensed

acupuncturists and practitioners of CM relative to

chiropractors. I find that until I actually work on

osteopaths, or trade treatments with them, that they

feel I am unqualified to treat craniosacrally. Yet,as

you will see in Dr. Upledger's article below, indeed

there are significant differences, and not just style.

 

>

> Let me start with one or two issues..

>

> > The essence of CST is following the guidance of

> the

> > patient's inner wisdom

>

> Most therapies I've encountered claim this,

> including CO. I don't see

> this as a CST vs CO difference.

 

Three points to add here: 1.The touch in CST is very

light, 2. The guidance that we receive is not

esoteric, nor " energetic " (I hate that term!) but

rather proprioceptorial. Meaning, when, using very

light touch, I feel a therapeutic pulse, a change in

temperature, my patient sighs, or other signs of

release, I am guided to go deeper. 3. Because of the

fascial network that traverses the entire body, I can

feel the CS rhythm and treat the patient through that

process anywhere in the body, not just on the cranium,

the spine or the sacrum.

 

> > and rather than looking for a

> > diagnosis and viewing the patient as " an other "

>

> This might be important.

> I understand this as placing emphasis on a treatment

> protocol, with

> the protocol guiding your decisions, rather than

> making a diagnosis,

> and letting that diagnosis guide your decisions.

>

> I agree, a wrong diagnosis creates a barrier between

> you and the

> patient. I also believe treatment based on an

> average of all patients

> (i.e treatment based on protocol) creates a

> barrier betwen you and

> THIS patient.

> I believe the key is the ability to make good

> diagnoses, based on

> palpatory sensitivity and anatomical knowledge.

> What would CST teach?

 

We are guided by this palpatory process of releasing

" energetic cysts " that I described previously, along

with intuition: learning to view the patient without

any preconceptions, remaining neutral without an

agenda, and opening ourselves up to follow the

direction that we pick up from the patient, rather

than what we want to do, including knowing when to

stop. What's also important to point out is that we

are not treating the patient mechanically, following a

specific protocol (though new therapists are

encouraged initially to follow a 10-step protocol),

with specific manipulations maneuvers or adjustments

as an osteopath or chiropractor would, but rather are

addressing in a much more integrated way, the

body/mind/emotional interaction. This is the essence

of SomatoEmotional release, and is tapped into when a

" stillpoint " occurs during therapy.

 

> > follows the instructions received from within,

> without

> > an agenda, ever sensitive to anamolies in the CS

> > rhythm in terms of symmetry, rate, amplitude and

> > quality.

>

> I think this is also important. I've met people who

> are real

> psychics, who can select herbs, acupuncture points,

> etc based on their

> inner contact with the patients. I've met more

> people I've thought

> were listening more to their own inner dialogue,

> biases, hopes and wishes.

 

I agree with you. I have a former patient who

insisted on checking all the herbs I had included in a

prescription with her friend who used a pendulum. For

example, she would say, take out #12 or #17, I would

give her the list of possible alternative herbs to

include until we came up with an approved formula. I

went along, once, twice, but at a certain point I

said, " let her treat you, if you think she knows

better than I what's good for you " . Yes, there are

certain very high souls who are able to tune in to

others in a very high sense, but they don't need

gimmicks, and they don't discount training or

experise, rather, they incorporate it. What I am

saying, though, is something else: Just as a patient

with ADHD is unable to discriminate between the myriad

of sounds that bombard his consciousness, and

therefore is easily distracted, so too, I have found

that we can be trained to better tune in, focus, and

listen to what our patients bodies, or better, their

" higher wisdom " as manifested by their bodies, are

saying.

 

> If I understand you correctly, that CST uses " inner

> contact " rather

> than or as much as palpatory findings to make

> treatment decisions,

> then we have an important issue to clarify.

>

> Therefore because we don't " force " or

> > " trick " the body to make changes, the soma's

> natural

> > guardedness and inhibition cease to be a barrier

> for

> > change. T

> >

> I believe precise treatment, based on good diagnosis

> is EXACTLY what

> the body craves.

 

A different route to the same destination. Of course

a good therapist is able to develop this technical

skill to release this guardedness and inhibition. I

think that a patient can tell right away, intuitively,

whether they can trust the physician, and the

inner-wisdom absolutely opens the door to allowing the

treatment to take place-- indeed, craving it.

 

I you have to " trick " or " force " ,

> you're not giving

> the body what it wants. Note this is not saying

> " Always use minimal

> effort " Sometime the body wants and a lot of force,

> sometimes almost

> nothing. If you can't make a good diagnosis, then

> yeah, err on the

> side of less force.

 

Believe it or not, we agree here as well! Many times

I intuitively feel that the patient's inner-physician

is telling me, " keep going! " , but the patient tells me

to stop. I usually negotiate a compromise, either

silently or out loud thus empowering the patient.

Usually, I will lighten up slightly, and ask the

patient for permission to continue, telling them to

signal me if I need to lighten up more, but never

forcing them without their permission. And we always

get to the other side. BTW, this is one of the great

things about combining CST and acupuncture. I find

that the acupuncture dramatically speeds up the

process.

____

(Reprinted with Permission)

 

Differences Separate CranioSacral Therapy from Cranial

Osteopathy

 

John E. Upledger, D.O., O.M.M.

 

CranioSacral Therapy, which I developed as a

practicing osteopath and researcher, is frequently

confused with cranial osteopathy, a totally different

modality. While they share a common historical

thread, the therapies differ broadly, not just in

technique but also in therapeutic focus.

 

Cranial Osteopathy: A Radical Idea

What was to become cranial osteopathy began as the

idea of an osteopathic student in Kirksville, Missouri

in the early 1900s. Dr. William G. Sutherland saw

that the bones of the skull were designed to provide

the opportunity for movement in relationship to one

another. For more than 20 years, he pondered the

prospect of movable bones in the adult skill. That

radical idea flew in the face of anatomy textbooks,

which taught that the skull bones fuse together before

adulthood. To test his theory, Dr. Sutherland filled

a skull with dry beans to which he added water. This

caused the skull bones to move along the suture lines

and, ultimately, to disarticulate.

 

He also performed makeshift experiments on himself

with helmet-like devices designed to impose variable

controlled and sustained pressures on different parts

of his head. His wife then recorded personality

changes he displayed in response to different pressure

applications. He described symptoms such as head

pains and problems with coordination related to the

varied pressures in different locations.

 

Under a pseudonym, Dr. Sutherland published the first

article about his work in the early 1930s. Based on

his experiments, Dr. Sutherland developed a system of

examination and treatment for the bones of the skull.

With some patient success, he organized a small group

of osteopaths to study cranial work with him, and his

system became known as cranial osteopathy. Because so

little was known about how it worked and results with

patients seemed at times to be miraculous, Dr.

Sutherland's system acquired an esoteric reputation.

 

Observation & Tenacity Lead to the Development of

CranioSacral Therapy

Conversely, the origin of CranioSacral Therapy can be

traced to the accidental discovery of the craniosacral

system during a seemingly routine surgery in 1970.

During the surgery, I had a rather unique view of the

dura mater-the outer layer of the meningeal membrane

in the neck. The dura mater, which is ordinarily

compromised as part of surgical procedure, was

deliberately left intact during this surgery to

prevent any risk of meningeal infection.

 

My task as a surgical assistant was to hold the dura

mater still while the surgeon scraped a calcium plaque

off its surface. I was unable to hold it still; the

membrane rhythmically moved at a rate of about 10

cycles per minute. No member of the surgical team,

none of my colleagues, nor any of the medical tests I

consulted had an explanation for this observation.

 

Still curious about what I had seen, In enrolled two

years later in a seminar that explained Dr.

Sutherland's ideas and taught some of the evaluation

and treatment techniques. Coupling my scientific

background with tactile sensitivity, I surmised that

the rhythmical motion could have been caused by a

hydraulic-type system, functioning inside a membranous

sac encased within the skull and canal of the spinal

column. After further study and research, I refined

Dr. Sutherland's techniques and successfully

incorporated them into my private medical practice.

 

In 1975, I was invited to join the College of

Osteopathic Medicine at Michigan State University as a

clinician-researcher and professor in the Department

of Biomechanics. I worked with a multi-disciplinary

research team made-up of anatomists, physiologists,

biophysicists, and bioengineers through the maze of

research that first established the scientific basis

for the craniosacral system. The team was able to

explain in scientific and practical terms the function

of the craniosacral system, and how it could be used

to evaluate and correct a myriad of health problems

that previously were misunderstood.

 

Unlike Dr. Sutherland's cranial osteopathy, I had

uncovered the scientific basis for Craniosacral

Therapy. However, the prevailing viewpoint that

cranial bones could not move was a remaining obstacle

to wide-spread acceptance of CranioSacral Therapy. A

lecture I gave to physicians and scientists at a

hospital in Haifa, Israel, in 1978 at first astonished

me, then validated my viewpoint. Accustomed to a

battery of questions concerning the movement of the

skull bones, I came prepared with slides of

microscopic views of the skull bone sutures. I was

surprised, however, that the audience didn't question

me about my presentation. Mentioning this to one of

the physicians, he showed me an Italian medical text

published in 1920 that stated that skull bones

continue to move in relationship to one another

throughout life except under abnormal and/or

pathologic conditions. The idea that skull bones

moved as not new to physicians who studied Italian

anatomy texts. However, the British texts, which are

the basis for American reference books, asserted that

the skull bones are fused.

 

The Differences Between Cranial Osteopathy and CST

One major difference between cranial osteopathy and

CranioSacral Therapy is the quality of touch.

Practitioners of CranioSacral Therapy use a light

touch that has been scientifically measured at between

5 and 10 grams or 1/16 to 1/3 of an ounce. That's

about the weight of a nickel resting in the palm of

the hand. No invasive or directive forces are used in

CranioSacral Therapy. This gentle quality often

belies the effectiveness of the therapy as most

clients report feeling nothing more than subtle

sensations during a typical session. In general, the

manipulations used in cranial osteopathy are sometimes

heavier and more directive.

 

Also, in cranial osteopathy, the focus is on the

sutures of the skull bones. CranioSacral Therapy,

however, focuses more upon the dura mater membrane

system and the hydraulics of the craniosacral system

as primary causes of dysfunction. Since the dura

mater attaches to the bones of the skull, these bones

serve as handles for the therapist to access the

craniosacral system membrane. Both CranioSacral

Therapy and cranial osteopathic techniques involve the

sacrum and coccyx, in addition to the cranium.

 

Who can do this work?

