NST vs. Bowen Therapy – Find Out The Difference

What is the difference between Neurostructural Integration Technique (NST) and Bowen Therapy? – This is a question so many Bowen therapists has asked me over and over again, that I’ve decided to put together the following article to fully explore that subject.

NST was developed from the later work of Tom Bowen. In other words it uses the techniques that his later students learnt before he died.  The choreography of NST was due to extensive testing using the principles of Kinesiology.  There are similarities between NST and Bowten versions, but there are also many significant differences.  These differences are the core effectiveness of NST. The work is representative of Tom’s later work- it does not mean that this is exactly what Tom himself did – as Tom’s work was forever evolving – NST is likewise evolving as practitioners learn more about the body using this wonderful technique.

The development of NST involved combining three powerful and effective neuromuscular techniques. The philosophy of NST is based upon the work of chiropractor, Major Bertrand DeJanette’s Sacro-occipital technique, the tool of validation and testing was Applied kinesiology and the technique itself being derived from the work of Tom Bowen.

From my own clinical experience in the Geelong region, treating clients of Tom Bowen, having used Bowen and now NST, the later is more dynamic than the other versions and, works more effectively.  It is faster to implement and gives better results. In fact I’ve had some of these clients say this is close to what Tom did.

I have also seen/experienced four different versions of the work through four of Tom’s six students. NST offers an integrative blend of all versions, making it a comprehensive overview of the type of work Tom was using the later part of his career.

NST is also taught within a theoretical and practical viable model, giving insight as to why the moves are used. NST basic course is 5 days and is only taught to practitioners who are in clinical practice and as such is taught within anatomical and physiological boundaries.  It covers the spinal area and extremities.

Generally practitioners who have taken other forms of Bowen find that NST is the most comprehensive and effective version.

I ran a class for experienced Bowen practitioners in Edmonton, Canada this year and here are some of the comments I’ve received:
“Thank you so much for sharing this work in such a beautiful way – it has taken my Bowen work to a new level” – Chelsea O’Neill-Becker
” Found my Bowen niche that makes most sense so far” – Sherry Barrett
” This workshop confirmed a lot of what I knew intuitively and has given credibility by providing a reasonable basis for this” – Jane Tews
Also a comment about  Neurostructural Integration Technique from David Howells a Chiropractor, Bowen Therapist and recently a NST teacher in the UK:

“Basic Bowen training was for me a revelation in achieving structural balance and neurological function. However, there were many cases where I felt limited in what I was able to offer clients. NST moved me on in my thinking and ability to address the sticking points that clients presented with. Now on average my number of treatments are 2 -3 for addressing both acute and chronic muscular skeletal issues . The feedback from clients is that they consistently prefer the NST approach as they feel the work seems to go deeper in addressing their problems.”


  1. The development of NST involved combining three powerful and effective neuromuscular techniques”
    I do not agree, read: http://bestofphoenix2009.com/bowen-therapy-conditions-that-benefit-from-bowen-treatments Nelda

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: