Mark Russell's response:

To answer the question of differences between “natural horsemanship” and “riding in lightness” I need to make several comments that are not meant to undermine natural horsemanship – just recognize the differences.

•  There are many similarities between the two philosophies, most concern the softness of contact and building an intuitive respectful bond between horse and rider. In building that bond more responsibility for forward movement is transferred to the horse.
• Engagement and gymnasticizing of the hind leg is decidedly different because riding in lightness uses the bridle to access the horse’s spine. The horse’s performance in natural horsemanship does not require the same focus on the horse’s back or neck.
• In riding in lightness, connectivity of the whole horse is essential. This begins with the release of the TMJ and poll; the horse is then encouraged to release throughout his whole spine to begin the balancing and engagement process. Riding in lightness maintains connection throughout the whole spine (from head to tail), and consciously avoids disrupting this flow. 

I have great admiration for the natural horsemanship movement and what they have done for riding and horse care in general. Whether you choose one method of riding and training over the other depends on type of riding you do and the outcome you expect from the horse.

I agree with this accessment. I have been following natural horsemenship trainers for several years. While having success with how they teach you to progress I really didn't feel a strong connection to my horse until I found qi gong exercise. It is really amazing the difference it makes. Not a lot of people taking about this "energy connection" with the horse so I think the work you are doing is great. I read somewhere on this site something like you don't really understand how much you need this connection until you have it - so it makes convincing other riders into qi gong difficult...I have a feeling it will be one rider at a time.