In 1985, The Upledger Institute, Inc., was established

as a clinical and education resource center. Since

then, more than 20,000 healthcare professionals

representing a wide range of disciplines have studied

the therapeutic value of the craniosacral system. (now

50,000-yf)

 

However, the first CranioSacral Therapy training

session was in 1976 during my research at Michigan

State. While preparing a project involving the use of

CranioSacral Therapy for learning-disabled children in

the Michigan public school system, I realized that

there were not enough osteopaths in the area trained

in CranioSacral Therapy. One of the county

supervisors of special education estimated that one in

20 children enrolled in the school system had some

sort of brain function problem such as seizures,

autism, learning disabilities, concentration problems,

retardation, speech and/or motor problems. I

estimated that 50 percent of brain dysfunction

problems might be helped by CranioSacral Therapy.

 

Faced with this dilemma, I obtained permission from

the university to teach professionals at the

children's school to do evaluations while I performed

the treatment. Physical therapists, occupational

therapists, registered nurses, school psychologists,

and special education teachers enrolled in the course.

They learned the craniosacral system evaluation

techniques exceedingly well.

 

When it became apparent that I could not treat all

candidates for CranioSacral Therapy, I began teaching

the treatment techniques to the school staff when they

accompanied children to the clinic. Soon, the

university sponsored my teaching of night courses in

craniosacral system evaluation and treatment to anyone

with diagnostic or therapeutic credentials to work

with children.

 

During that time, I learned that the requirements to

do CranioSacral Therapy were dedication, compassion,

and sensitivity. The requisites were not organic

chemistry, neurology, materia medica, and other

science courses. More than 20 years later, healthcare

professionals are finding CranioSacral Therapy to be a

valuable complement to their practice. Because it

deals more with soft tissues, as compared to bones,

CranioSacral Therapy has been embraced by physical,

occupational, and massage therapists in addition to

osteopaths, chiropractors, medical doctors, dentists,

nurses, doctors of oriental medicine, and

psychologists. As the director of multi-disciplinary

healthcare centers, I have observed these

professionals practicing CranioSacral Therapy and

achieving largely equivalent results. Patient

satisfaction has been outstanding.

 

Over the past 25 years, my views on the requirements

for practicing CranioSacral Therapy have changed very

little. I believe that the most important requisites

are proprioceptive sensivitity, willingness to work

hands-on, uninterrupted, with a patient or client for

30 to 90 minutes, and a strong sense of the artistic

qualities of body function. Most body workers qualify

in these areas. Massage therapists seem to qualify

exceptionally well and seem to train easily. I

suspect that this is because of the development of

manual skills and proprioceptive sensitivity that is

require of them.

 

While CranioSacral Therapy and cranial osteopathy have

differences, they are linked in history by two

osteopaths who trusted their observations and

continued undaunted on their quest to prove their

theories.

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

The article was written for lay people, not

professionals, as a very simplified introduction to

differences. There are plenty of peer journal

references that are available should you be

interested, including the JAOA, the Michigan

Osteopathic Journal, Osteopathic medicine, and

Osteopathic Annuls. As a matter of fact, if you are

in touch with Dan Bensky, you can ask him what he

thinks of John Upledger's work. I can tell you that

Eastland press(Bensky's publishing house)publishes

Upledger's textbooks. Through bio-mechanics, and

bio-electric measurements, Upledger has proven and

substantiated his theory of the origins and mechanisms

of the craniosacral system. A quick summary of it:

The CranioSacral system is a semi-closed hydraulic

pressurestat system, in a closed container with a

regulated inflow and outflow mechanism. The

container is the waterproof Dura Mater (the Dural

tube), the fluid is the cerebrospinal fluid, the

inflow pumping system is the choroid Plexuses, located

in the lateral ventricles and the third ventricle, and

the primary regulatory system is the stretch and

compression(extension and flexion) receptors in the

saggital suture. These receptors communicate via nerve

tracts running through the Falx Cerebri and then into

the brain substance with the ventricular system and

its choroid plexuses. When the Saggital suture is

stretched open by increased fluid pressure within the

Dural membrane, the stretch receptors signal the

Choroid Plexuses to reduce or stop the production of

Cerebrospinal fluid. When the saggital suture

compresses, a signal is generated to begin production

of CSF again. This system operates on about a 6

second cycle: that is CSF is produced for about 3

seconds, and then production stops for about 3

seconds. The regulation of the CSF outflow operates

through several mechanisms, including the cluster of

Arachnoid Granulation Bodies located at the anterior

end of the Straight Venous Sinus. The CSF is then

reabsorbed back into the venous blood system through

the arachnoid Villae, located throughout the length of

the Dural tube, but concentrated in the sagittal

venous sinus. His work is now hardly considered by

Osteopathic scholars to be controversial, and he was

named by Time Magazine as one of the 10 most important

innovators of alternative medicine for the 21st

century. Incidentally, in his many articles he

addresses the other theories of the mechanisms of the

Craniosacral system and explains why they are simply

incorrect.

 

Sincerely,

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

 

 

--- <alonmarcus wrote:

 

> Yehuda

> This article by Upledger is so over simplified it

> would be like me saying Chinese acupuncture never

> uses the skill of palpation and Japanese acupuncture

> is highly sensitive and demand palpation skill.

> Osteopathic manipulation in the cranial field or the

> primary respiratory mechanisms has many different

> approaches depending on palpatory findings. There

> are several sutural approaches (which i use the

> most) there are fluid approaches, dural and

> membraness approaches among several others. There

> are techniques that utilize extremely light touch

> both direct and indirect, there are some that use a

> heavier touch both direct and indirect, these are

> all dependent on training and on the patient's

> condition. The fact that the primary respiratory

> mechanism can be felt anywhere in the body is

> obviously part of osteopathic technique, both

> diagnostically and therapeutically.

