Letters to The Editor — August 3, 2026
A letter to the editor discusses the NCISM's stance on protecting ayurvedic practitioners from being labeled as quacks, while simultaneously criticizing the lack of scientific rigor in the current ayurvedic curriculum. The piece also pays tribute to the late playback singer K. Jamuna Rani.
Why it matters
The debate reflects broader tensions in India regarding the integration and scientific validation of traditional medicine systems within modern healthcare.
The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM), Government of India, recently issued a circular stating that those who denigrate ayurvedic degree holders as quacks or fake doctors would invite statutory action. It is certainly uncouth to hurl vile insults at people who undergo a five-year course fully recognised and endorsed by the same universities that grant MBBS degrees. As such, the NCISM is justified in issuing the statement. However, more fundamentally, the NCISM should introspect on why the professionals it creates and endorses are being called quacks. There are serious problems in the way ayurveda is approached, taught, and studied. A lack of timely, evidence-informed revisions has fossilised ayurvedic theories, which in turn has impeded a straightforward appraisal of its practices. Together, these factors have made a significant portion of the ayurveda degree syllabus pseudoscientific.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in