How is craniosacral different from cranial osteopathy?

[theGR8shazam]

One of Walt's recent posts reminded me of this question I had...

How is craniosacral different from cranial osteopathy? Does it really fit into our scope of practice as MTs?

 

[kelsie g]

Guess who???? :grin:

(Please keep in mind I am Upledger trained, so my answer is from that perspective of CST work)

I believe the biggest difference to be that our main focus as CranioSacral Therapists is that we are ultimately concerned about the health of the tissues and fluid of the CranioSacral System (CSS). Osteopaths focus mainly on the bones and the health of the body through good structural alignment. Remember, it was AT Still who 'rocked' the medical world saying that 'Structure and Function are interrelated'. Also remember that AT Still had an engineering background and studied the skeleton from this perspective.

Dr Sutherland came along and looked specifically at the cranial bones. His worked focused on the movement of cranial bones and what happens when sutures get stuck. He came up with the CV4 and other techniques to 'move CSF' around inside the skull to release sutural restrictions. But again, his focus was on bone.

As CranioSacral Therapists we do have a focus on the bones in the CSS. But our focus is to free up the bones to use as handles to access the meningeal system. This, I believe is what makes CST a unique therapy.

Also, in CST we focus on the soft tissues throughout the body that may be putting tensions or restrictions on the CSS. Again, this differs from Osteopathic work as their focus would be on the alignment of the bone to address soft tissue restrictions.

Another difference is that in Upledger CST we work with energy cysts and facilitated segments. I don't believe either of these are directly addressed by Osteopaths.

So, as you can tell (and probably could have guessed), I believe that CST is very different from Osteopathic work. Do I think it is within our scope as MTs? Absolutely!!! Out primary focus is on the soft tissues of the body; even the soft tissues of the CNS. Yes we use bone to access these deeper tissues, but we are not performing thrust adjustment of any type. The work is light - VERY LIGHT!!! Plus, we are not trained to give a diagnosis or to prescribe medicines. We are taught to listen to and follow the body using bodywork techniques and some energy work.

I have had treatments from a Cranial Osteopath. They were very different from what I do as a CranioSacral Therapist.


Looking forward to this discussion ....

 

[hex]

Brian,
Who is AT?

 

[imsoeffinhxc]

Brian,
Who is AT?

I should have written it as A. T. Still (sorry)

Andrew Taylor Still is known as the 'Father of Osteopathy' and opened the first school of Osteopathy in Kirksville, Missouri in the 1890's.

He has a fascinating story and I highly recommend people learn more about him. He was well ahead of his time in his thoughts on the body and it's self healing abilities (from a medical perspective).

 

[jannsody]

Thank you! That was an excellent reply, it really helped me organize some of the floating matter in my head into my coherent universe of information.

Another issue: I immediately want to take all of the Visionary CS classes as well as pursue Upledger training. Q: What is wrong with me? LOL

 

[John O]

I am curious about the term "energy cysts" - what is it? What is the nature of the energy? Why is it called a cyst? Are there "energy adhesions"?

 

[Pompal 09.]

From Milne's Heart of Listening:

John Upledger uses the term "energy cyst" to describe the phenomena Woodman terms a "psychotic corner." As people are alarmed at the thought of having anything "psychotic" within them, and "cyst" seems destined for morbid interpretation, I prefer to use the term "archaic wound," which is more neutral. Grof calls the same phenomena "an area of condensed experience," or "COEX."

But so this is in the chapter on Unwinding... in Upledger's work, are energy cysts treated only with unwinding or with other methods as well?

 

[Don H]

From Milne's Heart of Listening:

John Upledger uses the term "energy cyst" to describe the phenomena Woodman terms a "psychotic corner." As people are alarmed at the thought of having anything "psychotic" within them, and "cyst" seems destined for morbid interpretation, I prefer to use the term "archaic wound," which is more neutral. Grof calls the same phenomena "an area of condensed experience," or "COEX."

But so this is in the chapter on Unwinding... in Upledger's work, are energy cysts treated only with unwinding or with other methods as well?

So, uh... I appreciate the contribution, but I'm still in the dark. What is the nature of the energy? Why is it called a cyst? Are there "energy adhesions"?

The book quote makes it sound more like an area of tissue adaptation to ongoing emotional phenomena than like anything I'd associate with energy. If so, the term "energy cyst" seems a bit esoteric and perhaps misleading... but I am only guessing here. Is there perhaps a plain English explanation?

