7 ms·

Notice the use of the phrase "allopathic hospitals" in a database of number of beds available! It always cracks me up how modern medicine is referred to as just

by berito 14y ago

Notice the use of the phrase "allopathic hospitals" in a database of number of beds available! It always cracks me up how modern medicine is referred to as just another form of medicine, like Ayurvedic or homeopathic. The Indian government is clearly of the opinion that forms of quackery that are homeopathy and Ayurveda actually work and are worthy of tax payer money.

shiven 14y ago
Please qualify your claims with sources and/or evidence. I agree with your statement regarding Homeopathy being quackery, but I see no reason to paint Ayurvedic Medicine with the same brush. Unless, of course, our definitions of Ayurveda differ on a fundamental level.
- berito 14y ago
  The burden of proof is on you if you are making the outrageous claim that ayurveda works.
w1ntermute 14y ago
In India, you can even get a degree in the field: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Ayurveda,_Medicine_and_Surgery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Ayurveda,_Medicine_... It's pretty crazy that this sort of crap still gets attention in this day and age.
- pullo 14y ago
  Having known people who benefitted from ayurvedic treatment, I tell you that the regimen (medication and food restrictions- you are not assigned one without the other) is one of the toughest I have seen. the people who successfully get through it, swear by ayurvedic medicine. I have been to some of the facilities and met the doctors and they are above average ( by Indian standards). This is why, this mode of treatment in still popular among many in india. needless to say many treatment centers are based in cities and visited by what you might call a more educated and worldly crowd (I mean no offense here, but could not find a better way to say it :) I am willing to forgo my personal observation as an one off, but please qualify your comment.
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    > Having known people who benefitted from ayurvedic treatment Anecdotal evidence. > needless to say many treatment centers are based in cities and visited by what you might call a more educated and worldly crowd Appeal to authority. How about some actual scientific evidence? I'm no expert on the matter, but from what I can find on Wikipedia[0], the benefits of Ayurvedic medicne were inconclusive at best. As someone who has spent time in medical research, I will admit my opinion is skewed. I've worked with plenty of researchers from India, and none of them have given any credence to Ayurvedic medicine. These are people who (like any researchers) will use any and all means available to them to come up with scientifically viable theories that they can use to get grants. If Ayurveda were as great as you claim it is, then they would have definitely given it a shot. 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurvedic_medicine#Scientific_appraisal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurvedic_medicine#Scientific_a...
    - pullo 14y ago
      is it anecdotal even if it is one of your best friends? I am not so sure. ok, here is some more information. A study comparing ayurveda with allopathic treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis. http://journals.lww.com/jclinrheum/Abstract/2011/06000/Double_Blind,_Randomized,_Controlled,_Pilot_Study.5.aspx http://journals.lww.com/jclinrheum/Abstract/2011/06000/Doubl... "Conclusions: In this first-ever, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study comparing Ayurveda, MTX, and their combination, all 3 treatments were approximately equivalent in efficacy, within the limits of a pilot study. Adverse events were numerically fewer in the Ayurveda-only group" Ayurveda is recognized by nih as alternative and complimentary medicine. http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/introduction.htm http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/introduction.htm I think at some level, you need to believe not all doctors wear white coats. modern medicine is a few hundered years old , but people have been getting sick and have been treated since the dawn of time. When a country sets up regulatory agencies ( http://www.ccimindia.org http://www.ccimindia.org ) , qualifies practitioners and monitors the practice ( albeit poorly) , to dismiss the structure based on wikipedia articles is incorrect to say the least. if only conclusive evidence , agreed upon by everyone is acceptable we should have stopped taking aspirin a long time ago:) http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/950817/aspirin.shtml http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/950817/aspirin.shtml
- njx 14y ago
  You think ayurveda is crap? What makes you think that?
mayutana 14y ago
"are worthy of tax payer money": As far as I know, most of these ayurvedic/homeopathy institutes (both for education as well as treatment) do not receive public funding.
- berito 14y ago
  The Indian government shamelessly squanders tax money on both Ayurveda and homeopathy. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-extra-fund-for-ayurvedic-homeopathy-coll/821193/ http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-extra-fund-for-ayurvedi... check this link. Some quacks in the Indian state of gujrat were denied additional funding. On a side note, gujrat is also the state where state sponsored ethnic cleansing happened not so long ago! To be fair, I'd rather they use tax payer money to fund quackery than kill some of the tax payers!
statictype 14y ago
Several medical doctors I know (including surgeons) recommend Ayurvedic treatments on occasions and I've found them to generally work well (though they generally are skeptical of homeopathy). Do you have reason to believe that herbal remedies don't work?
- amackera 14y ago
  Remedies that have been subjected to scientific experimentation to determine if they are effective are by definition "evidence-based", or "modern" medicine. Any medicine that is not evidence-based should be treated with suspicion and skepticism, and frankly should not be called medicine at all in my opinion.
  - statictype 14y ago
    That's reasonable. I agree that medicines that have not been subjected to scientific tests should be treated with skepticism.
lenkite 14y ago
One can only shake one's head at yet another individual fully brainwashed by western Pharmacies and mainstream doctors. Folks like you are always to point out any alternative medicine system as quackery while fully ignoring that mainstream medicine has had a very long tradition of copying and patenting any active ingredient that has been proven beneficial by their sister professions. Ayurvedic research into herbal ingredients follow rigorous testing in labs, peer-reviewed research and case studies before it gets the govt of India stamp, quite similar to how mainstream medicine works, but of course you didn't care to educate yourself on that.

