Gathering place for osteopaths
CV4 ??
When I was a osteopathic student, I learnt classical CV4, but I never got any improve over my patients. Several years after, I learnt Biodynamic CV4 and I have felt lots of changes in my patients. Therefore, I have some questions... What is your experience with classical Cv4 or biodinamic CV4? and Do you believe that Biodinamic CV4 must be called with an other name (no CV4)?
Thanks!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Wyatt on -
Hi chap :)
I learned CV4 at the BSO, and it worked very well from scratch. Later I learned to work in a way which undercuts most of the reason to use it - and so stopped. It's largely a matter of driving the fluid system through whatever blocks exist, and to my mind it's better to competently unblock the system itself.
I think it's possible that your skill in performing CV4 has improved simply because your perception and abilities have developed over time. That's normal. :)
I don't believe there's much to gain from renaming a Biodynamic CV4. It's human nature to split things up. The Cranial is one of the tools of Ost, and should be integrated - but is it? The Biodynamicists are part of the Cranial, which is part of Ost; but they're determined to go their own way. Hi ho!
All the best
Dick
-
Permalink Reply by Roger Kingston on -
The classical CV4 of squeezing the hell out of the occiput never rested well with me.
Listening and allowing the system to work in a way that it wants to is a far more effective way.
Force rarely works! Though a good HVT can produce the same effects!
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Vaucher on -
Learning cranial osteopathy at the Swiss School of osteopathy was a chalenge! We had four teachers who taught in the cranial field in different courses. They all had different underlying concepts and strongly disagreed with one and another. All seemed to be sure their approach was optimal and that the other teachers were phonies without knowing it.
For myself, I only started understanding cranial osteopathy once I read old textbooks. "The cranial bowl" from Sutherland is more about what we ought to feel and do and is full of paraboles like feeling "the waves washing back and forward on a beach". Magoon then tried to make cranial osteopathy look like a science and therefore lost all these subjective exlanations making cranial osteopathy paradoxaly less accessible to me. I guess I am much more receptive to Sutherland's pedagogy than Magoon's. But then for many of us it could be just the opposite.
What we all agree on is that interacting with a patient and changing his own perception of his body and/or pain is an efficient way of treating patients. I think both approaches could therefore be efficient; and might only depend on patient's and practitioner's expectations.
-
Permalink Reply by Hume O'Rous on -
'It's largely a matter of driving the fluid system through whatever blocks exist'
'squeezing the hell out of the occiput'
'the waves washing back and forward on a beach'
Isn't language fascinating, so what's it to be then: poetry or science?
Many cranial practitioners have definite right hemisphere allegiance, and a magnet attraction to the gentle, feminine, receptive principle. They are distinctly unimpressed by HVLA techniques where the left hemisphere, masculine principle struts its stuff.
What to do?
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Vaucher on
-
Well, the brain lateralisation and it's functional use between men and female is not so clear (it is the subject of my thesis by the way). Cranial osteopathy is likeways a mixture between what we would want it to be, what we think it to be, and what we doen't believe it to be.
It is surely not a science and if it is to be poetry it definitly would be modern art; no one can understand it ;)
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Wyatt on
-
Hi Maria! & hi everyone else, everywhere.
I'm interested in your sentence 'the treatment happens by itself, courtesy of your pt.'.
To me, this is pointless dogma and it isn't true, at least not in my practice.
I was taught this way, of course and a lot of the books agree, but I subsequently taught myself to find the roots of the problems, go to them, get them out and *only then* step aside - allowing the body to heal. And even then, in the event of extraordinary healing there's work for me to do.
Working this way is very much more effective! I work only in the cranial, obedient to the sheer efficacy of my methods. Believe me, if I'd listened to the dogma, I too would be puzzled.
Try and find the root of the problems. Grasp the problem, feel out its outlines and attempt to rush along it - following the tract, or conduit which leads to the next one. You're following fascial planes and linkages. At some stage (usually in the pelvic ring or the foot intrinsics, although anywhere is fair game in the event of local trauma), there can be no more progress - and that's your origin.
Envelope the origin in the fluid (or as you wish), and pull an extensible conduit out of the fluid encasement, which is dragged to the sacral hiatus, inserted until it 'catches' - and then release. Just 'go' to the sacral hiatus, pulling the conduit with you - it should work.
