A Rocky Road That Settled: One Woman’s 18 Months With Neck Eczema
Where she started
She was in her 40s and otherwise well, but an itchy, rough, discoloured patch had sat on the back of her neck for about a year. There was no family history of eczema, and her blood tests were normal. The only other thing she mentioned was constipation. Two details mattered for what came next: she had been using a steroid cream for about six months, and she took a daily licorice supplement.
A change of approach
Rather than continue the steroid cream, the clinic stopped it — and stopped the licorice supplement too, since licorice is not as neutral as it sounds and can act on the skin in a steroid-like way. In their place she started oral and topical Chinese herbal treatment, and came back every month so her neck could be photographed and tracked.

For the first half-year, little changed — the patch stayed thick, rough and discoloured. Then it got worse, not better. Activity picked up around Month 8, and Month 10 was the roughest point in the whole series, redder and more raised than at the start. If she had judged the treatment at that moment, it would have looked like a failure.
She kept going. From around Month 12 the patch began to settle, and the clearest change came between Months 14 and 16 — less redness, less thickness, smoother skin. By Month 18 the neck looked much calmer: some faint discolouration and a little textural change lingered, but the angry, continuous patch was gone. After that review she didn’t come back, so the photographs simply stop there.
What can honestly be said
Read plainly, the pictures show a wave-like course that ended up much improved but not blank. They do not show a cure, and they cannot prove what caused the change — she stopped a steroid, stopped a supplement, and started herbs all around the same time, and eczema naturally comes and goes on its own. What the story does show is that a bad patch in the middle was not the end of it.
How the clinic framed it, in TCM terms
Traditional Chinese medicine reads the same skin through pattern differentiation rather than a single lesion label. Taking the chronic, thickened neck plaque together with the reported constipation, the clinic assessed the case as follows:
| Pathogenesis (病机) | Lung-and-Spleen qi deficiency with an unconsolidated protective (wei) exterior, allowing wind-dampness to lodge in the skin — 肺脾气虚,卫表不固,风湿蕴肤 |
| Pattern (证型) | Spleen-deficiency with dampness accumulation; wind-dampness invading the skin — 脾虚湿蕴、风湿犯肤证 |
| Treatment principle (治法) | Tonify qi and consolidate the exterior; strengthen the Spleen and resolve dampness; dispel wind to relieve itching — 益气固表、健脾祛湿、祛风止痒 |
This is TCM pattern-differentiation reasoning expressed in its own framework, and it is what guided the choice of herbs. It is not a biomedical mechanism claim, and it is not evidence that the herbs changed the disease — that question is addressed honestly in the FAQ and the clinical appendix below.
Frequently asked questions
- What does this story describe?
- Eczema on the back of the neck in a woman in her 40s, present for about 12 months before treatment began. It was diagnosed from its appearance and course, not by biopsy or patch testing.
- What treatment did she have?
- The clinic stopped her topical steroid cream and her oral licorice supplement, and used oral and topical Chinese herbal treatment instead, with photographs taken at monthly reviews.
- Why stop the licorice supplement?
- Licorice is not inert. Its active compound acts on the skin in a corticosteroid-like, anti-inflammatory way, so the clinic chose to stop it alongside the steroid cream, so the skin’s own recovery could be judged clearly. Licorice can also raise blood pressure and lower potassium with regular use, which is a separate reason to review it.
- Did it get worse before it got better?
- Yes. The roughest point was around Months 8 to 10, after treatment had already started. The skin settled later, with the clearest improvement from about Month 14 onward.
- Did her skin fully clear?
- No. By Month 18 it was much improved but not completely blank — faint residual discolouration and textural change remained, and there is no record after that point.
- Was the improvement caused by the herbal treatment?
- A single story cannot prove that. Several things changed at once — the steroid was stopped, the licorice was stopped, and herbs were started — and possible steroid withdrawal, continued hair-dye exposure, and the naturally relapsing-remitting nature of eczema could all have played a part.
- Could this have been a hair-dye allergy rather than eczema?
- It is a fair question and part of the differential. Allergic contact dermatitis from hair-dye ingredients typically affects the nape of the neck and behind the ears and can look eczema-like once it becomes chronic. It is confirmed by patch testing, which was not done here, so it cannot be ruled out from photographs alone.
- Why does the record stop at Month 18?
- She did not return once her skin had largely settled — a common pattern in long-term skin conditions. The downside is that we cannot know whether the improvement lasted, since nothing was documented afterwards.
- Is this treatment likely to work for me?
- No honest treatment can promise a result, and nothing here should be read that way. This is one person’s documented course; results differ between individuals, and any treatment should be discussed with a qualified practitioner who has assessed your skin and your other medicines.
- When should someone see a doctor about a rash like this?
