India’s Controversial Move to Grant Doctorates in Ayurveda
A recent announcement has ignited debate in India’s medical community. The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) has green-lit the establishment of Doctorate of Medicine (DM) courses in Ayurveda, a centuries-old traditional healing system. This move, while aiming to elevate Ayurveda’s standing, has drawn criticism for its perceived overreach into specialized medical fields.
Six DM specializations are planned: psychiatry, hepatology, oncology, orthopedics, reproductive medicine, and gerontology. The stated goal is to produce Ayurveda "super specialists" with deep knowledge of traditional texts and modern scientific updates.
However, critics argue that Ayurveda, rooted in an era of limited scientific understanding, lacks the robust foundation to tackle complex modern ailments.
“Ayurveda is an ancient science that developed when the methods of collecting and evaluating evidence were nascent,” writes Dr. G.L. Krishna, an Ayurveda physician and research scholar at the National Centre for Biological Sciences, in a commentary published on BMJ Blogs. “Its understanding of life-processes in health and illness was sketchy and often conjectural.”
While Ayurveda offers valuable insights into health promotion and managing milder conditions, its effectiveness in treating severe diseases remains unproven.
“Mild depression is a common presentation in primary care settings. It can be addressed safely and effectively with the interventions of Ayurveda and yoga,” explains Dr. Krishna. "The option of referring to higher levels of care if the condition does not improve is always open. But severe depression with psychotic symptoms and suicidal risk usually require an urgent referral to specialists trained in psychiatry. Ayurveda and yoga are good to use only as complementary systems in the management of severe cases!”
The controversy lies in equating Ayurveda to modern medical specializations. Proponents argue that integrating traditional knowledge with contemporary science can lead to innovative treatments. Skeptics contend that Ayurveda’s historical reliance on anecdotal evidence and its limited understanding of complex pathologies make it unsuitable for managing serious diseases like cancer or liver diseases.
"Conceiving a super-specialty DM course in hepatology based on a system that had only a vague understanding of liver functions and pathologies is a result of policy-makers’ misdirected zeal," Dr. Krishna argues.
The potential consequences are twofold. Firstly, portraying Ayurveda as having a major role in managing serious diseases like cancer could misinform the public and embolden charlatans making unsubstantiated claims. A recent Supreme Court case against an Ayurvedic drug company for misleading advertising highlights this concern.
Secondly, by venturing into specialized areas, Ayurveda risks undermining its traditional emphasis on humility and truthfulness.
"Fraudulent physicians blow their own trumpet and move from place to place in search of victims. They seldom ask or entertain questions. They are the envoys of death," warns the ancient Ayurvedic text, Charaka Samhita, hinting at the dangers of exaggeration and false promises.
Dr. Krishna urges the NCISM to reconsider its decision, arguing that Ayurvedic research should be nurtured through dedicated institutions rather than super-specialty programs. "The Charaka Samhita showed contempt for fraudulent physicians and warned,” he concludes. “May the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine not end up becoming an unwitting supporter of the type of fraudulent physicians whom Charaka despised."
This controversial move has ignited a debate about the boundaries of traditional medicine and the risks of overstepping its boundaries. As India’s healthcare landscape evolves, finding a balance between embracing ancient knowledge and upholding scientific rigor will be paramount.
## Interview: Navigating teh Uncharted Waters of Ayurvedic Super Specialists
**World today News interviews Dr. Priya Sharma, a leading Ayurvedic practitioner and Dr. Amit Choudhary, a modern medicine surgeon and vocal critic of the new DM program, to explore the complexities surrounding India’s decision to grant doctorates in Ayurveda.**
**WTN:** Thank you both for joining us today. Dr. Sharma, let’s start with you. What are your thoughts on the NCISM’s decision to introduce DM courses in Ayurveda?
**Dr. Sharma:** This is a landmark decision that recognizes the immense potential of Ayurveda. It reaffirms our ancient wisdom and paves the way for deeper research and specialization within the field. Ayurveda isn’t just about traditional remedies; it’s a holistic system focusing on preventive care, lifestyle modifications, and individualized treatments. With dedicated DM courses, we can produce highly specialized Ayurvedic practitioners who can effectively address a wider range of health issues.
**WTN:** Dr. Choudhary, you have been vocal about your concerns. What are your main objections to the DM program?
**Dr. Choudhary:** While I respect Ayurveda’s historical significance, I worry that thes DM courses risk blurring the lines between proven scientific medicine and unverified traditional practices. Many core principles of Ayurveda, developed in a pre-scientific era, lack the robust scientific backing needed to address complex modern diseases.
Granting doctorates in areas like oncology or hepatology, where scientific understanding is constantly evolving, raises serious concerns about patient safety and ethical considerations.
**WTN:** Dr. Sharma, how do you address these concerns about scientific rigor?
**Dr. Sharma:** Ayurveda is not a static system.It has evolved over centuries and continues to integrate new scientific discoveries. We are not suggesting replacing modern medicine, but rather offering a complementary approach that combines the best of both worlds. The DM program will emphasize incorporating modern scientific diagnostics and research methodologies alongside traditional knowledge, ensuring Ayurveda evolves and remains relevant in the 21st century.
**WTN:** Dr. Choudhary, do you see any role for Ayurveda in modern healthcare?
**dr. choudhary:** I believe Ayurveda can contribute to overall well-being through lifestyle recommendations and stress management techniques. However, its effectiveness in treating serious medical conditions requires rigorous scientific scrutiny.
We need to be cautious about promoting Ayurveda as a substitute for proven medical treatments.Granting doctorates without robust evidence-based validation could lead to misleading patients and jeopardizing their health.
**WTN:** dr. Sharma, what message do you have for those concerned about the potential impact on patient safety?
**Dr. Sharma:** We understand the concerns, and we assure everyone that patient safety is paramount. The DM program will include rigorous training, clinical rotations, and strict regulatory oversight to ensure graduates are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills.
Openness and ethical practice will be at the forefront of this initiative. It is crucial for Ayurveda and modern medicine to engage in constructive dialog and collaboration to ensure the best possible healthcare outcomes for all Indians.
**WTN:** Thank you both for sharing your perspectives. This is undoubtedly a complex issue with far-reaching implications for healthcare in India. We hope that open dialogue and continued exploration of both traditional knowledge and modern science will lead to solutions that benefit all.
