One element of the controversy is a contest between two paradigms of healthcare, the holistic ancient systems like ayurveda versus the “modern” allopathic system based on drugs and pharmaceuticals.  

The called a strike to protest against this bill, after which it was referred to a parliamentary select committee.To function in a healthy way, the gut microbiome needs a diverse diet and a diverse diet needs diversity in our fields and gardens. Our sciences have been based on the recognition of the inter-connections and inter-relatedness between humans and nature, between diverse organisms, and within all living systems including the human body.

In India, a multi-dimensional debate emerged when the   was introduced in Parliament.There have been many objections to the bill. Bayer and Monsanto are now merging. It is based on the ecological science of inter-connectedness. The chemicalisation of health has created new Iatrogenic disease which are the result of mechanistic chemical approaches and diagnostic and therapeutic procedures which result in adverse drug reactions and side-effects often more fatal than the disease being attempted to be cured. They have been assessed in the context of contributing to the well-being of all. The bill seeks to allow practitioners of ayurveda, yoga, naturopathy, unani, siddha and homoeopathy to practice modern medicine once they complete a short-term “bridge” course. With the repeated failures and limitations of the reductionist approach to life, in agriculture and in health, the relevance of agro-ecology and ayurveda grows. The mechanistic worldview sees us as separate from nature and each part of our body as separate from all others, as parts of a machine are.While the objection of allopathic doctors is to ayurveda and other traditional medicine practitioners being able to practise “modern medicine”, my objection is to the degradation and devaluation of one of the oldest and most sophisticated health systems being swallowed by a mechanistic, commodified system.                    end-of                Tags: pharmaceutical industry, bayer, ayurveda, ima. The first is holistic and sees connections between the health of the planet and our health.Ayurveda — the science (veda) of life (ayur) — is guided by 5,000 years of time-tested knowledge of health, nutrition and diet.The ayurvedic science of health is centred around food.The holistic sciences like ayurveda are based on inter-connectedness and living processes while “modern medicine” is based on a mechanistic paradigm of separation, reductionism, fragmentation and on pharmaceuticals derived from the chemicals and dye industry over 100 years ago. Om Peace, Peace, Peace. Health is defined as a commodity we buy from the pharmaceutical industry. It tries to reduce the rich systems of knowledge of agro-ecology and ayurveda to a mechanistic basis, thus robbing the systems’ paradigm of its very strength.Diverse knowledge systems are scientific within their own paradigms. Our gut is a microbiome which contains trillions of bacteria. I prefer to call them food style diseases.

Today, Western science has begun to realise what ayurveda understood 5,000 China Aerated Mixer Suppliers years ago — that the body is not a machine and food is not fuel that runs this machine as per Newton’s laws of mass and motion.)Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah has been our philosophy and the objective which guides all science, technology and knowledge.In a mechanistic paradigm, chemical, mechanical and genetic technologies become the measure of the sophistication of a health system. There are 100,000 times more microbes in our gut than people on the planet.There is a growing awareness that the epidemic of chronic non-communicable diseases is related to our environment and food. I see it as one of India’s greatest gifts to the world, along with agro-ecology and organic farming brought to the West by Sir Albert Howard through his agricultural testament. But technologies are tools. The principles of self-organisation were identified by the ayurveda thousands of years ago. We are now seeing the emergence of an epidemic of non-communicable chronic diseases related to food and the environment.We pray — Om Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah Sarve Santu Nir-Aamayaah| Sarve Bhadraanni Pashyantu Maa Kashcid-Duhkha-Bhaag-Bhavet| Om Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih!  

Be Happy, May All be Free from Illness. May All See what is Auspicious, May no one Suffer.It has thus evolved as an ecological and a systems science, not a fragmented and reductionist one.The industrial health system and the mechanistic reductionist paradigm of health that it is based on cannot be the future of a healthy planet and healthy people.Ayurveda recognises that every part of the body is inter-related and that the digestive system plays an important role in both health and disease. Tools and technologies have not been viewed as self-referential in Indian civilisation. The second one is reductionistic, mechanistic and commercial.The toxic chemical industry is responsible for many of the chronic disease epidemics we face. They are referred to as lifestyle diseases.Because we are more bacteria than human, when the poisons we use in agriculture such as pesticides and herbicides, reach our gut through food, they can kill beneficialbacteria. We need holistic systems to understand the inter-connection between living beings and the earth so that we can live in ways that contribute to a healthy planet and healthy people. This is a “knowledge apartheid” which prevents us from obtaining real answers on how to live healthy lives. Food is not “mass”; it is living, it’s the source of life and health.

