The Central Council of Research in Siddha (CCRS), National Institute of Siddha (NIS) and the department of Ayush should focus more on researches in future years than what they did in the past because only the government institutions can care more on the efficacy of the traditional drugs in the system than private institutions can do, comments Dr S Renganathan, a senior scientist in Siddha research organisation in Chennai.
None of these government institutions has done great researches in the development or in the efficacy of Siddha medicines and published research articles in top ranking journals of India and abroad, says he.
According to him, apart from patients, the major beneficiaries of this age old system are the people who are in the government establishments like PHCs, CCRS, NIS and Ayush. They have to speak high about this method of treatment and work for this system’s growth as they work under Siddha departments. Unfortunately, this group of people, although appears to care the system, seems to be doing little for its growth.
The central and the state government of Tamil Nadu should obtain yearly commitment from the heads of these institutions about what they intent to achieve for the year and must evaluate whether they have achieved it or not. If the institutional heads feel that the government is keenly monitoring their activities, they will be compelled to do something for the growth and promotion of the system. Government is spending huge sum of money for these institutions and their research work.
Secondly, the Siddha drug manufacturing and marketing companies are the other major beneficiaries of the system. The industry really cares this traditional system because the manufacturers and traders make huge revenue from marketing Siddha drugs. Since a cross section of the population still follows traditional methods of treatment, the industry is taking advantage of them by selling their products. Unfortunately, only a handful of Siddha products manufacturing companies are doing good researches or supporting research organisations, says Dr Renganathan, who is doing research in Siddha for the last 25 years.
While interacting with Pharmabiz, the Siddha scientist said most industries smartly convolute the generic formulations either with an addition of an extra herb or deleting one and would make it ‘proprietary formulations.’ Comfortably they use the benefit of the generic claims for promoting the proprietary formulations. When the new norms are introduced by the state drug licensing authority (SLA) for the issuance of license to new proprietary drugs, most companies appear to be shy to venture into new proprietary formulations. To bring new proprietary Siddha drugs, the companies have to spend money for toxicological and clinical evaluation of the drugs. Earlier, the licensing system was frivolous and unscientific. The institutionally qualified Siddha private practitioners would easily give away clinical trial reports for just a few thousand rupees. The drug would not be seen even by those who have given such clinical reports, he alleged.
He further comments that most of the generic Siddha drugs are prescribed for treating multiple diseases. When the indications of the drugs are vague, their real efficacy is difficult to measure. Even the ‘Nilavembu kudineer’ is reported to have antipyretic and analgesic effects. Definitely it may have some effect but the efficacy can never be compared with Acetaminophen. Further, the Nilavembu kudineer is never prescribed as stand alone drug but is always given along with many other Siddha drugs. When someone questions about the efficacy of Siddha medicines, the people concerned become very generous and luxuriant in talking about the safety of the medicines or get highly emotional and angry. For an ordinary man, safety reaches faster than efficacy as anything that is safe is believed to be good. So, the time requires more researches in the efficacy of Siddha drugs also, Dr Renganathan said.