> When i teach someone to feel cranial movement i

> usually have my hand somewhere on the pt body (not

> head) and then i guide the student letting them know

> when flexion and extension switches so that they can

> feel it.

> To do good pelvic work one must know where sacral,

> cranial and lower extremity axis are.

> Good osteopathy never has protocols in any of its

> modalities including cranial. I once took an

> Upledger muscle energy course and what struck me was

> the fact that they teach a protocol which goes

> against everything Mitchell Sr has taught all his

> life and against what Mitchell Jr and Ed Styles

> teach today. I have never taken an Upledger cranial

> class but some of the criticism i have heard is this

> lack of diagnostic approach and teaching

> protocols.Of course the DOs say he does this because

> his student do not have the anatomy and medical

> background needed to learn it as they teach it. And

> obviously there is a lot of politics and resentment

> that he teaches " none physicians. " This however has

> changed and now a legal opinion forced the

> osteopaths to open their courses to anyone with

> appropriate license, including LAc.

> Lastly, his historical statements in the article are

> only partly true as others besides Upledger

> researched and developed cranial techniques many of

> which are not sutural. Some are just as dural or

> membraneness.

> Also his statement that he discovered the scientific

> rational for the cranial system is ridiculous

> because we still do not know were the cranial

> movement comes from. There are several theories.

>

>

>

>

> Oakland, CA 94609

>

>

> -

> yehuda frischman

>

> Wednesday, June 21, 2006 7:59 PM

> CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> Osteopathy

>

>

> Dear Dr. Sam,

>

> Thank you for your thoughtful response to my

> letter.

>

> I want to address some of the issues that you

> raise,

> and then to follow, I am reprinting a short

> article

> that Dr. Upledger wrote in 1995 specifically

> explaining the differences between CO and CST.

>

> Except for my friend, in my experience, the

> similarities and differences between CST and

> Cranial

> > Osteopathy tend to be obscured by politics and

> turf

> > battles.

>

> This is indeed a problem, that we face. Just as

> tuina

> is a problem for our " other hat " as licensed

> acupuncturists and practitioners of CM relative to

> chiropractors. I find that until I actually work

> on

> osteopaths, or trade treatments with them, that

> they

> feel I am unqualified to treat craniosacrally.

> Yet,as

> you will see in Dr. Upledger's article below,

> indeed

> there are significant differences, and not just

> style.

>

> >

> > Let me start with one or two issues..

> >

> > > The essence of CST is following the guidance

> of

> > the

> > > patient's inner wisdom

> >

> > Most therapies I've encountered claim this,

> > including CO. I don't see

> > this as a CST vs CO difference.

>

> Three points to add here: 1.The touch in CST is

> very

> light, 2. The guidance that we receive is not

> esoteric, nor " energetic " (I hate that term!) but

> rather proprioceptorial. Meaning, when, using very

> light touch, I feel a therapeutic pulse, a change

> in

> temperature, my patient sighs, or other signs of

> release, I am guided to go deeper. 3. Because of

> the

> fascial network that traverses the entire body, I

> can

> feel the CS rhythm and treat the patient through

> that

> process anywhere in the body, not just on the

> cranium,

> the spine or the sacrum.

>

> > > and rather than looking for a

> > > diagnosis and viewing the patient as " an

> other "

> >

> > This might be important.

> > I understand this as placing emphasis on a

> treatment

> > protocol, with

> > the protocol guiding your decisions, rather than

> > making a diagnosis,

> > and letting that diagnosis guide your decisions.

> >

> > I agree, a wrong diagnosis creates a barrier

> between

> > you and the

> > patient. I also believe treatment based on an

> > average of all patients

> > (i.e treatment based on protocol) creates a

> > barrier betwen you and

> > THIS patient.

> > I believe the key is the ability to make good

> > diagnoses, based on

> > palpatory sensitivity and anatomical knowledge.

> > What would CST teach?

>

> We are guided by this palpatory process of

> releasing

> " energetic cysts " that I described previously,

> along

> with intuition: learning to view the patient

> without

> any preconceptions, remaining neutral without an

> agenda, and opening ourselves up to follow the

> direction that we pick up from the patient, rather

> than what we want to do, including knowing when to

> stop. What's also important to point out is that

> we

> are not treating the patient mechanically,

> following a

> specific protocol (though new therapists are

> encouraged initially to follow a 10-step

> protocol),

> with specific manipulations maneuvers or

> adjustments

> as an osteopath or chiropractor would, but rather

> are

> addressing in a much more integrated way, the

> body/mind/emotional interaction. This is the

> essence

> of SomatoEmotional release, and is tapped into

> when a

> " stillpoint " occurs during therapy.

>

> > > follows the instructions received from within,

> > without

> > > an agenda, ever sensitive to anamolies in the

> CS

> > > rhythm in terms of symmetry, rate, amplitude

> and

> > > quality.

> >

> > I think this is also important. I've met people

> who

> > are real

> > psychics, who can select herbs, acupuncture

> points,

> > etc based on their

> > inner contact with the patients. I've met more

> > people I've thought

> > were listening more to their own inner dialogue,

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Yehuda

Actually Upledger is a part owner of Eastland press and does not get along with

Dan very well. All his resent books are published by North Atlantic books.

Upledger has not proven anything regarding the origin of the movement and the

fluid theory is probably the least likely one. Some think it was completely

disprove. In osteopathic view no-one, or almost noone, disagree that the primary

respiratory mechanism is active (ie movement of the cranial mechanisms). What is

not known is what causes this movement. The most likely theory which i tend to

believe is a muscular pulse.

