Blog Archives - Doctor Rekha

Cart

What Ayurveda Can Actually Offer Autistic Children and What It Can’t

Parents of autistic children usually hear one of two things. Either that nothing can be done, and they should simply learn to live with it. Or that someone, somewhere, has a cure. Both of these are failures of honesty. Autism is a neurodevelopmental difference. I cannot remove it, and I will never tell a parent otherwise. What I can say, based on years of clinical experience, is that many children show meaningful improvements in cognition, regulation, sleep, and digestion with individualized Ayurvedic care. Where I Actually See the Pattern Many of the autistic children I’ve worked with come in with gastrointestinal symptoms alongside everything else, constipation, restless sleep, real difficulty winding down at night. Classically, this combination has a name: disturbed Vata and weak Agni, presenting together. In this framework, the digestive and nervous systems are not viewed as separate problems. They’re two expressions of the same underlying imbalance. That’s the starting point for how treatment gets built and here is what I actually do. Dinacharya (Daily Routine and Rhythm) Meals at the same time, every day. Sleep at the same time, every day. This is, without question, the intervention parents underestimate the most. Vata, the quality most associated with restlessness, irregularity, and difficulty settling, responds to consistency more than to almost anything else I can prescribe. A predictable rhythm to the day is not a minor lifestyle suggestion here. Ahara (Food) Warm. Cooked. Simple. Unhurried. And no restriction. Most autistic children are already working with a narrow range of accepted foods. Taking things away tends to make that narrower still, not better. So, the approach isn’t to remove foods, it’s to change how the accepted foods are prepared, before changing what they are. Same ingredients a child already trusts and eats, prepared in a way that’s easier on digestion. Deepana and Pachana (Kindling Digestion, Clearing Ama) This is the direct work of strengthening digestive fire and addressing Ama, the accumulation of incompletely digested material as described in Ayurveda. Everything here is gentle, matched to the child’s age and constitution, and prescribed individually, in person. There’s no standard protocol handed out uniformly, the dose and approach are unique to the child. Medhya Medicines This is a classical category of Ayurvedic preparations traditionally used to support memory, learning, and cognitive function. Many are prepared as medicated ghrita, with the specific preparation chosen according to the child’s constitution and clinical presentation. That property is what allows herbs like Brahmi and Centella asiatica (Gotu Kola) to actually reach the brain and act on cognitive function, rather than being absorbed elsewhere in the body and doing little for the nervous system directly. In my experience treating many autistic children, these preparations help. But there is no single herb you simply take and get uniform benefit from. The combination, the dose, the vehicle, and the child’s own constitution all have to be individualized. What works well for one child can be entirely wrong for another. Abhyanga (Daily Warm Oil Massage) A daily practice, and one I’ve written about extensively. As a consistent, long-term habit, it supports overall well-being in a way that compounds over time rather than producing an immediate, isolated effect. I’ve written a detailed guide on how to practice Abhyanga correctly, the oils to use, and its benefits. You can read it here. What I Do Not Do Boundaries matter as much as the treatment itself, so here they are, stated plainly. I do not perform Panchakarma on young children. In my clinical practice, children under seven are not considered candidates for classical Panchakarma procedures such as Nasya, Vamana, or Virechana, or any of the other classical cleansing procedures. If anyone tells you otherwise, don’t do it. I do not put autistic children on restrictive diets. Many of them are already eating a very limited set of foods. Removing items from an already-narrow list isn’t a viable strategy. The work happens around preparation and ingredients, not elimination. What Actually Happens Every child is different. Some respond well. Some change slowly. Some continue to struggle with the same challenges despite consistent treatment. There are no guarantees here, and I won’t pretend otherwise. What I can say, based on what I’ve seen across many cases, is this: a child receiving genuinely individualized Ayurvedic treatment will often be doing noticeably better over time. If you’d like a deeper understanding of autism and how it’s approached through our Agni Awakening Programs, send a WhatsApp message to +91 99011 26331. Our team will guide you through the next steps.

Why Two Healthy Foods Don’t Always Belong Together?

