Jump to content

Talk:Ayurveda

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2024

[edit]

Please add that "Recent findings confirmed the nanotherapeutic functionalities of metal derived ayurvedic drugs like jasada basma. The demonstrated experiments,physicochemical and bio-characterization reveal that ayurvedic rasa drugs synthesized and processed through traditional methods are not toxic due to the variation in its structure-property relationship from macro to nano dimensions." please add the following reference for the above edit.https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acsomega.2c05391 Casira (talk) 12:18, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done fails WP:MEDRS. Bon courage (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Effectiveness

[edit]

Can anyone add the section where this treatment is effective like the case with former Kenyan president's daughter who were unable to treat her eye disease, none of the treatment was successful but in the end when she used ayurvedic treatment helped her get her eyesight back.There are several articles about this,you can google it, i can't add links because it's not allowed 2409:40D1:16:36AD:DCD2:F1FF:FE81:2E7F (talk) 14:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Discussions of effectiveness need WP:MEDRS sourcing as a basis. Bon courage (talk) 15:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well one source would have been nice, even if it did fail medrs .Slatersteven (talk) 15:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://m.economictimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/will-take-ayurveda-to-africa-ex-kenya-pm-raila-odinga-after-daughters-eyesight-recovery/amp_videoshow/89549503.cms 2409:40D1:1015:B2FC:DCB2:D8FF:FE5D:8F17 (talk) 08:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails wp:medrs and even if it did not it would need attribution "Raila Odinga claimed". Slatersteven (talk) 09:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so you mean former prime minister of Kenya is lying, even if I add that 'he claimed' would you still not revert my edits? 2409:40D1:1005:F809:D0C2:A8FF:FE62:BD48 (talk) 10:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No I am saying he is not a medical expert. Slatersteven (talk) 10:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10 § Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments until a consensus is reached. CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {CX}) 16:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayurveda is not a pseudoscience.

[edit]

Ayurveda is an ancient system of medicine that originated in the Indian subcontinent and is still practiced worldwide, particularly in complementary and alternative medicine. While some critics classify it as pseudoscience due to its divergence from the scientific method established in the 17th century, others suggest that this characterization may not fully consider its empirical and observational basis. Historical texts such as the Charaka Samhita and Sushruta Samhita reflect an early scientific approach rooted in observation, experimentation, and holistic principles. Scholars such as Hankey (2005), Rastogi (2010), and Chattopadhyay (2020) have highlighted Ayurveda's contributions to health and wellness, emphasizing its ongoing relevance in contemporary integrative health practices.[1] Citations: [1] Hankey, Alex. "The scientific value of Ayurveda." Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine 11.2 (2005): 221-225. [2] Rastogi, Sanjeev. "Building bridges between Ayurveda and modern science." International Journal of Ayurveda Research 1.1 (2010): 41. [3] Chattopadhyay, Kaushik. "Globalisation of Ayurveda: importance of scientific evidence base." Herbal Medicine in India: Indigenous Knowledge, Practice, Innovation and its Value (2020): 3-7. PrateekthePrateek (talk) 13:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There you kind of have it " due to its divergence from the scientific method established in the 17th century", If it does not meet those criteria it is pseudoscience, as that is what it means "a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.". Slatersteven (talk) 13:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it is too reductionist to characterize an ancient terms in terms of a method that solely focused on empirical means. Scientific inquiry can be based on non empirical basis such as in critical reality. It's best if this sentence characterizing ayurvedic science as pseudoscience is removed as it unfairly brackets it in terms of an outdated schema of scientific thought constructed in narrow terms PrateekthePrateek (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]