- If a rash is spreading, weeping, crusting, painful, not settling, or affecting sleep and daily life, it is worth seeing a doctor. New or changing skin problems should be assessed in person rather than self-treated from an article.
Clinical Studies: diagnosis, differential, confounders, evidence tiering & limitations
Case summary
Woman in her 40s; posterior neck eczema ~12 months; no family history; normal routine bloods; constipation; otherwise healthy. Prior topical corticosteroid (Cobiderm, ~6 months; exact molecule/potency unresolved) and daily oral licorice supplement; hair dye ~every 6 months. Diagnosis clinical (morphology and course), not biopsy- or patch-test-confirmed.
Intervention
Topical corticosteroid and oral licorice both discontinued at outset; individualized oral Tangs Clinical herbal formula(s) plus topical herbal cream commenced; monthly review with photographic documentation, Baseline→Month 18. No corticosteroid used during the herbal course. Assessment was photographic only; no validated severity instrument (EASI/SCORAD/IGA) recorded.
Course
Non-linear/wave-like: relative stability to M6; increased activity M8; peak flare M10; partial regression M12–14; clearest improvement M14–16; substantial reduction in active disease by M18 with residual dyspigmentation and textural change. Lost to follow-up after M18.
Differential diagnosis
Allergic contact dermatitis (hair-dye/PPD — site-congruent for nape and retroauricular skin), seborrhoeic dermatitis, tinea, and topical steroid withdrawal (given the steroid history). None excluded by test; diagnosis rests on morphology and course. Patch testing would be the key discriminator for the contact-allergy hypothesis and was not performed.
Confounders and competing explanations for the observed course
(1) Topical steroid withdrawal — a described but contested entity, without agreed diagnostic criteria, frequently indistinguishable from a flare or contact allergy; a plausible contributor to the M8–10 flare. (2) Licorice withdrawal — glycyrrhetinic acid inhibits 11β-HSD, conferring corticosteroid-like/cortisol-potentiating and anti-inflammatory activity; removing it may, in principle, contribute to a rebound-type effect. “Licorice withdrawal syndrome” is a clinical hypothesis, not an established diagnosis; licorice’s best-documented systemic risk is pseudohyperaldosteronism. (3) Continued hair-dye exposure (not documented as stopped) as an ongoing trigger. (4) Unmeasured adherence, seasonality, and the intrinsic relapsing-remitting course of eczema. Multiple interventions changed simultaneously, precluding attribution to any single factor.
TCM pattern rationale
Pattern differentiation: 肺脾气虚,卫表不固,风湿蕴肤 (Lung-Spleen qi deficiency, unconsolidated exterior, wind-damp retention); pattern 脾虚湿蕴、风湿犯肤证; principle 益气固表、健脾祛湿、祛风止痒. Presented as the internal reasoning that guided herb selection, in its own idiom; it is not offered as a biomedical mechanism nor as evidence of efficacy.
Limitations
Single uncontrolled case; photographic assessment without a validated severity score; non-standardised lighting/angle/distance; multiple simultaneous interventions; unconfirmed diagnosis (no biopsy/patch test); follow-up limited to 18 months with loss to follow-up thereafter. No causal or efficacy conclusion is drawable.
Background references (disease, withdrawal, licorice pharmacology, contact allergy)
- Lax SJ, Harvey J, Axon E, Howells L, Santer M, Ridd MJ, Lawton S, Langan S, Roberts A, Ahmed A, Muller I, Ming LC, Panda S, Chernyshov P, Carter B, Williams HC, Thomas KS, Chalmers JR. Strategies for using topical corticosteroids in children and adults with eczema. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Mar 11;3(3):CD013356. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013356.pub2. PMID: 35275399; PMCID: PMC8916090.
- Mohta A, Sathe N. Topical Steroid Withdrawal (Red Skin Syndrome). StatPearls [NBK603718], 2024; and DermNet, Topical corticosteroid withdrawal (2023–25).
- Myles IA and Ratley G (2026) Topical steroid withdrawal: dissecting the controversy. Front. Med. 13:1786331. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1786331
- Kwon YJ, Son DH, Chung TH, Lee YJ. A Review of the Pharmacological Efficacy and Safety of Licorice Root from Corroborative Clinical Trial Findings. J Med Food. 2020 Jan;23(1):12-20. doi: 10.1089/jmf.2019.4459. Epub 2019 Dec 23. PMID: 31874059.
- Encabo Durán B, Romero-Pérez D, Silvestre Salvador JF. Allergic Contact Dermatitis Due to Paraphenylenediamine: An Update. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2018 Sep;109(7):602-609. English, Spanish. doi: 10.1016/j.ad.2017.12.007. Epub 2018 Feb 26. PMID: 29496197.
Herbal formulas are prescribed after individual assessment; they can interact with medicines and are not suitable for everyone. Do not self-prescribe.