Sometimes I believe we look at food in a very simple way, in the sense that we don’t question it. We look at two foods that are healthy, like for example, a fruit is healthy, milk is healthy, and yogurt is healthy. Then we think, okay, if we mix these two healthy foods, the result will also be healthy. But that is not always true. More than 2,000 years ago, the Charaka Samhita introduced a concept called Viruddha Ahara, which means incompatible food combinations. The idea behind this is that a food is not only judged by what it is, but also by how it is eaten, how it is prepared, what it is eaten with, and who is eating it. Taking all these factors into account is important because two foods can be good on their own, but when combined, may not result in a good combination when eaten together. This is a very different way of thinking about food and nutrition. Normally, the questions that pop into our mind when we think about food are: Is it high in protein? Does it contain any vitamins? Is it low in sugar? Or is it natural or processed? But we should ask different questions. What is this food being combined with? How is it being prepared? Is the right amount being consumed? Is it the right season to eat it? Can my digestion handle it? Now, instead of looking at foods one by one, Ayurveda looks at the relationship between foods. According to the Charaka Samhita, there’s not just one kind of food incompatibility. There are 18 different ways in which food can become unsuitable when combined. Keep in mind that food is affected by where, when, how, how much, and with what it is eaten. Let us look into some of the most important types of Viruddha Ahara. First is Desha Viruddha, which means some foods are better suited to certain climates than others. A food that might work well in a cold region might not be the best choice to be eaten in a hot or humid place. Kala Viruddha refers to, as the name signifies, the season and time of the day. Eating heavy and oily foods during summer, or eating meals that are difficult to digest at night, might not suit the body and is not suggested. Agni Viruddha means digestive strength. Not everyone can digest food in the same way. A meal that might feel light for one person may feel heavy and uncomfortable for someone with weaker digestion. Matra Viruddha means quantity. Even healthy food becomes unhealthy when taken in excess amount. It is important to keep in mind that the right amount of food is as important as the right food. Then there is Samskara Viruddha. The way food is cooked, stored, and processed also changes how it affects the body. The same ingredients may have different effects depending on how they are prepared. Virya Viruddha refers to the inherent qualities of food. Some foods have warming qualities, while others have cooling qualities. Combining foods with opposite properties might not always be a good choice. Samyoga Viruddha refers to foods that do not work well together, even when each of them is healthy on its own. One of the best-known examples of Samyoga Viruddha is milk with sour fruits. According to Ayurveda, milk has a cooling nature, while sour fruits are heating and acidic. The classical texts explain that this combination can disturb digestion, increase heaviness, and create discomfort. Many people may have experienced this without realizing, like after consuming certain fruit-and-milk combinations, such as a smoothie or milkshake, they may feel bloated, heavy, or simply feel that the meal “didn’t sit well.” Now, Viruddha Ahara is not just a small idea presented in Ayurveda. It is an important concept because it is considered one of the major causes of disease. In the Charaka Samhita, incompatible food combinations are described as a major reason for several health problems, especially those related to the skin. They are also linked with inflammation, poor digestion, and, in some cases, even disturbances of the mind. Vagbhata has also described incompatible food combinations as being poison-like. This doesn’t mean they act like a poison after every single meal. It means that when these combinations are consumed repeatedly over months, they might gradually affect your health. The effects may show up as bloating, discomfort, inflammation, and other digestive issues. So, the next time you are trying to consume something healthy, ask yourself if that combination of foods or ingredients is actually healthy for your body. Did this article change the way you think about food? Share it with someone who might find it interesting, and let us know in the comments if you’ve ever noticed certain food combinations affecting your digestion or how you feel. As next, we’ll explore some of the most well-known incompatible food combinations described in Ayurveda.

The Protein Obsession – You Are Not What You Eat

I want to talk about protein. Not because it doesn’t matter, because it does. But because we are being sold a deficiency most of us don’t have, and you deserve to know who is selling it, and why. Walk through any store now and protein is everywhere. Protein water. Protein coffee. Bread, cereal, chips, yoghurt, all wearing the number on the front of the pack. It feels like science. It feels like progress. It is neither. It is marketing, and it has a history most people have never been told. In 1974, a paper in The Lancet took apart the idea of a global “protein gap,” the belief, pushed for two decades by international agencies, that the world was starving for protein and needed industrial protein products to fix it. The scientist who had led that entire field admitted, the very next year, that the gap had never existed. The recommended protein for infants was quietly revised down, again and again. One of the men involved later called it one of the greatest errors ever made in the name of nutrition science. Fifty years later, the same myth is back. Bigger, and far more profitable. It is a thirty-billion-dollar industry now, doubling. And this time it has reached your morning coffee. Here in India, the campaign working hardest to convince you that you are protein deficient is funded by an American soybean export council. That is not a conspiracy; it is stated openly on their own website. And the figure you have seen everywhere that seventy-three percent of Indians are protein deficient, comes from a 2017 market research survey of 1,800 people. Not a health study. A marketing study. The government’s own survey, of more than two hundred thousand households, tells a different story. On average, we already eat enough protein. What we are actually short on is not quantity. It is quality, diversity, and the part nobody is selling: digestion. Because this is what the grams will never tell you. You are not what you eat. You are what you digest and absorb. In my tradition, this is not a metaphor. Digestion is agni, your metabolic fire. And there is a line I return to again and again: rogah sarve’pi mande’gnau. Nearly all disease begins in weak digestion. You can drink three protein shakes a day. But if your agni is weak, that protein does not become muscle. It becomes ama, undigested, sticky residue that clogs your channels and quietly inflames you. More fuel on a low fire does not make a bigger flame. It makes smoke. And here is the part I find most beautiful. My tradition knew, thousands of years ago, that food becomes flesh. The Chandogya Upanishad says it plainly: the coarsest part of food becomes waste, the middle part becomes flesh, and the subtlest part becomes the mind. Read that again. They knew food builds muscle. They simply refused to make muscle the goal. Flesh was the middle outcome, above waste, below mind. The finest yield of what you eat was never meant to be a bigger body. It was meant to be a clearer one. In Ayurveda, muscle, Mamsa, is the third transformation of your food, not the first. Food becomes plasma, then blood, then muscle, each step depending on a fire of its own. You cannot shortcut that by scooping more powder into the top. There is no supplement for a broken fire. Now let me be honest, because I am a physician and not a contrarian. There are people who genuinely need more protein. Women in perimenopause and beyond. Anyone over sixty losing muscle to age. People on the new weight-loss injections. Those recovering from illness, surgery, childbirth. Serious athletes in real training. If you are one of them, this is not permission to eat less. But for most others, sitting at a desk, reaching for a third shake out of anxiety, it is the opposite. So, before you count another gram, do this instead. Rebuild the fire first. Warm, freshly cooked food, at regular hours. Fewer cold shakes. Your dal with rice and a spoon of ghee is a complete protein and an easily digested one, the combination our grandmothers understood long before it had a name. And that fruit-and-milk smoothie you feel so virtuous about? Milk and fruit are two different digestions fighting in one glass. My texts call that combination harmful, and they are right. It is one of the most common causes of the bloating and congestion I see every single day. Strength was never a number on a package. It is what your body can actually transform. That is the real question. Not how much protein you can swallow, but how much of it you can become.

