Coincidentally, La Vanguardia has a two-page piece today on something called ayurveda, which they call a "millenarian science...millenarium wisdom...ayurveda does not cure symptoms, like Western medicine, but rather goes to the roots and establishes an integral or holistic diagnosis of the individual." Naturally, it's nothing but superstition and fraud.
Critics object to the lack of rigorous scientific studies and clinical trials of many ayurvedic products. The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine states that "most clinical trials of Ayurvedic approaches have been small, had problems with research designs, lacked appropriate control groups, or had other issues that affected how meaningful the results were."
There is evidence that using some ayurvedic medicine, especially those involving herbs, metals, minerals, or other materials involves potentially serious risks, including toxicity.
Quackwatch says that ayurveda as it is known today is based on the fraudulent claims of the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Deepak Chopra, and adds, "Because Ayurvedic medicine relies on nonsensical diagnostic concepts and involves many unproven products, using it would be senseless even if all of the products were safe."
The Skeptic's Dictionary also describes ayurveda as "pseudoscience," and says it "confuses metaphysical claims with empirical claims."
Even La Vanguardia says, tucked away at the bottom of the article, "Nonetheless, there are those who criticize the fact that ayurveda only cures those who are not ill. In case of emergency, ayurvedic doctors themselves resort to Western medicine."
So why did the newspaper bother using two whole pages to encourage people to travel to India for ayurvedic treatment?