 

[BossResurfacing]

Sorry, I could have been more clear. I wasn't trying to answer your question, but add to it. I'm as curious as you are about this whole "energy cyst" thing.

I think you understood Milne's words the way I've understood them though.

 

[dave w]

I am curious about the term "energy cysts" - what is it? What is the nature of the energy? Why is it called a cyst? Are there "energy adhesions"?

Here's a place to start:
Releasing the Energy Cyst By John Upledger, DO, OMM (article from Massage Today, August 2003)

Let me know what questions remain after reading ....

 

[Camona]

Thanks, that helped a lot. I'm still curious to know, in Upledger's work are energy cysts treated only with unwinding or with other methods as well?

 

[MzConception]

Thanks, that helped a lot. I'm still curious to know, in Upledger's work are energy cysts treated only with unwinding or with other methods as well?

No problem.

In Upledger work we don't use the term 'unwinding', but the body does sort of 'unwind' as a result of the treatment. We teach that one can treat energy cysts with two different techniques. I would explain them here, but honestly there is so much that would have to be discussed for them to make sense, that it would be like teaching the classes. One needs a solid understanding of the material in CST1 to really understand how to treat energy cysts as discussed in CST2 and then how to deepen the process of energy cyst release in SER1 / SER2.

 

[SgtShamy]

I am curious about the term "energy cysts" - what is it? What is the nature of the energy? Why is it called a cyst? Are there "energy adhesions"?

Here's a place to start:
Releasing the Energy Cyst By John Upledger, DO, OMM (article from Massage Today, August 2003)

Let me know what questions remain after reading ....

Thanks for the article link! I read it through several times and several things jumped out at me.

Research I conducted in the late 1970s with a biophysicist named Dr. Zvi Karni led us to discover that the body can retain the imprints of physical trauma in the tissues. These imprints, which can also include intense feelings that occurred at the time of injury, actually leave a residue embedded in the body. I call these areas of restricted or disorganized energy "energy cysts."

The idea behind this is: When an accident occurs, the energy of the accident enters the body. This fits with the laws of thermodynamics, which tell us that energy cannot be created or destroyed. They also tell us that the natural tendency of atoms, molecules and energy is toward disorganization. When this external, disorganized energy - the "energy of injury" - is forced into the body, it penetrates into the tissues to a depth determined by the amount of force versus the density of the tissues. This force is countered only by the density of the tissues it is trying to penetrate.

A blow to the foot or ankle might penetrate through the leg all the way to the pelvis. Once it reaches its depth of maximum penetration, it stops and forms a localized "ball" of energy that doesn't belong there. If your body is vital and able, the "energy of injury" can dissipate and normal healing can occur, but if your body is unable to dissipate this energy, it is compacted into a smaller and smaller ball in order to minimize the area of disruption to tissue function. As it becomes more compressed and localized, the disorganization within this compressed energy increases until it becomes an "energy cyst."

I am still confused by this article. First he mentions "a residue" that is embedded in the tissues. Context indicates some sort of detectable change related to an emotional experience, so did they find corresponding chemical and tissue changes? If so, what? It would be interesting to learn more about the specific nature of the "residue" mentioned.

When he states "the energy of the accident", at first it seems fairly clear that he is referring to kinetic force energy. The description of what determines "depth of penetration" is reasonably consistent with what I know of the transfer of kinetic energy through matter, and the emphasis on a tendency towards "disorganization" makes me think of hydrostatic shock, which may result from blunt force trauma. In the case of slashing, piercing or other non-blunt-force trauma in which the kinetic energy is transferred and absorbed differently, do energy cysts still occur? If so, how?

When "depth of maximum penetration" is achieved, a focal point of some sort develops, apparently leading to undesirable tissue adaptations and/or behaviors. How does the body "compact" this focal point to minimize disruption of normal functions? If tissue adaptations at the focal point occur in order to store and compact the "energy of injury", what other kinds of adaptions occur in the surrounding tissues as the site is compacted? When dealing with non-blunt-force trauma, how are these different?

Am I totally off-base on the kinetic energy thing? If so, what is Upledger talking about?

Or is Upledger referring strictly to physiological changes resulting from emotional responses experienced during the incidence of trauma? If so, his descriptions of external energy and energy penetration wouldn't make sense in the context of this article. Since he is referencing the laws of thermodynamics and research conducted with a biophysicist, it seems that he is suggesting "energy cysts" are a phenomenon rooted in physics and subtle tissue changes.

Does Upledger reference biotensegrity concepts in any of his works?

