I also initially wondered if non-face-to-face would be sufficient. Having experienced many cases in the clinic, the pros and cons are clear. First, the advantages: it saves commuting time and eliminates the stress of traveling for appointments. Since diet herbal medicine often requires adjustments every 2–4 weeks based on progress, this is especially helpful for those who find it burdensome to visit each time, supporting consistency. It also allows for immediate consultation when questions arise during medication, reducing dropout rates. However, there are clear disadvantages. In Korean medicine, diet treatment frequently uses concepts such as Spleen Deficiency (biheo) or Phlegm-Fluid (dameum), and accurate assessment relies heavily on pulse diagnosis (maekjin) and tongue diagnosis (seoljin). With non-face-to-face, we can only rely on photos or videos taken by the patient, making it easy to miss subtle changes. Moreover, herbal formulas are adjusted by changing just one or two ingredients based on constitution and condition, but it is difficult to comprehensively evaluate facial color, voice tone, and speech patterns remotely. Therefore, I strongly recommend an in-person visit for the initial consultation. During the first visit, we perform constitution differentiation and baseline diagnosis, then from the second or third follow-up, we may transition to non-face-to-face depending on the situation. If you are in the Gwangmyeong area, you can come once for the initial visit, and subsequent adjustments can be done via video or phone consultation. Of course, if any changes occur—such as constipation or menstrual irregularities—it is better to return for an in-person visit. Ultimately, whether non-face-to-face or in-person is better depends on how consistently the patient can manage their treatment and the current stability of their condition. Rather than simply choosing the more convenient option, I encourage you to consider 'what kind of diagnosis do I need right now?'