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

-

yehuda frischman

Thursday, June 22, 2006 12:27 AM

Re: CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio Osteopathy

 

 

Alon,

 

The article was written for lay people, not

professionals, as a very simplified introduction to

differences. There are plenty of peer journal

references that are available should you be

interested, including the JAOA, the Michigan

Osteopathic Journal, Osteopathic medicine, and

Osteopathic Annuls. As a matter of fact, if you are

in touch with Dan Bensky, you can ask him what he

thinks of John Upledger's work. I can tell you that

Eastland press(Bensky's publishing house)publishes

Upledger's textbooks. Through bio-mechanics, and

bio-electric measurements, Upledger has proven and

substantiated his theory of the origins and mechanisms

of the craniosacral system. A quick summary of it:

The CranioSacral system is a semi-closed hydraulic

pressurestat system, in a closed container with a

regulated inflow and outflow mechanism. The

container is the waterproof Dura Mater (the Dural

tube), the fluid is the cerebrospinal fluid, the

inflow pumping system is the choroid Plexuses, located

in the lateral ventricles and the third ventricle, and

the primary regulatory system is the stretch and

compression(extension and flexion) receptors in the

saggital suture. These receptors communicate via nerve

tracts running through the Falx Cerebri and then into

the brain substance with the ventricular system and

its choroid plexuses. When the Saggital suture is

stretched open by increased fluid pressure within the

Dural membrane, the stretch receptors signal the

Choroid Plexuses to reduce or stop the production of

Cerebrospinal fluid. When the saggital suture

compresses, a signal is generated to begin production

of CSF again. This system operates on about a 6

second cycle: that is CSF is produced for about 3

seconds, and then production stops for about 3

seconds. The regulation of the CSF outflow operates

through several mechanisms, including the cluster of

Arachnoid Granulation Bodies located at the anterior

end of the Straight Venous Sinus. The CSF is then

reabsorbed back into the venous blood system through

the arachnoid Villae, located throughout the length of

the Dural tube, but concentrated in the sagittal

venous sinus. His work is now hardly considered by

Osteopathic scholars to be controversial, and he was

named by Time Magazine as one of the 10 most important

innovators of alternative medicine for the 21st

century. Incidentally, in his many articles he

addresses the other theories of the mechanisms of the

Craniosacral system and explains why they are simply

incorrect.

 

Sincerely,

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

--- <alonmarcus wrote:

 

> Yehuda

> This article by Upledger is so over simplified it

> would be like me saying Chinese acupuncture never

> uses the skill of palpation and Japanese acupuncture

> is highly sensitive and demand palpation skill.

> Osteopathic manipulation in the cranial field or the

> primary respiratory mechanisms has many different

> approaches depending on palpatory findings. There

> are several sutural approaches (which i use the

> most) there are fluid approaches, dural and

> membraness approaches among several others. There

> are techniques that utilize extremely light touch

> both direct and indirect, there are some that use a

> heavier touch both direct and indirect, these are

> all dependent on training and on the patient's

> condition. The fact that the primary respiratory

> mechanism can be felt anywhere in the body is

> obviously part of osteopathic technique, both

> diagnostically and therapeutically.

> When i teach someone to feel cranial movement i

> usually have my hand somewhere on the pt body (not

> head) and then i guide the student letting them know

> when flexion and extension switches so that they can

> feel it.

> To do good pelvic work one must know where sacral,

> cranial and lower extremity axis are.

> Good osteopathy never has protocols in any of its

> modalities including cranial. I once took an

> Upledger muscle energy course and what struck me was

> the fact that they teach a protocol which goes

> against everything Mitchell Sr has taught all his

> life and against what Mitchell Jr and Ed Styles

> teach today. I have never taken an Upledger cranial

> class but some of the criticism i have heard is this

> lack of diagnostic approach and teaching

> protocols.Of course the DOs say he does this because

> his student do not have the anatomy and medical

> background needed to learn it as they teach it. And

> obviously there is a lot of politics and resentment

> that he teaches " none physicians. " This however has

> changed and now a legal opinion forced the

> osteopaths to open their courses to anyone with

> appropriate license, including LAc.

> Lastly, his historical statements in the article are

> only partly true as others besides Upledger

> researched and developed cranial techniques many of

> which are not sutural. Some are just as dural or

> membraneness.

> Also his statement that he discovered the scientific

> rational for the cranial system is ridiculous

> because we still do not know were the cranial

> movement comes from. There are several theories.

>

>

>

>

> Oakland, CA 94609

>

>

> -

> yehuda frischman

>

> Wednesday, June 21, 2006 7:59 PM

> CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> Osteopathy

>

>

> Dear Dr. Sam,

>

> Thank you for your thoughtful response to my

> letter.

>

> I want to address some of the issues that you

> raise,

> and then to follow, I am reprinting a short

> article

> that Dr. Upledger wrote in 1995 specifically

> explaining the differences between CO and CST.

>

> Except for my friend, in my experience, the

> similarities and differences between CST and

> Cranial

> > Osteopathy tend to be obscured by politics and

> turf

> > battles.

>

> This is indeed a problem, that we face. Just as

> tuina

> is a problem for our " other hat " as licensed

> acupuncturists and practitioners of CM relative to

> chiropractors. I find that until I actually work

> on

> osteopaths, or trade treatments with them, that

> they

> feel I am unqualified to treat craniosacrally.