 

[Richard R]

Bumping this thread back up for further discussion.

 

[MissDementia]

cstbrian, sorry to disagree but osteopathic physicians do address soft tissue. A lot of osteopathic manipulation medicine (OMM) techniques deal with muscle energy, counter-strain, and tender points. There isn't some separation of bone from soft tissue in osteopathy; on the contrary, it's all part of the living organism and so it's all treated. OMM isn't done in a vacuum; the nervous system and cardiovascular system are addressed as well. It's a huge, huge field of practice, actually.

Osteopathy in Europe is more like chiropracty here; they don't practice general medicine but only do manipulation medicine and I don't know how extensively they study physiology and anatomy, but probably not as much as American DO's.

Cranial osteopathy is the original modality that began in the 1920s; Dr. Upledger has developed a tangential modality that's more or less based on cranial, but most DO's don't consider it to be osteopathy.

 

[Kristin]

Next week I'm getting a checkup for preventive maintenance, and will be seeing an osteopath for the first time. This DO practices in a standard clinic and sees the same patients as their MDs. I will try to remember to ask about his understanding of cranial osteopathy and cranio-sacral therapy.

BTW - I'm still waiting for answers to the questions in my prior posts.

 

[Tucker M]

Next week I'm getting a checkup for preventive maintenance, and will be seeing an osteopath for the first time. This OD practices in a standard clinic and sees the same patients as their MDs. I will try to remember to ask about his understanding of cranial osteopathy and cranio-sacral therapy.

BTW - I'm still waiting for answers to the questions in my prior posts.

Let us know what he says. By the way OD = optometrist, DO = doctor of osteopathy. I heard of someone who was both, and had "DOOD" after his name.

I wish I knew more about the Upledger c-s therapy. It's not discussed in osteopathic med school. I did read his book on c-s therapy where he described the results of treating autistic children--a couple of them recovered so much functionality that the psychologists decided they'd been misdiagnosed. I don't know if it's true, but it's what he said in his book. You'd think if it really cured autism, people would be lining up for treatments.

 

[Kayteeee]

Oops, I knew that! Prior post edited to correct the error.

 

[Freedom]

cstbrian, sorry to disagree but osteopathic physicians do address soft tissue. A lot of osteopathic manipulation medicine (OMM) techniques deal with muscle energy, counter-strain, and tender points. There isn't some separation of bone from soft tissue in osteopathy; on the contrary, it's all part of the living organism and so it's all treated. OMM isn't done in a vacuum; the nervous system and cardiovascular system are addressed as well. It's a huge, huge field of practice, actually.

Osteopathy in Europe is more like chiropracty here; they don't practice general medicine but only do manipulation medicine and I don't know how extensively they study physiology and anatomy, but probably not as much as American DO's.

Cranial osteopathy is the original modality that began in the 1920s; Dr. Upledger has developed a tangential modality that's more or less based on cranial, but most DO's don't consider it to be osteopathy.

I apologize if my point was not very clear and misleading. I do know that DOs address soft tissue. But in CST our focus is specifically on the soft tissues of the craniosacral system. I have not heard of DOs working so specifically in this way with meningeal tissues.

Also, I apologize if I gave the impression that we consider CST to be osteopthy. We do not. It is very different.

I wish I knew more about the Upledger c-s therapy. It's not discussed in osteopathic med school. I did read his book on c-s therapy where he described the results of treating autistic children--a couple of them recovered so much functionality that the psychologists decided they'd been misdiagnosed. I don't know if it's true, but it's what he said in his book. You'd think if it really cured autism, people would be lining up for

Myself and my colleagues have had similar results with Autistic children. It is NOT that we are 'curing' autism! We don't cure anything. We are simply helping open up restrictions in and around the nervous system to allow the body's inherent healing ability to take over. With any health issue, we are just looking to support the release of restrictions to allow the body to be as healthy as possible. This results in a decrease of symptoms and better quality of life.

CranioSacral Therapy can help to stop the self hurting behaviors often associated with autism: head banging, wrist biting, and severe thumb sucking. Also post treatment, children show signs of love and affection and increased interaction with other children and adults. But then what we often see is when the child goes through his/her next big growth spurt, symptoms start to come back and we find the CSS restrictions coming back.

BTW - I'm still waiting for answers to the questions in my prior posts.

I am waiting as well. As much as I would love to be able to respond, your knowledge of physics is much deeper than mine. I never did well in this area. I understand it on a very basic level intellectually, but intuitively feel it in a much different, deeper way.