The “73% of Indians Are Protein Deficient” Claim Deserves a Closer Look

In a study conducted by IIMRB titled Understanding Protein Myths and Gaps Among Indians, about 1,800 Indian residents across four different regions of the country were surveyed. It reported that up to 73% of Indians had protein-deficient diets. Among these people, 84% were vegetarians, while 65% were non-vegetarians. 93% of Indians did not know their daily protein requirements. This statistic has since been recycled into academic papers, cited in brand campaigns, and repeated so often that you have almost certainly come across the phrase, “73% of Indians are protein deficient,” if you have spent any time reading health and wellness content over the last few years. Since then, this number has been amplified through a campaign called Right to Protein, which has been running in India since 2020, with Protein Day celebrated every year on February 27. The campaign has also expanded to several other countries, including Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. In 2025, a conference was co-hosted in Indore titled Farm to Fork: Bridging the Protein Gap in India through Sustainable Soy Foods. It featured the CEO of one of India’s largest soy producers, and the USSEC regional director stated that India needs to meet its protein requirements. Since then, there has been a phrase thrown around repeatedly: the protein gap. This term, the protein gap, was the exact phrase used by UN-led campaigns during the 1950s to 1970s, when it was declared that the world was suffering from a global protein deficiency. That claim was later publicly discredited by the scientist who had originally led the research in 1974, and the entire episode came to be known as the Great Protein Fiasco. Why am I mentioning this? Because 50 years later, in a different country, the same phrase appears to be doing the same marketing work. None of this means that everything about protein marketing, promotion, or these campaigns is false. It simply means that you need to understand that this statistic has been funded and amplified by organizations that are trying to promote their own products. For that reason, we should not automatically treat it as a science-grounded framework. We should also keep in mind that the survey included about 1,800 residents, while India consists of about 1.3 billion people. That is a very small sample relative to the country’s population, and it deserves to be interpreted with that context in mind. Now Let’s Look at Something Larger The The National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) conducted a Household Consumption Expenditure Survey in 2023-24 and covered about 261,953 households, of which 154,357 were rural and 107,596 were urban. This dataset is much larger than the IIMRB sample. More importantly, the figures came from a government-run household consumption survey rather than a market research survey. The survey was analysed in December 2025 by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). According to this analysis, the conclusions were very different. First, the average protein intake in India is actually adequate, not deficient. Around 55.6 grams of protein per person per day is consumed on average. Per capita intake was estimated at 61.8 grams in rural regions and 63.4 grams in urban areas. What the researchers observed was that the real problem lies in the composition of protein intake, not the quantity. About 50% of India’s dietary protein comes from cereals such as rice, wheat, and refined flour, whereas the recommended proportion is 32%. Pulses contribute only about 11%, despite a recommended share of 19%. The real problem, therefore, is distribution of protein sources within the diet. Separately, many independent researchers from organisations such as the M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation have also estimated that average protein intake in India is generally adequate. However, they point out that a specific amino acid, lysine, is often the limiting factor. If we put aside all these numbers and statistics, the summary is actually quite simple. India does not have a nationwide protein crisis. What India has is a dietary diversity crisis, and in many places, an inadequate food access, of which protein is only one constraint rather than the entire problem. The people most affected are households living in rural and economically disadvantaged regions. Now, selling protein powders to urban consumers, many of whom are already meeting their protein requirements, is not the solution. In fact, the solution, on the other hand, is also much simpler. Improving access to pulses, dairy, and other naturally protein-rich foods that are already part of traditional diets would do far more than encouraging already well-fed consumers to buy another protein product. Perhaps the bigger question is not whether you’re eating enough protein, but whether your body is capable of using the protein you’re already eating. I also wrote about how Ayurveda looks at protein very differently, focusing on digestion before nutrients. You can read that here.