> Yet,as

> you will see in Dr. Upledger's article below,

> indeed

> there are significant differences, and not just

> style.

>

> >

> > Let me start with one or two issues..

> >

> > > The essence of CST is following the guidance

> of

> > the

> > > patient's inner wisdom

> >

> > Most therapies I've encountered claim this,

> > including CO. I don't see

> > this as a CST vs CO difference.

>

> Three points to add here: 1.The touch in CST is

> very

> light, 2. The guidance that we receive is not

> esoteric, nor " energetic " (I hate that term!) but

> rather proprioceptorial. Meaning, when, using very

> light touch, I feel a therapeutic pulse, a change

> in

> temperature, my patient sighs, or other signs of

> release, I am guided to go deeper. 3. Because of

> the

> fascial network that traverses the entire body, I

> can

> feel the CS rhythm and treat the patient through

> that

> process anywhere in the body, not just on the

> cranium,

> the spine or the sacrum.

>

> > > and rather than looking for a

> > > diagnosis and viewing the patient as " an

> other "

> >

> > This might be important.

> > I understand this as placing emphasis on a

> treatment

> > protocol, with

> > the protocol guiding your decisions, rather than

> > making a diagnosis,

> > and letting that diagnosis guide your decisions.

> >

> > I agree, a wrong diagnosis creates a barrier

> between

> > you and the

> > patient. I also believe treatment based on an

> > average of all patients

> > (i.e treatment based on protocol) creates a

> > barrier betwen you and

> > THIS patient.

> > I believe the key is the ability to make good

> > diagnoses, based on

> > palpatory sensitivity and anatomical knowledge.

> > What would CST teach?

>

> We are guided by this palpatory process of

> releasing

> " energetic cysts " that I described previously,

> along

> with intuition: learning to view the patient

> without

> any preconceptions, remaining neutral without an

> agenda, and opening ourselves up to follow the

> direction that we pick up from the patient, rather

> than what we want to do, including knowing when to

> stop. What's also important to point out is that

> we

> are not treating the patient mechanically,

> following a

> specific protocol (though new therapists are

> encouraged initially to follow a 10-step

> protocol),

> with specific manipulations maneuvers or

> adjustments

> as an osteopath or chiropractor would, but rather

> are

> addressing in a much more integrated way, the

> body/mind/emotional interaction. This is the

> essence

> of SomatoEmotional release, and is tapped into

> when a

> " stillpoint " occurs during therapy.

>

> > > follows the instructions received from within,

> > without

> > > an agenda, ever sensitive to anamolies in the

> CS

> > > rhythm in terms of symmetry, rate, amplitude

> and

> > > quality.

> >

> > I think this is also important. I've met people

> who

> > are real

> > psychics, who can select herbs, acupuncture

> points,

> > etc based on their

> > inner contact with the patients. I've met more

> > people I've thought

> > were listening more to their own inner dialogue,

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

What can I say? I am neither an osteopath (though

definitely open to learning, as we have spoken about),

nor a researcher. What I have learned from Upledger

and his instructors has made sense to me in my limited

knowledge of anatomy and physiology, and has enriched

my clinical practice. Now in my 50s, and a young pup

in terms of experience (I reinvented myself and began

to study formally in 2000), my priority is to educate

myself to offer my patients as many modalities (ie.

opportunities) as I can which resonate well with me,

to promote their wellness and balance. My second

priority is to educate them to become more in touch

with themselves in order for me to become obsolete. I

will leave the research to those more educated or

younger than myself, and so (forgive my

long-windedness) I defer to your wisdom and

experience--but appreciate the opportunity to engage

in these polemics. Bottom line--why what I do works,

Upledger's explanation works for me, but the point

really is moot, as why is a question which for me is

not that important.

 

Sincerely and respectfully,

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

--- <alonmarcus wrote:

 

> Hi Yehuda

> Actually Upledger is a part owner of Eastland press

> and does not get along with Dan very well. All his

> resent books are published by North Atlantic books.

> Upledger has not proven anything regarding the

> origin of the movement and the fluid theory is

> probably the least likely one. Some think it was

> completely disprove. In osteopathic view no-one, or

> almost noone, disagree that the primary respiratory

> mechanism is active (ie movement of the cranial

> mechanisms). What is not known is what causes this

> movement. The most likely theory which i tend to

> believe is a muscular pulse.

>

>

>

>

> Oakland, CA 94609

>

>

> -

> yehuda frischman

>

> Thursday, June 22, 2006 12:27 AM

> Re: CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> Osteopathy

>

>

> Alon,

>

> The article was written for lay people, not

> professionals, as a very simplified introduction

> to

> differences. There are plenty of peer journal

> references that are available should you be

> interested, including the JAOA, the Michigan

> Osteopathic Journal, Osteopathic medicine, and

> Osteopathic Annuls. As a matter of fact, if you

> are

> in touch with Dan Bensky, you can ask him what he

> thinks of John Upledger's work. I can tell you

> that

> Eastland press(Bensky's publishing house)publishes

> Upledger's textbooks. Through bio-mechanics, and

> bio-electric measurements, Upledger has proven and

> substantiated his theory of the origins and

> mechanisms

> of the craniosacral system. A quick summary of it:

