Traditional Indian medicine in practice in an Indian metropolitan city

Abstract

In India, two parallel systems of medicine (modern and traditional—Ayurvedic, Siddha and Unani) exist. Very little is known about the way the two divergent approaches to healing operate side by side even in the same metropolitan settings. Even though overall trends may appear to be moving towards adoption of modern scientific therapy especially in urban areas, general observations indicate Indian systems of medicine and its practitioners are no way diminishing in size in serving some of the basic health needs of the people in Indian cities. However, very little is known about the reasons for the persistence of indigenous medical practices in the most expanding urban areas. This paper presents some of the practical aspects of traditional Indian medical practices from data and information obtained from the results of field questionnaires administered to private registered practitioners of indigenous medicine in the city of Madras in the state of Tamil Nadu, India. The analysis is primarily concerned with the actual distribution and socio-economic characteristics of the practitioners rather than theoretical or developmental ideals. Only a mixed assessment of medical practices can be presented. The survey indicates that all the three systems of medicine seem to provide fairly satisfactory solutions for common ailments. The practical, survival and prestige values of many of the practitioners in the informal sector of the city are still high in spite of competition from modern practitioners. Their services freely cut across all socio-economic groups in the city. On the other hand obstacles such as lack of standardized training and qualifications of the practitioners, slow adoption of modern scientific and technical methods of practice and research, still stand in their way of progress and advancements. The IMPs (Indigenous Medical Practitioners) still represent a vast underutilized human resource outside the official health services for want of strong government commitment, financial support and comprehensive programmes to improve the quality of their services as well as to facilitate their participation and integration in health plans at all levels. Collaboration and cooperation have hardly begun between the two systems. The bargaining power of the IMPs is still weak. They also operate in isolation and they are reluctant to cooperate in integration of the two systems which may threaten their individual cultural heritage characteristics and force them to occupy not only a subordinate role but lose their independence. They prefer to see a dual system of medicine promoted rather than an integrated system.