You have, thereby established what the body itself cannot - a direct transmission-link between the problems and the seat of their demolition. This is, itself an innate phenomenon, but alone it works only so very slowly.
The entire sequence of problems, from origin to wherevers should now drain towards the origin and so into dissolution, i.e. the spinal midline, which you accessed earlier via the sacral hiatus. Read about the spinal midlines in Sills, Franklin's 'Craniosacral Biodynamics' vol. 2, ISBN 1-55643-390-5. I don't accede to everything Sills says, by a long chalk but he's more-or-less on the money here.
Later one can add acceleration factors, time-readings etc. There are also better ways (and much more technical!) of getting problems to process into the spinal midline.
The problems of which I speak are simply unintentional energy-accumulations stored in elastic units of the fascial system. This, in a nutshell is what origin problems are made of. The physiological upshots, of course, where these things encumber arterial walls, oesophagi, major nerve and spinal bodies (to mention only a very few loci!) are manifest...
I have never, ever, seen a pt who lacked these features. And if the problems are removed prior to catastrophic disarrangement of the anatomophysiological system, absolutely satisfactory recovery is feasible. Inevitably, in most cases the problems have to get worse first, so your pts are already on the downward slope - but that's what you're there for, isn't it? It's just a matter of dealing with as much as you can, as fast as possible. :)
Just my 0.02 Euros
Dick
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Kuchera_DO on
-
Here is one mechanism of action for CV4 recently reported in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. In the article CV4 (cranial suppression technique) and its effect on cerebral blood flow was objectively measured using near infrared spectroscopy.
Our lab is now investigating this with transcranial doppler and rheoencephalography using the Moskalenko method. (More to come!!!)
Fraternally, Dr. Mike
- Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by indikate on -
Hi Francesc
I always heard Jim refer to this as EV4 which, I suppose, is just semantically focusing on a perceived expansion phase so is probably a similar phenomenon except in application.
-
Permalink Reply by Leo on -
The problem is that a classical CV4 involves DOING a technique, whilst a biodynamic CV4 is the response chosen by the system to best restore balanced and healthy function at that particular moment. The 2 approaches are completely different and so are the results. I think the important thing is not to get hung up on names but rather to be aware of how completely different the approaches are. As you say perhaps "no CV4" or indeed "no any technique" makes more sense!
-
Permalink Reply by Theodore Jordan on -
Out of curiosity: Is there a time difference between doing the 'traditional' CV4, versus doing the 'Biodynamic' CV4? My limited knowledge of biodynamics suggests that the procedure takes a fair bit longer than a couple of minutes of a 'traditional' CV4, as I was taught. If there is a significant duration-of-treatment difference, might there be other (e.g. psychological) factors playing a role in a longer-duration treatment?
-
Permalink Reply by Leo on
-
Its not really a question of time, because the biodynamic CV4 is a spontaneous treatment by the systems inherent intelligence to bring the body to the best level of function possible at that time. Byodynamics is about allowing the inherent healing capacity of the body to do its job, by creating the space in which it can happen. That is why the notion of neutral is so important in Biodynamics. I think psychological factors are important as far as the osteopath is concerned i.e the desire TO DO something to the patient, but not for the patient.
-
Permalink Reply by snoopy on
-
Compression of the 4th ventrical should not change because it was taught the classical way or via dr jeolous....however everyone hears differently. If the biodynamic way got you to actually feel something then off you go. My complaint with the CV4 is that it is really just a hands on valium. It really doesn't reset anything nor "heal' miraculously....it is however a way into the system...something to monitor as you work elsewhere....the vitality of the CSR is not the end-point...it is what should be monitored such that one has a basis to relate your other treatments elsewhere on the body....if your treatment closes down the cranail rhythm then something is wrong...if it excites the rhythm the same is true...but if it balances the rhythm then you have additional information to contemplate while trying to facilitate health in the body. Just some thoughts to get a conversation going....not trying to be subversive but complaining is a left brain activity and will keep you in the wrong area of the creative art that an Osteopath produces....our medium is the body.....one must access the right brain in order to be creative....unfortunately logic can get in the way....but the CSR will let us know if we are the correct treatment track
DrJ
© 2012 Created by Ronan O'Brien.