> The CranioSacral system is a semi-closed hydraulic

> pressurestat system, in a closed container with a

> regulated inflow and outflow mechanism. The

> container is the waterproof Dura Mater (the Dural

> tube), the fluid is the cerebrospinal fluid, the

> inflow pumping system is the choroid Plexuses,

> located

> in the lateral ventricles and the third ventricle,

> and

> the primary regulatory system is the stretch and

> compression(extension and flexion) receptors in

> the

> saggital suture. These receptors communicate via

> nerve

> tracts running through the Falx Cerebri and then

> into

> the brain substance with the ventricular system

> and

> its choroid plexuses. When the Saggital suture is

> stretched open by increased fluid pressure within

> the

> Dural membrane, the stretch receptors signal the

> Choroid Plexuses to reduce or stop the production

> of

> Cerebrospinal fluid. When the saggital suture

> compresses, a signal is generated to begin

> production

> of CSF again. This system operates on about a 6

> second cycle: that is CSF is produced for about 3

> seconds, and then production stops for about 3

> seconds. The regulation of the CSF outflow

> operates

> through several mechanisms, including the cluster

> of

> Arachnoid Granulation Bodies located at the

> anterior

> end of the Straight Venous Sinus. The CSF is then

> reabsorbed back into the venous blood system

> through

> the arachnoid Villae, located throughout the

> length of

> the Dural tube, but concentrated in the sagittal

> venous sinus. His work is now hardly considered by

> Osteopathic scholars to be controversial, and he

> was

> named by Time Magazine as one of the 10 most

> important

> innovators of alternative medicine for the 21st

> century. Incidentally, in his many articles he

> addresses the other theories of the mechanisms of

> the

> Craniosacral system and explains why they are

> simply

> incorrect.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

>

> --- <alonmarcus wrote:

>

> > Yehuda

> > This article by Upledger is so over simplified

> it

> > would be like me saying Chinese acupuncture

> never

> > uses the skill of palpation and Japanese

> acupuncture

> > is highly sensitive and demand palpation skill.

> > Osteopathic manipulation in the cranial field or

> the

> > primary respiratory mechanisms has many

> different

> > approaches depending on palpatory findings.

> There

> > are several sutural approaches (which i use the

> > most) there are fluid approaches, dural and

> > membraness approaches among several others.

> There

> > are techniques that utilize extremely light

> touch

> > both direct and indirect, there are some that

> use a

> > heavier touch both direct and indirect, these

> are

> > all dependent on training and on the patient's

> > condition. The fact that the primary respiratory

> > mechanism can be felt anywhere in the body is

> > obviously part of osteopathic technique, both

> > diagnostically and therapeutically.

> > When i teach someone to feel cranial movement i

> > usually have my hand somewhere on the pt body

> (not

> > head) and then i guide the student letting them

> know

> > when flexion and extension switches so that they

> can

> > feel it.

> > To do good pelvic work one must know where

> sacral,

> > cranial and lower extremity axis are.

> > Good osteopathy never has protocols in any of

> its

> > modalities including cranial. I once took an

> > Upledger muscle energy course and what struck me

> was

> > the fact that they teach a protocol which goes

> > against everything Mitchell Sr has taught all

> his

> > life and against what Mitchell Jr and Ed Styles

> > teach today. I have never taken an Upledger

> cranial

> > class but some of the criticism i have heard is

> this

> > lack of diagnostic approach and teaching

> > protocols.Of course the DOs say he does this

> because

> > his student do not have the anatomy and medical

> > background needed to learn it as they teach it.

> And

> > obviously there is a lot of politics and

> resentment

> > that he teaches " none physicians. " This however

> has

> > changed and now a legal opinion forced the

> > osteopaths to open their courses to anyone with

> > appropriate license, including LAc.

> > Lastly, his historical statements in the article

> are

> > only partly true as others besides Upledger

> > researched and developed cranial techniques many

> of

> > which are not sutural. Some are just as dural or

> > membraneness.

> > Also his statement that he discovered the

> scientific

> > rational for the cranial system is ridiculous

> > because we still do not know were the cranial

> > movement comes from. There are several theories.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Oakland, CA 94609

> >

> >

> > -

> > yehuda frischman

> >

> > Wednesday, June 21, 2006 7:59 PM

> > CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> > Osteopathy

> >

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yehuda

As long as we learn we stay alive, i am with you

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

-

yehuda frischman

Thursday, June 22, 2006 1:31 PM

Re: CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio Osteopathy

 

 

Alon,

 

What can I say? I am neither an osteopath (though

definitely open to learning, as we have spoken about),

nor a researcher. What I have learned from Upledger

and his instructors has made sense to me in my limited

knowledge of anatomy and physiology, and has enriched

my clinical practice. Now in my 50s, and a young pup

in terms of experience (I reinvented myself and began

to study formally in 2000), my priority is to educate

myself to offer my patients as many modalities (ie.

opportunities) as I can which resonate well with me,

to promote their wellness and balance. My second

priority is to educate them to become more in touch

with themselves in order for me to become obsolete. I

will leave the research to those more educated or

younger than myself, and so (forgive my

long-windedness) I defer to your wisdom and

experience--but appreciate the opportunity to engage

in these polemics. Bottom line--why what I do works,

Upledger's explanation works for me, but the point

really is moot, as why is a question which for me is

not that important.

 

Sincerely and respectfully,

 

Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

 

--- <alonmarcus wrote:

 

> Hi Yehuda

> Actually Upledger is a part owner of Eastland press

> and does not get along with Dan very well. All his

> resent books are published by North Atlantic books.