Why “More Nutrition” Isn’t Always Better

Overnutrition has become a distinctly modern problem due to the abundance and easy availability of convenient foods. The belief that “more nutrition is always good” has also become increasingly widespread. Now, let us talk about this according to Ayurveda. More than 2,000 years ago, one of Ayurveda’s fundamental texts, the Charaka Samhita, dedicated an entire chapter to diseases caused by overeating and overnourishment. It is called the Santarpaniya Adhyaya (Sutrasthana 23). The Charaka Samhita did not describe the foods that we eat today. Instead, it described an entire pattern of eating. It observed the pattern and the diseases that arose because of it. In the text, Charaka states that not everyone needs more nourishment. He describes two broad causes of disease. One is Santarpana, where disease is caused by overnourishment. The other is Atarpana, where disease is caused due to undernourishment. When we look at today’s medical advice, the focus is mostly on deficiency. If someone is not getting enough protein, they are advised to increase protein intake. If they are low in iron, they are told to take more iron. If they have low energy, they are encouraged to build it up through supplements. Ayurveda always had a broader view. It recognized that too much can be just as harmful as too little. The goal has always been to maintain balance. When we look at what causes overnourishment, Charaka lists several foods, patterns, and habits that contribute to disease when taken in excess. These include foods that are Madhura (sweet), Snigdha (oily), Guru (heavy in constitution), and Picchila (slimy), along with new grains, milk and milk-based foods such as Payasam, and various meats, particularly from aquatic animals. All of these, when consumed in excess (Atimatrasaha) and combined with a sedentary lifestyle and excessive daytime sleeping, may contribute to disease. When you read that paragraph again, many modern foods might come to mind. But Charaka was not describing any of them. He was describing a pattern of eating that looks remarkably similar. According to Ayurveda, repeatedly eating this way and living such a lifestyle can disturb Kapha and Meda Dhatu (the fat tissue), eventually leading to Srotorodha, or blockage of the body’s channels. Ayurveda does not simply advocate eating less. It has always been about choosing the right approach. The chapter immediately before this one, Sutrasthana 22, explains how to manage nutrition properly. It is the Langhana Brimhana Adhyaya, which describes two complementary therapeutic approaches. One is Langhana, which means lightening the body through fasting or reducing food. The other is Brimhana, which nourishes and rebuilds the body. The right approach depends on the individual and their internal constitution. Someone recovering from an illness may need nourishment, while someone who is overloaded or overnourished may benefit from reduction. These approaches should always be assessed by a qualified Ayurvedic doctor. The answer does not always have to be another medicine, another supplement, or eating more. Sometimes, doing less is exactly what the body needs. Interestingly, a research study published in Nature Metabolism in 2024 found that consuming more than about 25 grams of protein in a single meal may reduce a process called autophagy, the body’s natural way of clearing damaged cells. The idea that the quantity consumed in a single meal matters sounds remarkably similar to Charaka’s emphasis on Matra, or eating the right quantity of food. Nutrition was never simply about eating more. It was always about eating the right amount, for the right person, at the right time. Over the years, if you look at the conversations around food, they have almost always been about one nutrient at a time. First it was carbs, then it was sugar, and now it’s protein. Each time, the same pattern repeats: one nutrient is singled out while everything else in the meal is ignored. You cannot isolate a single nutrient and consume it in excessive amounts. Santarpana was never about one nutrient going wrong. It was always about your entire way of living and eating going out of balance. That is probably the most significant shift for us to make today. Instead of asking whether I am eating a certain amount of protein or a certain amount of carbs, or simply trying to make it a balanced diet, we need to ask whether this food is suited for me in this season, at this stage of my life, and in the living conditions I am going through. Because what nourishes your body depends as much on you as it does on the food itself. Only when both are in sync can your body stay healthy. When we look at Santarpana and Atarpana, they are simply two ends of the same imbalance. Too much and too little may sound like one is good and the other is bad, but they are just two different problems arising from the same root. That is where the idea of Agni, the digestive fire, becomes important again. A person with weak Agni can develop Santarpana-type diseases even while eating a completely normal diet. Because it has never been solely about the quantity of food; it has always been about how much the body can process. Two people can eat the exact same meal and have completely different outcomes because their Agni is different. So, it is never about following the same routine for everyone. You should understand your relationship with food. If you would like to understand more about Ayurvedic concepts that are relevant to today’s modern health problems, you can explore our 3-Month Agni Awakening Program, where we help you understand your relationship with food, digestion, and your own body more deeply.

Protein vs Digestion: What Ayurveda Teaches About Building Muscle

If you are hitting the gym today, or even just opening a health app on your phone, there’s probably one thing you’ll notice immediately: protein intake. Thirty grams for breakfast, twenty-five grams for lunch and even a protein shake after your workout to hit your daily target. Protein has become so ingrained in modern nutrition that we rarely stop to question it. But here’s something interesting. Ayurveda, one of the world’s oldest continuously practised systems of medicine, never counted protein at all. Why? Let’s understand protein in a simple way. Protein helps build muscle and supports strength. Many people assume that the more protein we eat, the stronger we become. But the amount of protein you eat isn’t necessarily the amount your body digests, absorbs, and uses. This single difference changes everything. The World Has Become Obsessed With Protein Protein is everywhere today. The global protein supplement industry is now worth over $30 billion, and millions of people are actively trying to increase their daily protein intake. Protein powders, protein cereals, protein bars, protein water, almost every food category now has a protein version. The question is not whether we need protein. It has become how can we eat even more of it? Research suggests that most Americans already meet or exceed the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for protein. Consuming protein far beyond these requirements doesn’t automatically lead to additional muscle gain or health benefits, particularly for sedentary individuals. At the same time, many people are actually falling short on nutrients like fiber, calcium, potassium, and several B vitamins. India has a similar story. You may have heard the claim that 73% of Indians are protein deficient. But that number comes from a relatively small market survey rather than a nationwide nutritional assessment. Protein intake varies considerably across India. While many people meet their basic physiological requirements, others, particularly older adults, women, and lower-income populations, may still consume inadequate amounts. The bigger question isn’t simply how much protein we’re eating, it is whether our body is actually able to absorb and use it properly. Ayurveda Never Looked at Food This Way One of the basic principles of Ayurveda is that food is understood by how it behaves inside your body, not by how many grams of protein, carbohydrates, or fat it contains. In other words, Ayurveda is less interested in the food itself and more interested in what that food does to your body. Every food is understood through its taste, qualities, energy, and what happens after digestion. The Chandogya Upanishad describes what happens when food is eaten, it explains that the heaviest part becomes waste, the finer part nourishes the body, while the subtlest portion supports the mind. The remaining part contributes to building the body’s tissues, including muscle. So Ayurveda never denied that food builds muscle. It simply believed that something else comes first. You might have heard of the saying, you are what you eat. But I believe it extends to you are what you digest. Every meal you eat has the potential to nourish you but only if your body can properly absorb it. Food doesn’t become muscle the moment you swallow it. It first has to be digested, the nutrients must then be absorbed and gradually transformed into the body’s tissues. Ayurveda describes this as a sequential process of tissue nourishment that eventually supports blood, muscle, fat, bone, marrow, reproductive tissue, and finally Ojas, the body’s deepest reserve of vitality and resilience. For all of this to happen efficiently, your digestion has to be working well. Why Ayurveda Focuses on Agni This is why Ayurveda places so much importance on Agni, the digestive fire. When your Agni is strong, food is digested efficiently, nutrients are absorbed properly, and the body receives nourishment. But when Agni becomes weak, the body struggles to digest and process food effectively. Instead of being completely transformed into nourishment, part of the food remains partially digested. Ayurveda calls this Ama. Ama is described as incompletely processed metabolic waste. According to Ayurveda, its accumulation is considered the starting point for many diseases. This is why simply adding more food or more protein is not always the answer if your digestion is weak. Eating more protein does not automatically mean your body will build more muscle. The first step is improving digestion. Modern Science Is Beginning to Ask Similar Questions Interestingly, modern nutrition is beginning to explore many of these same ideas. One 2024 study published in Nature Metabolism reported that consuming more than approximately 25 grams of protein in a meal reduced markers associated with autophagy, the body’s natural process for clearing damaged cells. Researchers are increasingly recognising that digestion, gut health, and nutrient absorption are just as important as nutrient intake itself. High-protein diets can also unintentionally reduce fiber intake if they replace plant-based foods. This matters because dietary fiber feeds beneficial gut bacteria and plays an important role in long-term digestive and metabolic health. In some respects, modern nutrition is beginning to explore concepts that echo principles long emphasised in Ayurveda, particularly the importance of digestion, gut health, and nutrient utilisation. The body is not just a container for nutrients. It is a living system that must digest, absorb, and transform food before it can become nourishment. So Should You Stop Eating Protein? Absolutely not. Protein is an essential nutrient, it helps build muscle, repair tissues, produce enzymes, hormones, and support numerous physiological functions throughout the body. I am not asking you to stop eating protein. I am asking you to stop thinking that more protein automatically means better health. Instead of asking,… Continue reading Protein vs Digestion: What Ayurveda Teaches About Building Muscle

