Additional FAQs About Ayurveda & ISM

(The Appeal to PM on “Full and Effective Use of ISMs to treat Covid-19″ dated 14 July 2021 was sent to people for their signature. Several queries were received. Answers to the queries were prepared and put together in this FAQ, bacause these answers might be useful to many people. This contains the additional questions. Version 2 of the FAQ contains all the questions in one place, including these additional questions.)

Additional Questions (mainly from allopathic doctors)

Q14: What is “herbology” view of Ayurveda?

Q15: It is said that there are alternate views of body. How can there be two views of the same reality?

Q15a: I do think that the ISMs are forms of medicine that are worthy of promoting but ayurveda should adopt solid, comprehensible forms of communication of etiopathogenesis.

Q16: What else is there in Ayurvedic understanding other than “herbs”?

Q17: Ayurvedic medicines are not subjected to the same level of testing as allopathic medicines.

Additional Questions & Answers
(Questions mainly from interested allopathic doctors)

Q14: What is “herbology” view of Ayurveda?

A14: Herbology is a European term. It, alongside herbalism, refers to the use of herbs as medicine. Herbology is not recognized in any country as a complete system of medicine. Modern allopathic physicians unfamiliar with the depth of ayurveda knowledge system, have a “herbology” view of Ayurveda. What this means is the following:
I have diagnosed the disease,
I know all about the disease and its prognosis,
I have worked out the treatment plan,
Can you give me a natural herb to supplement treatment?
This is not Ayurveda, this is “herbology”! By itself, herbology might still do some good as the herbal medicines might have lesser side-effects, but it is not Ayurveda.

Most allopathic doctors are not aware of the alternative view/theory in Ayurveda regarding human body, about its illness and how to treat the patient. (See Q3 and Q4 in this FAQ.)

Q15: It is said that there are alternate views of body. How can there be two views of the same reality?

A15: One way to understand the two views of reality is in terms of depth or levels of understanding. For example, common understanding in allopathy is that ghee causes obesity (fattiness). However, in Ayurveda, ghee is given in large amounts (25 ml to 100 ml) to patients in early morning on empty stomach for shodhanam (or cleansing) which may cause weight loss.
It is the same human body (or reality), however, the body is complex. It behaves differently based on what processes are being activated. Unless there is an understanding of these “larger” processes, one might reach different, even opposite, conclusions. To resolve whenever such issues arise, is through careful experimentation and observation over a long period of time, at the systems level and not just at the cellular level.

(Differences also appear in the results of therapeutic interventions tested in lab models like isolated cell lines or small animals and organisms versus what happens in the actual highly complex and interconnected human biological system. That is why, many drugs that appear promising in lab studies fail when applied in human trials, and some show adverse effects after several years of use, even after having been approved by regulatory bodies with due scientific testing.)

Q15a: I do think that the ISMs are forms of medicine that are worthy of promoting but only once they adopt solid, comprehensible forms of communication of etiopathogenesis, mechanisms of action of their treatments, methods of measuring, monitoring illness/ treatment, as well as strategies to deal with acute/ emergent situations or crises.

A15a: Ayurveda does have sophisticated etiopathogenesis but asking the Ayurvedic physician to explain their diagnosis and treatment in allopathic terms is not only being arrogant but also does a disservice. There are alternative ways, particularly systemic ways, of viewing and understanding the disease. In fact, many times the alternative ways are superior in treating the disease leading to long term benefits, rather than only short term solutions. One will have to put in effort and understand its etio-pathogenesis, which will lead to further progress in integrative medicine. (See Q3, Q4 and Q15.)

Q16: What else is there in Ayurvedic understanding other than “herbs”?

A16: The materia-medica of Ayurveda comprises of around 2500 plants, around 300 animal products, and about 70 metals and minerals. These day animal products are not in active use, due to wild life restrictions.
These natural products are used as whole fractions, based on an understanding of their systemic pharmacology (Dravya-Guna Shastra). The Ayurvedic pharmacology studies the action of natural products (fractions with multiple molecules) on key systemic functions (doshas) like anabolism, catabolism, bio-transmission. Allopathic pharmacology on the other hand, usually considers single active molecules and studies their effect on cellular functions. A simplistic way to understand the difference of “systemic” understanding versus “cellular” understanding, is to differentiate between macro- vs. micro-understanding of biological change. The two should complement each other because changes in a part impact the whole and vice-versa, but the correlation can only be discovered by new integrative cross-cultural discipline like Ayurvedic-Biology.

The differences in outlook when not cooperatively reconciled result at times in controversy. For example, allopathy till recently held the view that dietary cholestrol is a major cause of heart diseases, and therefore advised that one should consume less fats, for example, ghee.

Ayurveda believes that the body naturally produces substances like cholestrol (recent studies also indicate that 85% of the serum cholestrol is produced by the body), therefore it holds that avoiding fats in diet is not so critical for health. In the Ayurveda view, ghee is considered essential for metabolic, cardiac and neurological functions. Based on these two alternate understandings/theories, the treatment and the approach to management of health is different.

(Today it is recognized that Cholestrol, whether produced by the body or taken from outside, is NOT the cause of cardiac diseases! This assumption in allopathy has been found to be erroneous after being widely practiced in the allopathic world for a better part of the last century. Some have termed it as the scam of the century. Anyway, the drug companies have benefitted enormously from this mistaken assumption. See the latest findings on it in USA including retraction of advisories. Incidently, allopathic doctors have routinely used it to debunk Ayurvedic treatment based on cow ghee. (See “Dietary Cholesterol and Cardiovascular Risk: A Science Advisory from the American Heart Association” AHA Journals, Vol.141, 3, Dec, 2019, https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000743.) )

Q17: Ayurvedic medicines are not subjected to the same level of testing as allopathic medicines.

A17: The above is false.
World Health Organization (WHO, UN) prescribes three key parameters for quality assurance of any drug. These are safety, quality and effectiveness. The International regulation regarding two parameters viz safety and effectiveness of traditional medicines in public use for periods in excess of 15 years, do not require same testing as required for new molecules which have not been used on humans before. However, the parameter of quality of medicine, irrespective of traditional use, does need regular testing.

Sometimes, not all brands of medicines, whether in Ayurveda or in Allopathy, undergo the same level of testing for quality due to laxity of regulatory bodies NOT because of requirements of regulation. The consumers then rely on reputation of manufacturers. Fortunately, there are highly reputed companies on whom consumers can rely upon both in allopathy and ayurveda. but there are also few black sheep. The implementation of regulation needs to be strengthened by State and Central governments to weed out the black sheep. (Also see Q9.)

(Prepared by Prof Rajeev Sangal and Vaidya Shefali Sangal – with inputs from Ashok Jhunjhunwala, Darshan Shankar, JK Bajaj and AV Balasubramanian)

See PPST (Patriotic and People-oriented Science and Technology)
https://www.ppstindiagroup.in/covid-and-ayurveda  Email: ppstindiagroup@gmail.com