by berito 14y ago

shiven 14y ago

Please qualify your claims with sources and/or evidence. I agree with your statement regarding Homeopathy being quackery, but I see no reason to paint Ayurvedic Medicine with the same brush. Unless, of course, our definitions of Ayurveda differ on a fundamental level.

berito 14y ago
The burden of proof is on you if you are making the outrageous claim that ayurveda works.

w1ntermute 14y ago

In India, you can even get a degree in the field: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Ayurveda,_Medicine_and_Surgery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Ayurveda,_Medicine_... It's pretty crazy that this sort of crap still gets attention in this day and age.

pullo 14y ago
Having known people who benefitted from ayurvedic treatment, I tell you that the regimen (medication and food restrictions- you are not assigned one without the other) is one of the toughest I have seen. the people who successfully get through it, swear by ayurvedic medicine. I have been to some of the facilities and met the doctors and they are above average ( by Indian standards). This is why, this mode of treatment in still popular among many in india. needless to say many treatment centers are based in cities and visited by what you might call a more educated and worldly crowd (I mean no offense here, but could not find a better way to say it :) I am willing to forgo my personal observation as an one off, but please qualify your comment.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  > Having known people who benefitted from ayurvedic treatment Anecdotal evidence. > needless to say many treatment centers are based in cities and visited by what you might call a more educated and worldly crowd Appeal to authority. How about some actual scientific evidence? I'm no expert on the matter, but from what I can find on Wikipedia[0], the benefits of Ayurvedic medicne were inconclusive at best. As someone who has spent time in medical research, I will admit my opinion is skewed. I've worked with plenty of researchers from India, and none of them have given any credence to Ayurvedic medicine. These are people who (like any researchers) will use any and all means available to them to come up with scientifically viable theories that they can use to get grants. If Ayurveda were as great as you claim it is, then they would have definitely given it a shot. 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurvedic_medicine#Scientific_appraisal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurvedic_medicine#Scientific_a...
  - pullo 14y ago
    is it anecdotal even if it is one of your best friends? I am not so sure. ok, here is some more information. A study comparing ayurveda with allopathic treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis. http://journals.lww.com/jclinrheum/Abstract/2011/06000/Double_Blind,_Randomized,_Controlled,_Pilot_Study.5.aspx http://journals.lww.com/jclinrheum/Abstract/2011/06000/Doubl... "Conclusions: In this first-ever, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study comparing Ayurveda, MTX, and their combination, all 3 treatments were approximately equivalent in efficacy, within the limits of a pilot study. Adverse events were numerically fewer in the Ayurveda-only group" Ayurveda is recognized by nih as alternative and complimentary medicine. http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/introduction.htm http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/introduction.htm I think at some level, you need to believe not all doctors wear white coats. modern medicine is a few hundered years old , but people have been getting sick and have been treated since the dawn of time. When a country sets up regulatory agencies ( http://www.ccimindia.org http://www.ccimindia.org ) , qualifies practitioners and monitors the practice ( albeit poorly) , to dismiss the structure based on wikipedia articles is incorrect to say the least. if only conclusive evidence , agreed upon by everyone is acceptable we should have stopped taking aspirin a long time ago:) http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/950817/aspirin.shtml http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/950817/aspirin.shtml
njx 14y ago
You think ayurveda is crap? What makes you think that?

mayutana 14y ago

"are worthy of tax payer money": As far as I know, most of these ayurvedic/homeopathy institutes (both for education as well as treatment) do not receive public funding.

berito 14y ago
The Indian government shamelessly squanders tax money on both Ayurveda and homeopathy. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-extra-fund-for-ayurvedic-homeopathy-coll/821193/ http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-extra-fund-for-ayurvedi... check this link. Some quacks in the Indian state of gujrat were denied additional funding. On a side note, gujrat is also the state where state sponsored ethnic cleansing happened not so long ago! To be fair, I'd rather they use tax payer money to fund quackery than kill some of the tax payers!

statictype 14y ago

Several medical doctors I know (including surgeons) recommend Ayurvedic treatments on occasions and I've found them to generally work well (though they generally are skeptical of homeopathy). Do you have reason to believe that herbal remedies don't work?

amackera 14y ago
Remedies that have been subjected to scientific experimentation to determine if they are effective are by definition "evidence-based", or "modern" medicine. Any medicine that is not evidence-based should be treated with suspicion and skepticism, and frankly should not be called medicine at all in my opinion.
- statictype 14y ago
  That's reasonable. I agree that medicines that have not been subjected to scientific tests should be treated with skepticism.

lenkite 14y ago

One can only shake one's head at yet another individual fully brainwashed by western Pharmacies and mainstream doctors. Folks like you are always to point out any alternative medicine system as quackery while fully ignoring that mainstream medicine has had a very long tradition of copying and patenting any active ingredient that has been proven beneficial by their sister professions. Ayurvedic research into herbal ingredients follow rigorous testing in labs, peer-reviewed research and case studies before it gets the govt of India stamp, quite similar to how mainstream medicine works, but of course you didn't care to educate yourself on that.