WHO Recognises Ayurveda. So Why Isn’t It Covered by Insurance?

Biology concept with retro science cartoon icons set vector illustration

Ayurveda has gained global recognition from the World Health Organization. But in most countries, patients still have to pay for treatment entirely out of pocket. Why? Over the past few years, Ayurveda has reached several important milestones. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recognized Ayurveda as an important part of traditional and integrative healthcare. India has also established the WHO Global Traditional Medicine Centre in Jamnagar, backed by significant government investment, to strengthen research, collaboration, and innovation in traditional medicine. These achievements are important. They show that Ayurveda is receiving increasing attention at the global level. But if someone living in London, New York, or Berlin wants Ayurvedic treatment, they’re probably paying for it themselves. Even if Ayurveda is recognized, it is still not covered by most health insurance plans. Recognition and access are not the same thing. Recognition Is Only the First Step The WHO Global Traditional Medicine Strategy (2025–2034) encourages countries to strengthen research, improve safety and regulation, and integrate traditional medicine into healthcare systems where appropriate. This is an important step forward. It gives traditional medicine, including Ayurveda, greater visibility in global health discussions. However, recognition by the WHO does not automatically mean that a treatment becomes part of a country’s healthcare system. Every country has its own rules for licensing practitioners, approving medicines, and deciding what treatments insurance companies will pay for. That is where Ayurveda still faces significant challenges. What the Current Situation Looks Like India’s own report, Strategic Roadmap for Making Ayurveda Global, prepared by NITI Aayog and PwC, highlights this gap. According to the report: Ayurveda currently has formal recognition in only a limited number of countries. In many international markets, Ayurvedic products are still classified as dietary supplements rather than medicines. Insurance coverage for Ayurvedic treatment remains very limited outside India. This means that although awareness of Ayurveda is growing, access to affordable treatment has not kept pace. For many patients, cost remains a major barrier. India Has Already Shown That Insurance Can Work Interestingly, this challenge has already been addressed within India. Health insurance regulations now require insurers to provide coverage for AYUSH treatments, including Ayurveda, under specific conditions. Many insurance policies now reimburse eligible Ayurvedic treatments in the same way they reimburse conventional medical care. Hospitals that meet the required standards can offer insured Ayurvedic treatments to patients. This demonstrates that insurance coverage for Ayurveda is possible. The systems already exist. The question is how similar models can be developed internationally. Why Insurance Matters Insurance does more than reduce healthcare costs. It also builds trust. When an insurance company agrees to cover a treatment, it usually means that the treatment has passed careful reviews related to safety, effectiveness, practitioner qualifications, and clinical evidence. Without insurance coverage, many patients simply cannot afford long-term care, regardless of how beneficial a treatment may be. That limits access and slows wider adoption. Traditional Chinese Medicine Offers an Important Example Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has made greater progress in this area. In countries such as Switzerland, certain TCM treatments are included within the national health insurance system when provided by appropriately qualified medical professionals. This did not happen overnight. It was the result of years of research, standardized education, practitioner certification, and collaboration with healthcare regulators. Ayurveda has not yet reached the same stage in most countries. In many places, it is still classified alongside wellness services rather than integrated into mainstream healthcare. Why This Gap Still Exists Insurance providers make decisions based on evidence. They want answers to questions such as: Does the treatment improve patient outcomes? Is it safe? Does it reduce long-term healthcare costs? Are practitioners properly trained and regulated? While research in Ayurveda continues to grow, India’s own policy roadmap acknowledges that larger international clinical studies and stronger evidence are still needed. This is one of the biggest reasons insurance coverage remains limited. Recognition creates awareness. Evidence creates confidence. Insurance depends on confidence. What Needs to Happen Next The good news is that the path forward is becoming clearer. Several steps could help Ayurveda become more widely accepted by healthcare systems and insurance providers around the world. These include: Conducting more high-quality clinical research that meets international standards. Generating cost-effectiveness data to demonstrate how Ayurvedic care may reduce long-term healthcare expenses. Creating internationally recognized credentialing systems for qualified Ayurvedic physicians. Expanding the proposed Global Ayurveda Register so practitioner qualifications can be easily verified. Working with governments and insurers to launch pilot insurance programs in countries with growing interest in Ayurveda. These efforts would provide the evidence and infrastructure that insurers need before expanding coverage. Recognition Is Important. Access Is the Goal. The WHO’s recognition of Ayurveda is an important milestone. It reflects growing international respect for one of the world’s oldest healthcare systems. But recognition alone does not make treatment affordable. Patients benefit most when qualified practitioners are accessible, treatments are properly regulated, and insurance makes care financially possible. India has already shown that this model can work domestically. The next challenge is building similar systems internationally. If research, regulation, and professional standards continue to improve, Ayurveda will be in a much stronger position to become part of mainstream healthcare systems around the world. Recognition opened the door. The next step is making sure patients can actually walk through it.

