Social media is flooded with debates focusing on the authenticity of Ayurveda as a mainstream medical science. It takes an especially pointed turn on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter), where many allopathy doctors have outright dismissed Ayurveda as a dangerous pseudoscience. 

On the other side of the debate are proponents like Shailaja Chandra (@over2shailaja), author and former civil servant, who recently uploaded a lengthy post in reply to another tweet, discussing the pros and cons of Ayurveda. The following is an abridged version: 

“I have spent 12 years in the allopathic health sector, and 6 years studying and administering Ayurveda and Indian systems of medicine.  

The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library has over one lakh formulations drawn from 54 authoritative texts. It is approved by the World Intellectual Property Organisation. 

The authoritative texts contain references to several conditions that can be prevented by following daily and seasonal regimens depending on the constitution of the individual. 

I have personally watched innumerable patients being treated for a range of conditions. Even in the case of cancer, leading oncologists said it improved the quality of life of the patient.

Ayurveda is not a panacea but if used intelligently (and humbly), it can give a range of patients relief without ingesting chemical drugs.

Unfortunately, absurd claims are being made on the labels of medicine, in advertisements, and poorly researched published articles.

There is very little regulation as the states turn a blind eye to enforcement requirements. 

There are very few trusted practitioners and no directories of licensed practitioners are available. 

My Conclusion: 

Ayurveda is a time-honored system. However, the credibility of the system depends on proper supervision, licensing, testing, and enforcement. Only governments can do that. That is a duty, not an option.”