Mumbai: It’s one of Maharashtra’s medical paradoxes: why are practitioners of one traditional system of medicine—ayurveda—legally permitted to prescribe modern medicines in a limited capacity, while an attempt to extend a similar privilege to homeopaths has triggered an agitation by allopathic doctors?The answer lies in the route taken.Over three decades ago, a govt notification allowed qualified BAMS practitioners to prescribe specified allopathic medicines. The BAMS curriculum had by then expanded to include anatomy, physiology, pathology, surgery, obstetrics and gynaecology, forensic medicine and pharmacology. BAMS students were also posted to allopathic hospitals during internship, giving them hands-on exposure to modern medicine.As oncologist Dr Purvish Parikh wrote in a 2023 paper published in South Asian Journal of Cancer, several states, including Maharashtra, MP, UP, Karnataka, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, issued circulars allowing ayurveda practitioners to use allopathic medicines and modes of treatment. The reason was practical: to enable ayurveda practitioners, especially in rural areas, to provide emergency care in situations such as heart attacks, snakebites, poisoning, complicated deliveries and trauma until specialised treatment is available.When homeopaths sought comparable rights, Maharashtra took a different path. It enacted Maharashtra Homeopathic Practitioners and Maharashtra Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 2014, introducing a one-year bridge course, after which BHMS graduates could prescribe specified allopathic medicines. It also allowed them to obtain dual registration—with both Maharashtra Homeopathy Council and Maharashtra Medical Council (MMC), the regulator for modern medicine. That decision began a long period of litigation.“IMA is agitated because a BHMS doctor was granted registration with MMC. But in 2014, when the amendment allowing dual registration was passed, MMC itself was headed by an IMA panel. Why didn’t they instead argue for changes like what was done for ayurveda?” asked a senior govt official.Homeopathy leaders said the opposition is inconsistent. “Ayurveda and unani practitioners have long been allowed to prescribe allopathic medicines without such protests. Why is the same principle unacceptable for homeopaths?” asked Dr Bahubali Shah of Maharashtra Homeopathy Council at a public forum on Tuesday.However, former state president Dr Jayant Lele said the issue is not only about prescribing rights but also about dual registration. If a patient dies, which system of medicine would be held responsible? Dual registration blurs legal and professional responsibility, argued Dr Lele.State officials said they cannot change the old Act or court directives. “We had to start MMC registrations due to a court directive. Moreover, since the 2014 amendment is part of the law, any change may require judicial intervention,” said an official. Bombay HC is scheduled to hear the matter on Aug 13-14.