There is an intimate connection between the soil, plants, our gut and brain. “Science” is derived from the Latin scire — “to know”.Instead of degrading ayurveda by fitting it into the mechanistic paradigm, it is time to evolve a biodiversity of health and knowledge systems that recognise the ecology of health, our bodies and the connection of our health to the health of the earth. Today, biological sciences are gaining an understanding that the body is not a machine; it’s a complex, self-organised and self-regulated ecosystem.In the United States and Britain, intense debates are taking place over  Obamacare and the NHS, on whether health is a public good or a privatised commodity for sale.Across the world, there is an intense contest emerging between two paradigms of health and two paradigms of science. Tools must be assessed on ethical, social and ecological criteria.  

A loss of diversity in our diet creates ill-health. Food is central to the well-being of the planet and people, their health and healing.The mechanistic paradigm has transformed the diversity of knowledge systems into a hierarchy, privileging the mechanistic and reductionistic paradigm as the only science, pushing all other knowledge systems to oblivion or treating them as inferior.The same chemical industry that brings us toxics in agriculture also controls “modern medicine” based on pharmaceuticals. Mechanistic reductionist thinking does not just reduce the world to fragmented parts, but also reduces our capacity to know.

“The majority of people who die from food allergy are actually aware of what they are allergic to. “Almost half of the people who thought they had food allergies in this study did not.”Keet wasn’t surprised that few people had an EpiPen prescription.  

All told, 40,433 US adults completed the food allergy survey, for which they received 5 each.“The main message from the survey is that one in five adults have some kind of food-related conditions that are causing them to avoid certain foods,” said Dr Ruchi Gupta of Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine and the Ann & Robert H.“EpiPens are expensive and you need a doctor prescription every year.Among those who were determined to have a food allergy, 48 per cent reported developing at least one of their allergies in adulthood, while 26.  

“And one in 10 has what looks convincingly like a food allergy - and of those, only half are getting a proper diagnosis by a physician.”The fact that fewer than a quarter of those with food allergies had a prescription for an EpiPen to deal with life-threatening reactions is concerning, Reisacher said.2 per cent said they believed they had food allergies, but their symptoms suggested other causes, according to the report inJAMA Network Open.8 per cent reported the kinds of severe symptoms that are consistent with a food allergy, and another 8. “One of the most common places for accidental exposure is restaurants,” he said.People who didn’t have these reactions were assumed to have a food intolerance, such as celiac disease or lactose intolerance, or a non-allergy mediated reaction in the mouth. “I think this will give a lot of people pause,” said Reisacher, who was not affiliated with the new research.”“What’s also important is the number of adults and children who think they have food allergies and don’t,” said Keet, who was not involved in the new study.3 per cent reported they had been to the emergency room for a life-threatening reaction, while fewer than one quarter, 24 per cent, said they had a prescription for epinephrine to be used in case of a severe reaction. The results are very compelling. “It makes you wonder what is happening in adults causing all these allergies.While Gupta had occasionally heard adults saying they China Cookie Machine Factory used to be able to eat food like shellfish, but had to give it up because of severe reactions, she was most surprised that among those with food allergies, “almost half reported developing at least one food allergy as an adult.9 per cent developed food allergies only in adulthood. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.”Food allergies haven’t been studied much in adults, so “I think this is a really important article,” said Dr William Reisacher, director of allergy services at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City.                    end-of                Tags: american adults, adults, food allergies, diet, adulthood, epipen, nutrition.”The new study “points to the fact that this is not something that receives a lot of attention and it needs to receive more attention,” said Dr  Corinne Keet, an allergy specialist at the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center in Baltimore. “There was definitely a need for a study like this.5 per cent, said they had gotten a diagnosis from a physician, 38.Those deemed to have a food allergy had least one convincing food allergy symptom, which meant a severe reaction involving the skin or oral mucosa, gastrointestinal tract, cardiovascular or respiratory tract.Among more than 40,000 adults surveyed, 10. The most common foods causing allergies in these adults were shellfish, milk, peanuts, tree nuts, and finfish. “They think they are not at risk if they follow a restriction diet,” she said. It was thought that maybe four to five per cent of adults had food allergies.”To take a closer look at food allergies in adults, Gupta and her colleagues turned to two internet-based panels of people who have agreed to fill out surveys for a small remuneration, the AmeriSpeak panel and a panel put together by SSI Dynamix, a market research company. So I’m not surprised they don’t have them, even though they should,” she added.  

“We think of food allergies as a childhood disease and clearly there are a lot of adults who have food allergies and their management and treatment may be different from children’s. This is double that.”Reisacher was also surprised at how many people had developed food allergies in adulthood. That’s a big number. That’s a lot of people on unnecessary elimination diets that could have consequences in terms of cost, worry and nutritional impact.Fewer than a half of the people with food allergies.