Legal rights of the patients and obligation of AYUSH vaidya

Whether the patients have the right to know how the treating physician has diagnosed the disease and how the diagnosis was confirmed? The answer would be certainly big yes. The ‘case sheet’ or the ‘discharge summary’ of all in-patients will have the diagnosis clearly mentioned along with the findings of histopathology or scan or laboratory examinations or other relevant examinations. Further the details of treatment also will be mentioned in the discharge summary. That is how the scientific system of medicine or allopathic system functions.

For example, confirming the diagnosis of urinary tract infection, if X-ray scan or sputum culture is suggested by the clinician, it can be challenged/questioned.

The question before the nation is how the diagnosis of various diseases are done by AYUSH vaidyas based on prakrithi (vata, pitta and kapha), the fundamental principle of AYUSH? After treatment, how the vaidyas confirm the vata, pitta and kapha imbalances are corrected or not? Should such details the patients are entitled to know from the AYUSH vaidya?

Can the AYUSH vaidyas perfectly match vata, pitta, kapha based diagnosis of various diseases according to their system with the diseases as described by modern medicine? When all AYUSH products are meant for correcting Vatta, Pitta and Kapha, how we can allow such products to be promoted for treating various diseases that are described by modern medicine.

Another question is that how the AYUSH vaidyas, especially the Siddha vaidyas measure the ratios of vata, pitta and kapha - example as 4:1:3 based on reading the pulse beat such as snake pattern, bird pattern and frog pattern?

If the AYUSH vaidyas use modern gadgets for diagnosis no one would object to it but would certainly ask how they correlate X ray finding with Tridosha?

All the above questions are raised only to prove the absolute truth that the concepts of Tridosha and disease descriptions are obscurant and unscientific and so are most procedures of AYUSH. This proves nothing but AYUSH is not a medical science or drug based system. But indeed most of the products and practices of AYUSH may hold some paramedical value.

Another question also comes up for debate. How do the AYUSH vaidyas describe various diseases? Do they use the terminology of own system or would use the modern terms of allopathic system? If they use the modern terms, it is fine but then why we have such archaic and redundant descriptions?

If patients ask for details and ask for reliability and repeatability of the diagnostic tools of AYUSH, can the AYUSH vaidyas offer tenable reply that the Tridosha diagnosis can be proved undoubtedly and that can be accepted in the scientific realm and by court of law?

When the concept of Tridosha and disease descriptions are obscurant and useless and are already rejected by several AYUSH vaidyas, why they deserved to be part of AYUSH curriculum and how such practices can be called as ‘system of medicine?

Today we are promoting AYUSH as system of medicine. Although technically we may call them as ISM or AYUSH but at curriculum level we have made not clear distinction between MBBS and BSMS/BAMS etc. This confusion favour the AYUSH vaidyas to engage in cross pathy.

If we remove the concepts of Tridosha based diagnosis and disease descriptions of AYUSH from the curriculum, what else is there in the curriculum?

Then the AYUSH would be left with some herbal, mineral and metal preparations.

The system that has gifted all such redundant Tridosha concept and impractical disease descriptions only has gifted various herbal concoctions as drugs. How can we believe such herbal, mineral and metal preparations to be effective and scientific? If they are really effective, then where is the need for cross pathy by large number of AYUSH vaidyas in private practice?

How cross pathy can be legalized when AYUSH vaidyas have studied Tridosha concept of disease diagnosis and use of some herbal or metal or mineral products or their combinations as drugs? How AYUSH vaidyas would justify the use of modern gadgets to diagnose vata, pitta and kapha? If the AYUSH vaidyas diagnose the diseases based on the clinical descriptions of modern medicine, then how they correlate Tridosha and Tridosha based treatment of AYUSH with allopathic science?

For example how renal calculi is diagnosed based on pulse reading?

According to AYUSH, even the anupanam can change the drug property fully. If water instead of milk is used as anupanam, the vata drug will turned out to be pitta drug. If so when AYUSH products are given along with allopathic drugs, won’t such practice affect the performances of scientifically proven allopathic drugs and it may even result in some serious side effects?

Can we ever justify cross pathy either from the point of view of the fundamentals of AYUSH or from absolute science?

If the patients ask the AYUSH vaidya to explain how his or her disease was diagnosed through pulse reading, can the vaidya provide proof for such diagnosis not the answers based on their intuition or skill?

Promoting AYUSH as medical science and producing AYUSH vaidyas as doctor is harmful to our country. Only to sensitize the general public to collectively request to Government to derecognize the medical status of AYUSH and make it as wonderful paramedical system, several committed people are working overtime.

Certainly we need the service of AYUSH but not as medical science but as paramedical system.

Dr S Ranganathan