> Upledger has not proven anything regarding the

> origin of the movement and the fluid theory is

> probably the least likely one. Some think it was

> completely disprove. In osteopathic view no-one, or

> almost noone, disagree that the primary respiratory

> mechanism is active (ie movement of the cranial

> mechanisms). What is not known is what causes this

> movement. The most likely theory which i tend to

> believe is a muscular pulse.

>

>

>

>

> Oakland, CA 94609

>

>

> -

> yehuda frischman

>

> Thursday, June 22, 2006 12:27 AM

> Re: CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> Osteopathy

>

>

> Alon,

>

> The article was written for lay people, not

> professionals, as a very simplified introduction

> to

> differences. There are plenty of peer journal

> references that are available should you be

> interested, including the JAOA, the Michigan

> Osteopathic Journal, Osteopathic medicine, and

> Osteopathic Annuls. As a matter of fact, if you

> are

> in touch with Dan Bensky, you can ask him what he

> thinks of John Upledger's work. I can tell you

> that

> Eastland press(Bensky's publishing house)publishes

> Upledger's textbooks. Through bio-mechanics, and

> bio-electric measurements, Upledger has proven and

> substantiated his theory of the origins and

> mechanisms

> of the craniosacral system. A quick summary of it:

> The CranioSacral system is a semi-closed hydraulic

> pressurestat system, in a closed container with a

> regulated inflow and outflow mechanism. The

> container is the waterproof Dura Mater (the Dural

> tube), the fluid is the cerebrospinal fluid, the

> inflow pumping system is the choroid Plexuses,

> located

> in the lateral ventricles and the third ventricle,

> and

> the primary regulatory system is the stretch and

> compression(extension and flexion) receptors in

> the

> saggital suture. These receptors communicate via

> nerve

> tracts running through the Falx Cerebri and then

> into

> the brain substance with the ventricular system

> and

> its choroid plexuses. When the Saggital suture is

> stretched open by increased fluid pressure within

> the

> Dural membrane, the stretch receptors signal the

> Choroid Plexuses to reduce or stop the production

> of

> Cerebrospinal fluid. When the saggital suture

> compresses, a signal is generated to begin

> production

> of CSF again. This system operates on about a 6

> second cycle: that is CSF is produced for about 3

> seconds, and then production stops for about 3

> seconds. The regulation of the CSF outflow

> operates

> through several mechanisms, including the cluster

> of

> Arachnoid Granulation Bodies located at the

> anterior

> end of the Straight Venous Sinus. The CSF is then

> reabsorbed back into the venous blood system

> through

> the arachnoid Villae, located throughout the

> length of

> the Dural tube, but concentrated in the sagittal

> venous sinus. His work is now hardly considered by

> Osteopathic scholars to be controversial, and he

> was

> named by Time Magazine as one of the 10 most

> important

> innovators of alternative medicine for the 21st

> century. Incidentally, in his many articles he

> addresses the other theories of the mechanisms of

> the

> Craniosacral system and explains why they are

> simply

> incorrect.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac, CST, SER, TJM

>

> --- <alonmarcus wrote:

>

> > Yehuda

> > This article by Upledger is so over simplified

> it

> > would be like me saying Chinese acupuncture

> never

> > uses the skill of palpation and Japanese

> acupuncture

> > is highly sensitive and demand palpation skill.

> > Osteopathic manipulation in the cranial field or

> the

> > primary respiratory mechanisms has many

> different

> > approaches depending on palpatory findings.

> There

> > are several sutural approaches (which i use the

> > most) there are fluid approaches, dural and

> > membraness approaches among several others.

> There

> > are techniques that utilize extremely light

> touch

> > both direct and indirect, there are some that

> use a

> > heavier touch both direct and indirect, these

> are

> > all dependent on training and on the patient's

> > condition. The fact that the primary respiratory

> > mechanism can be felt anywhere in the body is

> > obviously part of osteopathic technique, both

> > diagnostically and therapeutically.

> > When i teach someone to feel cranial movement i

> > usually have my hand somewhere on the pt body

> (not

> > head) and then i guide the student letting them

> know

> > when flexion and extension switches so that they

> can

> > feel it.

> > To do good pelvic work one must know where

> sacral,

> > cranial and lower extremity axis are.

> > Good osteopathy never has protocols in any of

> its

> > modalities including cranial. I once took an

> > Upledger muscle energy course and what struck me

> was

> > the fact that they teach a protocol which goes

> > against everything Mitchell Sr has taught all

> his

> > life and against what Mitchell Jr and Ed Styles

> > teach today. I have never taken an Upledger

> cranial

> > class but some of the criticism i have heard is

> this

> > lack of diagnostic approach and teaching

> > protocols.Of course the DOs say he does this

> because

> > his student do not have the anatomy and medical

> > background needed to learn it as they teach it.

> And

> > obviously there is a lot of politics and

> resentment

> > that he teaches " none physicians. " This however

> has

> > changed and now a legal opinion forced the

> > osteopaths to open their courses to anyone with

> > appropriate license, including LAc.

> > Lastly, his historical statements in the article

> are

> > only partly true as others besides Upledger

> > researched and developed cranial techniques many

> of

> > which are not sutural. Some are just as dural or

> > membraneness.

> > Also his statement that he discovered the

> scientific

> > rational for the cranial system is ridiculous

> > because we still do not know were the cranial

> > movement comes from. There are several theories.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Oakland, CA 94609

> >

> >

> > -

> > yehuda frischman

> >

> > Wednesday, June 21, 2006 7:59 PM

> > CranioSacral therapy vs Cranio

> > Osteopathy

> >

>

=== message truncated ===