There are a few Ayurveda scholars who state that the so-called current science doesn't understand the depth of Ayurveda and that there are physicians who treat diseases based solely on Ayurveda pathophysiology. Their argument is that they do this by breaking down the process of disease progression as per Ayurveda fundamentals (Samprapti Vighatana).

 

This argument is completely misleading and dangerous at the same time. Without understanding the essentials of modern clinical medicine one cannot treat most of the diseases using exclusively Ayurveda theories because ancient Ayurveda scholars did not know the basics of physiology and pathology.

 

Though Ayurveda texts record clinical symptoms of hundreds of clinical conditions very well, they do not provide an understanding of the pathophysiological basis for these symptoms.

 

Ayurveda physicians should speak truth. Trying to derive modern pathophysiology by re-interpreting ancient texts is a futile exercise. 

 

For example, ancient scholars did not know about hormones. They did not know the role of kidneys in urine formation. They thought the role of kidneys was in fat metabolism for various reasons and not in urine formation. They believed that urine was drained directly from intestines into urinary bladder through minute tubules, which do not exist in reality. 

 

Though the symptoms such as polyuia, anuria, dysuria have been documented very well in our texts, a wide range of possible pathophysiological entities that may produce these symptoms - was not known to them. Hence the interventions proposed are based on their clinical experience and not on pathophysiology. 

 

Relying on these interventions today without understanding the actual pathology could be disastrous to the patients. For example, polyuria can result from diabetes mellitus, pituitary tumour, chronic kidney disease, fluid overload etc. Treating a pituitary tumour in terms of Prameha is useless and is a disservice.

 

Most of the Ayurveda doctors identify this problem but do not speak out. They mostly rely on modern clinical investigations to plan intervention and not on Samprapti Vighatana. This is actually the desired approach from a patient perspective. However, denying this fact and arguing that Ayurveda is a complete science in itself that doesn't require any modern scientific  inputs is either a reflection of ignorance or some sort of undue compulsion.