Government Report Confirms What Many Ayurvedic Practitioners Have Been Saying for Years

Ayurveda has immense potential to become a global healthcare system. But for that to happen, it needs stronger infrastructure, better international recognition, and clear global standards. The new government report says exactly that. On 2 July 2026, NITI Aayog, in collaboration with PwC, released a report titled “Strategic Roadmap for Making Ayurveda Global.” It’s an official policy document launched by senior leaders from NITI Aayog, the Ministry of AYUSH, and the Ministry of External Affairs. One of the report’s biggest messages states clearly that Ayurveda has a strong foundation in India, but it still lacks the systems needed to succeed globally. For many Ayurvedic practitioners, this isn’t surprising. These challenges have been discussed for years. The difference is that they have now been formally acknowledged in a national policy document. What the Report Says The report recognizes that Ayurveda has made significant progress, but it also points out several important gaps that continue to limit its international growth. One of its key observations is that Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has built a much stronger global ecosystem than Ayurveda. China has invested heavily in overseas medical centers, international partnerships, standardized regulations, research, and global quality standards. As a result, TCM has become far more integrated into healthcare systems around the world. Ayurveda, despite having a rich history and a strong presence within India, has not yet achieved the same level of international recognition. India Has the Expertise India has one of the largest traditional medicine workforces in the world. There are more than 355,000 qualified Ayurvedic practitioners, along with hundreds of thousands of other AYUSH professionals. Ayurvedic products are now exported to nearly 150 countries, and exports have grown significantly over the past decade. These are encouraging signs. However, the report points out that in many countries Ayurvedic products are still sold as dietary supplements rather than recognized medicines. Likewise, many qualified Ayurvedic physicians are unable to practice internationally because clear licensing and recognition systems do not yet exist. In other words, India has the expertise. What it still needs is stronger international infrastructure. Why This Matters Recognition is about much more than reputation. It affects whether qualified Ayurvedic doctors can practice abroad, whether treatments are covered by insurance, whether products receive medical approval, and whether patients know how to identify properly trained practitioners. Today, many people outside India struggle to distinguish between someone who has completed a five-and-a-half-year BAMS medical degree and someone who has only completed a short certification course. That creates confusion for patients and makes it harder for qualified professionals to gain the recognition they deserve. What the Roadmap Proposes Perhaps the most encouraging part of the report is that it doesn’t just identify problems. It also outlines a plan for addressing them. Over the next several years, the roadmap recommends: Developing internationally recognized standards for Ayurvedic education and clinical practice. Creating a Global Ayurveda Register where qualified practitioners can be verified. Expanding government-supported Ayurveda centers in key international markets. Increasing clinical research to strengthen the evidence base for Ayurveda. Supporting international recognition of Ayurvedic medicines. Working toward insurance coverage for Ayurvedic treatments in selected countries. Creating professional pathways that allow qualified Ayurvedic physicians to practice abroad. Together, these initiatives aim to make Ayurveda more accessible, more credible, and easier to integrate into healthcare systems worldwide. Why the Global Ayurveda Register Is Important Among all the recommendations, one stands out. The proposal to create a Global Ayurveda Register could become one of the most important developments for the profession. A verified international registry would allow patients, hospitals, employers, and healthcare regulators to confirm that a practitioner has completed recognized medical training. It would also make it much easier to distinguish fully qualified Ayurvedic physicians from individuals with limited or informal training. This kind of transparency builds trust, and trust is essential for any healthcare system. A Roadmap Is Only the Beginning While the report is an important milestone, it is still only a roadmap. The real measure of success will be how much of it is actually implemented. Previous initiatives have introduced valuable programs such as AYUSH Information Cells, international partnerships, academic collaborations, and medical tourism initiatives. These have all contributed to Ayurveda’s growth. However, the report also acknowledges that important challenges remain, including international licensing, insurance integration, standardized education, and regulatory alignment. The next few years will determine whether this roadmap leads to lasting change. The Future Looks Promising For many practitioners, this report represents an encouraging shift. The conversation is no longer focused only on promoting Ayurveda. It is now focused on building the systems that allow Ayurveda to grow responsibly around the world. If the proposed initiatives are implemented successfully, they could make it easier for qualified practitioners to work internationally, improve confidence in Ayurvedic products, strengthen research, and provide patients across the world with greater access to authentic Ayurvedic care. Looking Ahead Ayurveda has always had the knowledge, the history, and the practitioners needed to make a global impact. What it has needed is stronger infrastructure. This new roadmap recognizes that reality and provides a clear direction for the future. Now the focus shifts from planning to action. The coming years will show whether these recommendations become meaningful reforms that strengthen Ayurveda’s place in global healthcare. That is the opportunity ahead.

