Who Gets to Call Themselves a Doctor? The Curious Case of Ayurveda, Antibiotics & Ancient Pride

🚨 The Viral X-Fight: A Doctor vs. A Grandmaster

A few weeks ago, a Twitter (oops, we mean X) spat between a hepatologist and a chess Grandmaster took the internet by storm. It wasn’t about chess or livers. It was about Ayurveda.

The debate?
“Can practitioners of Ayurveda or other traditional Indian medicine systems call themselves ‘doctors’?”

What looked like a simple question turned into a heated national discussion—one that sits at the intersection of medicine, law, politics, culture, and even Hindu pride.

Let’s break it down.

🩺 Is Ayurveda Medicine or Myth?

India has a rich medical heritage. Systems like Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha, and others have been practiced for centuries. These systems are based on concepts like doshas, prakriti, vata-pitta-kapha, and the balance of spiritual energy. Think of it like a traditional blend of philosophy, wellness, and herbs.

On the other hand, modern medicine (aka "allopathy") relies on germ theory, evidence-based studies, and randomized control trials.

Imagine this:
In one classroom, you’re studying cell physiology and antibiotics. In the next, you’re learning about paramatma and jivatma.

Now, can a student trained in both prescribe the same medicine? Should they be allowed to perform surgeries? This is where the confusion—and the conflict—begins.

📜 A History of Conflicting Committees

This debate didn’t start on X. It started way back in 1946.

Bhore Committee (1946): Recommended that India adopt modern scientific medicine, like other countries were doing. Traditional systems? It suggested limiting their role in public healthcare.
Indigenous Systems of Medicine Committee (1948): Pushed back, saying Ayurveda is part of Indian culture, linked it to the Vedas, and blamed its decline on “foreign rule.” This marked the entry of communal overtones into a scientific debate.

Fast forward to 1970, the Indira Gandhi government passed a law formally recognizing Ayurveda, Siddha, and Unani practitioners.

In 2020, this law was replaced with a new one: The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, giving these systems their own central regulatory bodies.

💊 When Ayurvedic Doctors Want to Prescribe Modern Drugs

Here’s the real flashpoint: Ayurvedic practitioners want to prescribe modern medicine—yes, even antibiotics, which are born out of evidence-based science.

So, can they?

According to Indian law, only registered medical practitioners (RMPs) can prescribe modern drugs. But the definition of “RMP” under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 was vague enough for many states to interpret it liberally.

Result?

Some states passed orders allowing Ayurvedic and Unani doctors to prescribe modern drugs.

But wait…

⚖️ The Supreme Court Steps In

In 1998, the Supreme Court clarified in Dr. Mukhtiar Chand v. State of Punjab:

“You can’t prescribe drugs of a system of medicine unless you are trained in that system.”

In other words, Ayurvedic doctors cannot legally prescribe allopathic medicine.

But did it stop there? Nope.

States continued passing such orders. The Indian Medical Association kept challenging them. Consumer courts began hearing cases where patients felt cheated, thinking they were treated by an MBBS doctor when they were not.

🏥 From Prescriptions to Surgeries: Where’s the Line?

Here’s where it gets serious.

In 2020, the government passed a notification allowing postgraduate Ayurvedic practitioners to perform 58 types of surgeries—including removal of gallbladder, appendix, and benign tumors.

Sounds like a plot twist, right?

Now imagine this: A patient enters a hospital thinking a trained surgeon is about to operate. But the person holding the scalpel is a BAMS graduate—someone trained in doshas and traditional texts, not surgical procedures as per modern medical curricula.

And here’s the scary part:
Some hospitals even hire Ayurvedic practitioners instead of MBBS doctors to cut costs.

The legality of that 2020 notification is still being fought in court.

💰 The Money Behind the Medicine

Let’s talk numbers.

The government spends around ₹20,000 crore of taxpayers’ money on AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga, Unani, Siddha, Homeopathy) research institutions.
Now, there’s talk of including AYUSH treatments under Ayushman Bharat, India’s national health insurance scheme.

Translation: Your tax money may soon be paying for treatments that lack robust scientific evidence.

The sad part? These research councils have produced very little meaningful scientific output despite the generous funding.

🧠 A Tale of Two Realities

Let’s imagine two patients:

Rekha, 45, has chronic digestive issues. She visits an Ayurvedic doctor who suggests a herbal concoction. She feels better, credits Ayurveda, and tells all her WhatsApp groups about it.
Vikram, 50, has a heart attack. In the emergency room, he’s intubated, given blood thinners, and stabilized by a modern medicine team. He survives because of decades of rigorous medical research.

Both stories are valid in their own way. But should we treat both systems as equal?

Should we merge two completely different epistemologies—one based on scripture, another on science?

🇮🇳 The Politics of Pride

The conversation isn’t just medical or legal—it’s also political.

With the rise of Hindu nationalism, Ayurveda is no longer just a healing system—it’s become a symbol of cultural pride. Suddenly, Pushpaka Vimana and Kauravas as test-tube babies are not just mythology but examples of ancient Indian science (as claimed by some politicians).

In this climate, even parties like the Congress, which earlier championed modernity, now pledge to support all systems of medicine in their election manifestos. Why? Because opposing Ayurveda might be seen as opposing Indian culture.

🧪 Science or Sentiment? A Nation Must Choose Wisely

This is not a fight about who gets to wear a stethoscope or hang a "Dr." board. It’s about public health, medical ethics, and the future of healthcare in India.

We must ask:

Can tradition replace science?
Should belief override data?
Should emotional pride dictate health policy?

Because the joke, dear reader, is ultimately on us—the taxpayers, the patients, the citizens.

💭 Final Thoughts: What’s the Cure?

India doesn’t need to discard traditional knowledge. In fact, scientifically researching Ayurveda could be immensely useful. But mixing it with modern medicine without clear boundaries is not integration—it’s confusion.

As a country, we must ensure that policy is based on reason, not rhetoric. We need to protect people’s right to both wellness and truth.

And sometimes, the bitterest pill to swallow is the one called evidence.

Have thoughts? Been treated by a traditional practitioner? Share your story below! Let’s keep this discussion real, respectful, and rational.

AtoZ UPSC

Monday, 28 July 2025

Doctor or Not? The Ayurvedic Medicine Debate Unpacked