Complimentary nature of Ayurveda to Modern Medical Science

[Guest guest]

The reference is invited to a post by Dr. Mankikar, some extracts of

it are reproduced here. Many statements I would like to defer till

last piece of voice.

 

 

>Ayurveda is awesome, for maintenance of normality, if practiced on a

>daily and regular basis. Ayurveda is not a cure-all, if you suddenly

>start following it "after the horse has left the barn".

 

 

Sir, you start practicing it with humbleness. It is a cure-all, since

it provides diagnosis much in advance, without requiring a series of

costly e-tests or scans. Needless to say, accurate diagnosis requires

third eye, not necessarily a university degree. If dignosed too late,

of course, as you said, asadhya state has to be accepted.

Unfortunately, the surgery techniques of ayurveda are out of todays

practice, else ayurveda can also remove tumors etc. Moreover, cases

exist where sugery spoiled the scope of ayurveda. But these can be

discussed, privately. These are failures.

 

 

>If you have a very low heart rate, you need a Pacemaker first. Do

>not dabble in Ayurvda at the last minute.

 

Dr. Vidhyasagar has already given some comments. I would like to add,

that there are many more remedies available. Patient should meet a

vaidya well in time to get easy cure.

 

 

>If there is something surgical, like the brain tumor, please get it

>excised.

 

In one of the Cancer Camps of Panchgavya Cancer therapy at Akola, one

patient (from Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar, Maharashtra) who had already

undergonne surgical tumor removal (by modern techniques) without

success: means none of his symptoms had vanished. Within one month of

Panchgavya treatment 90% symptoms vanished. I myself have one brain

tumor patient, cured of all symptoms (100%) without surgical removal

of tumor, after six month Panchgavya treatment. What these examples

speak?

 

 

>The correct terminology is Complementary Medicine, where the two

>systems work in tandem. There are several things that ayurveda ,

>too, cannot cure. They are called "asadhya ( incurable) roga (

> disease)".

 

It is unfortunate, but your statement is similar to comments by

professors in one of the well-known ayurvedic college in Mumbai,

privately told to some students: "Use allopathy for diagnosis,

ayurveda for treatment" What meaning should be drawn by this? God

only knows.

 

Some of my patients were children of allopaths. They come to ayurveda

for treatment of self or dear ones. What this indicates? Is it

complimentary to a century old modern medical science or modern

medical science is complimentary?

 

Since this debate does not serve the goal of our club, I hope that we

will close the issue without further space on . We can discuss

the issues in a private forum, however. I am ready to take you to

living proofs, who, when rejected by allopathy found ayurveda could

grant them "Sanjivani". Reverse is not true. No vaidya has ever sent

a patient to allopathy,

 

Regards

Dr. Bhate