Why Most Ayurvedic Doctors Never Practice Outside India, and Why That Needs to Change

Ayurveda has one of the largest trained healthcare workforces in the world. Yet very few Ayurvedic doctors ever practice outside India. The problem isn’t a lack of talent. It’s a lack of global recognition. When people talk about taking Ayurveda to a global audience, the conversation often revolves around awareness. International interest has largely focused on wellness and herbal products. But they overlook a much bigger challenge. If qualified Ayurvedic doctors cannot easily practice outside India, how can Ayurveda truly become a global healthcare system? The answer lies in something far less exciting than marketing. It lies in regulation, recognition, and infrastructure. India Has Thousands of Qualified Ayurvedic Doctors India has built an impressive educational system for Ayurveda. According to government data, the country has more than 379,000 registered Ayurveda practitioners and over 750,000 registered AYUSH professionals overall. These aren’t hobbyists or wellness influencers. Most Ayurveda physicians complete the Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS), a government-regulated medical degree that takes five and a half years to complete. Their education includes subjects such as anatomy, physiology, pathology, pharmacology, diagnostics, surgery, gynecology, ENT, ophthalmology, and clinical training, alongside classical Ayurvedic principles. In other words, these are highly trained healthcare professionals. Yet despite having such a large workforce, very few ever practice outside India. Inside India, a BAMS degree is a recognized medical qualification regulated by the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine. Outside India, the situation changes dramatically. In many countries, the degree has little or no official recognition. A BAMS-qualified physician moving to countries such as the United States cannot simply continue practicing as a doctor. Instead, they often have to register through voluntary professional associations that do not grant medical licenses, prescribing rights, or hospital privileges. This creates an unfortunate situation. A physician who spent more than five years completing formal medical education may appear no different, from a legal standpoint, than someone who completed a short certification course in Ayurveda. For patients, employers, and healthcare regulators overseas, distinguishing between the two becomes difficult. Recognition Builds Trust Healthcare systems rely on trust. That trust comes from clear educational standards, licensing systems, and professional regulation. When hospitals hire doctors or governments approve healthcare providers, they need reliable ways to verify qualifications. This is where Ayurveda faces an important challenge. There is currently no widely recognized international system that allows foreign regulators to quickly verify whether someone has completed an accredited BAMS program. As a result, every country has to assess qualifications independently. Many simply choose not to create formal licensing pathways for Ayurvedic practitioners at all. Without a straightforward verification process, expanding professional recognition becomes much more difficult. Traditional Chinese Medicine Took a Different Approach Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) offers an interesting comparison. China invested heavily in creating international systems that support its practitioners. Government-backed TCM centers operate in numerous countries through official partnerships. Training standards are clearly defined. Foreign governments have established mechanisms to recognize qualified practitioners. This doesn’t necessarily mean TCM has better practitioners. It means the profession has stronger international infrastructure supporting those practitioners. That infrastructure makes global mobility possible. Why Credentials Matter As Ayurveda grows in popularity around the world, more people are offering Ayurvedic consultations, wellness coaching, and lifestyle advice. Some are formally trained physicians. Others have completed shorter courses or self-directed study. For the average patient, it can be extremely difficult to tell the difference. That creates confusion. It also affects the credibility of the profession as a whole. When inaccurate information is shared publicly by someone presenting themselves as an Ayurveda expert, the reputation of qualified practitioners is often affected as well. Without internationally recognized credentials, patients have no easy way to identify who has completed years of medical education and who has not. Ayurveda Needs Better Global Infrastructure The challenge isn’t producing skilled practitioners. India has already done that. The challenge is building systems that allow those practitioners to be recognized internationally. Several important steps could help move Ayurveda in that direction. A globally accessible registry of accredited BAMS graduates would allow patients, hospitals, employers, and healthcare regulators to verify qualifications with confidence. Mutual recognition agreements between governments could make it easier for qualified Ayurvedic physicians to practice in countries where there is growing demand. Clear international credentialing standards would also help distinguish fully trained doctors from wellness practitioners with shorter certifications, creating greater transparency for patients. India could continue working with international organizations such as the World Health Organization to develop consistent benchmarks for Ayurvedic education and professional practice. Government-supported clinical partnerships overseas could further strengthen the profession by allowing experienced Ayurvedic physicians to work within recognized healthcare institutions abroad. None of these ideas are unprecedented. Many healthcare professions already use similar systems to support international mobility and recognition. The Future of Ayurveda Depends on Its Practitioners Ayurveda’s global future isn’t limited by a lack of knowledge or skilled professionals. India already has hundreds of thousands of qualified Ayurvedic doctors who have undergone years of structured education and clinical training. The real challenge is ensuring that the rest of the world can recognize those qualifications with confidence. When patients can easily verify a practitioner’s credentials, when healthcare systems understand what a BAMS degree represents, and when governments create clear pathways for qualified physicians to practice internationally, Ayurveda will have a much stronger foundation for global growth. The medicine has always been ready. Now it’s time to build the systems that allow the people practicing it to be recognized around the world.

