There is no credible scientific evidence yet of the effectiveness of ayurveda in placebo-controlled trials. Is this a cause of concern within the Ministry?
Applying the same parameters to different sciences will not be appropriate. India has always had a pluralistic health system, and every system has its own philosophy, parameters and even testing criteria. In ayurveda, for example, it is believed that every substance in the world is medicine — then what is a placebo? In ayurveda, the individual’s temperament is very important; we believe that you can’t classify only by disease.
So trials cannot establish the effectiveness of these schools of medicine?
Earlier, there were a lot of complaints about heavy metals in ayurveda, but the thing people don’t know is that these metals go through many processes. Now, some people are even saying that nanotechnology might prove homeopathy. The problem is that protocols for AYUSH trials are not available in the Western world. The whole world is doing research in modern medicine, but here we are doing everything de nouveau. It takes time to develop expertise. We now have an AYUSH research portal with nearly 20,000 articles. The same is the problem with drugs. It takes 15 years to create a drug. Look at turmeric, for example; it has now been proven that turmeric has anti-cancer properties. The active ingredient in it was isolated and it became an allopathic drug. For ayurveda, the whole substance is used for treatment; it becomes difficult to find what is effective.
