Modernization was Acne

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr Muzumdar

 

Thanks for explainations and constraints of ayurvedic practice which

one has to face these days. While begging to differ from some of your

thoughts, author wishes to express some new hopes he has been

dreaming about since years. Further matter inside excerpts of your

message:

 

 

>

> You should know the modern diagnostic synonym of Ayurvedic name if

your certificates for sickness and fitness are to be accepted. You

need the back-up of modern diagnostic means like blood tests, x-rays,

songraphy etc. to confirm and validate your diagnosis, without which

the medi-claim companies will not settle the patients' medical

expenses. Lastly and most important fact that cannot be ignored by

practicing Ayurvedic doctor that he is covered under the Consumer

Protection Act and will have to face medical negligence charges if he

is not able to convince the patient and governing agencies that his

diagnosis and treatment are based on correct clinical judgement.

Modern diagnostic reports play a very crucial role in this aspect as

it is a third party observation and unbiased one. All courts and law

enforcing agencies are bound to accept their validity.>

 

> Hence, for the sake of patient satisfaction as well as to avoid any

allegation of medical negligence, a doctor from any pathy must

support, confirm and validate his diagnosis with the help of modern

diagnostic means. I, also in the capacity as President of BAMS

Graduates Association Mumbai Branch (A authentic association of

Ayurvedic doctors) am very much convinced about my stand when I face

the woes of our fellow practitioners.

 

The glitter of scinece, diagnostics, crisp printouts from computers,

nicely packed and sugar coated pills, medical insurance, conferences,

vacations etc was the glamour used by our earlier rulers and pharma

to supperss ayurveda and bring in modern science. Subsequently,

native rulers did not attempt changing the picture. The modern

science rules the academics too.

 

The wheel has turned round fully. Now that west is more interested in

ayurveda, we have started respecting its true potential.

 

Why cant the organised bodies of ayurvedic practitioners ask the very

government that ayurveda is more sound science, holistic approach and

even certificates mentioning ayurvedic names should be valid. And why

the disease name should be necessary. If a person is fit or unfit,

does it matter which disease he has. A fellow suffering from stomach

pain may sometimes need 20 days to diagnose his disease in a modern

hospital( real case at a speciality hospital in Metro), what is his

state in these 20 days? A message on our board by Riyaz shows how

confused he is when he looks at X-ray.

 

 

>

> DARSHAN SRAPSHAN PRASHNAI HI PARIKSHET ATHA ROGINAH

>

> which means that vaidya should check the patient by observation,

touch/feel and asking questions. So how the opinion you state can be

validated that a real vaidya can diagnose without patient speaking a

word be considered appropriate. Do you wish to contradict Maharshi

Charak from whose Samhita the above quote is mentioned?

 

 

 

If ancient texts do not mention how to use modern tests, should not

ayurvedic practice also able to diagnose without them? Why ayurvedic

practitioners cant show their skill just based on Ashta-vidh-parkisha

of Maharshi Charak? The philosophy which translates X-ray reports to

ayurvedic disease names is likely to be controversial. If diagnosis

is done based on so many tests, where is the role of ayurvdic

practice as written in samhitas? We bring Acharyas only when

convenient. Either we should follow acharyas fully and obtain decent

standing for ayurveda or leave them totally and adopt the science

which is loosing ground in hands of commercial lobbies.

 

> I would only quote that cancer detection has been much easier

because of modern diagnostic scrreening techniques and many a life

saved because of proper medication at 0-stage level of cancer. This

is just one practical example.>

 

Cancer can be detected by simplistic means, at a resolution much

finer than the one offered by scans etc

 

Dogs become most acurate pathologists:

http://health.ayurveda/message/5500

 

Detecting cancer by odour

http://health.ayurveda/message/7392

 

Body odour reveals your health

http://www.newstarget.com/019777.html

 

Cancer leaves many other indications, which experienced and expert

vaidya can easily use. Eli Jones, a western herbalist has given

simple tests. Having cured some 4,200 cases and taught his techniques

to several doctors, he can be comapred to Charaka.

 

Ayurveda should be modernised by such additions rather than glitter

of modern science. Modern science can be used to satisfy our

curiosity about why disease starts and spreads, but ultimately

energies should be concentrated on ayurveda's simplicity and economy

rather than modern science. If ayurvedic practitioners simply submit

to those in power who wish to enforce modern practice on simple age-

old ayurveda, it is ayurveda which becomes degraded. Events in past

two years give the indication that ayurveda as practiced today, may

soon take the path of modern science only. Any developments which

requires evidence based approach, takes years together. Same cancer

example if we take, a farmer from Solapur, Maharashtra was told to

take cow urine for mouth cancer and that result was the reason for

birth of PanchGavya medicines, which have obtained an impressive

place for them. Today we accept everything written by acharyas in

samhitas without any evidence. Why are our practices not uniform with

the faith in samhitas?

 

Modern science can offer only explainations, original developments

can come only from simple thinking. " Hospital Syndrome " is the word

used in one of the posts yesterday by Christina, most appropriate for

modern science driven ayurvedic practice.