What Ayurveda in India Can Learn from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)

For decades, discussions comparing Ayurveda and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) have focused on which system is older, which therapies are more effective, or which philosophy is more comprehensive. None of these debates answers the question that really matters. Why has TCM become far more integrated into global healthcare systems while Ayurveda, despite its growing popularity, is still largely viewed as an alternative medicine in many parts of the world? The answer has very little to do with the medicine itself. It has everything to do with the systems built around it. China invested heavily in creating institutions, international partnerships, regulatory standards, research infrastructure, and government-backed healthcare networks that allowed TCM to gain legitimacy across the world. India has made significant progress in promoting Ayurveda internationally, but much of the work is still in its early stages. Ayurveda has never lacked knowledge. What it has lacked is the infrastructure to make that knowledge universally trusted. Understanding this difference is important because it shows that the future of Ayurveda depends not only on preserving ancient knowledge, but also on building modern systems that support it. Traditional Medicine Needs More Than Tradition Many people assume that if a medical system has survived for thousands of years, international recognition will naturally follow. History suggests otherwise. Modern healthcare depends on trust, regulation, education, quality control, and evidence. Governments, insurance providers, hospitals, universities, and regulatory agencies need clear standards before they adopt any healthcare system. This is where China approached TCM differently. Rather than relying solely on the historical significance of traditional medicine, China treated it as a strategic national asset. It invested in making TCM understandable, measurable, teachable, and compatible with modern healthcare systems. That investment continues to shape how TCM is perceived around the world. China Exported Institutions, Not Just Knowledge One of the biggest differences between the two countries lies in how they expanded internationally. China established government-supported Traditional Chinese Medicine centres across multiple countries. They function as real clinical institutions where patients receive treatment, healthcare professionals undergo training, and collaborative medical research takes place. In countries such as Hungary and Thailand, these centers have become long-term healthcare partnerships rather than temporary projects. Chinese physicians regularly rotate through these institutions, local practitioners receive standardized training, and several Chinese herbal medicines have received official regulatory approval within those countries. This creates confidence. Patients know they are entering an institution backed by established systems rather than relying solely on the reputation of an individual practitioner. India has also taken meaningful steps abroad. The Ministry of AYUSH has established AYUSH academic chairs in foreign universities, signed numerous agreements with international governments and educational institutions, and promoted Ayurveda through conferences, educational collaborations, and diplomatic initiatives. These efforts are valuable because they introduce Ayurveda to new audiences and encourage academic interest. However, an academic chair inside a university serves a different purpose from a permanent government-supported healthcare center that treats patients every day. One spreads knowledge, while the other builds healthcare infrastructure. Both matter, but they have very different long-term impacts. Global Standards Build Global Trust Every healthcare system depends on standards. Imagine purchasing an herbal medicine in Germany, Brazil, or Australia. How do regulators determine whether the ingredients meet acceptable quality standards? How does a hospital know whether practitioners received sufficient training? How does a researcher compare results across different countries? Without internationally accepted standards, every country must answer these questions independently. China recognized this challenge early. In 2009, it secured the leadership of ISO Technical Committee 249, the international committee responsible for developing standards for traditional Chinese medicine. Over the years, China has helped develop dozens of international standards covering terminology, herbal materials, medical equipment, testing methods, and quality specifications. These standards make it easier for governments and healthcare institutions worldwide to evaluate and adopt TCM. India entered this process much later. Only in 2025 was a dedicated Ayurveda and Yoga subcommittee established within the same ISO technical committee, following proposals from India’s standards bodies. This development represents an important milestone. It gives Ayurveda a formal opportunity to help shape international standards instead of simply adapting to frameworks created by others. The opportunity now is to actively contribute, develop comprehensive standards, and ensure Ayurveda has a strong voice in global regulatory discussions. Recognition Begins at Home Another major lesson comes from how China positioned TCM within its own healthcare system. Traditional Chinese Medicine practitioners are recognized under the country’s medical framework, and legislation passed in 2017 strengthened the legal standing of TCM institutions alongside conventional medicine. Many treatments are covered through public insurance. Patients encounter TCM within hospitals, specialist clinics, and mainstream healthcare facilities. This domestic integration sends a powerful message internationally. If a country’s own government fully integrates traditional medicine into healthcare delivery, regulators elsewhere become more willing to evaluate it seriously. India has also made substantial progress over the past decade. The Ministry of AYUSH has expanded international collaborations, introduced the AYUSH Visa to encourage medical tourism, established AYUSH Information Cells across numerous countries, and partnered with the World Health Organization to launch the WHO Global Traditional Medicine Centre in Jamnagar. Ayurveda’s inclusion within the WHO’s ICD-11 classification is another significant achievement because it acknowledges traditional medicine within an international health framework. These developments deserve recognition. At the same time, India’s own policy documents acknowledge that further work remains. The NITI Aayog and PwC report Strategic Roadmap for Making Ayurveda Global identifies several continuing challenges, including limited international regulatory harmonization, insufficient evidence-based clinical research, minimal insurance integration, and the need for standardized global education. Recognizing these gaps is not criticism, it is the first step toward solving them. Why Has Acupuncture Become Mainstream? Perhaps the clearest… Continue reading What Ayurveda in India Can Learn from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)