Talk:Unani medicine

Untitled

from VfD:

Foreign language dicdef. SWAdair | Talk 07:34, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Concur with above. jni 07:46, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• merge and redirect to Greece. "Other names for greece" Kim Bruning 09:52, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Unani (in Hindustani, Urdu etc) refers to a form of medicine (like Allopathy or Ayurveda), as also to anything related to Greece. The article may be expanded by somebody. utcursch 11:46, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. It's substub now, but a genuine article about Unani could appear here -- GWO 14:11, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Correct name

I thought that this form of medicine was called Unani Tibb; if I am wrong, what does Unani Tibb mean? If I am not wrong, the title of the article needs to be changed accordingly. 149.171.241.237 (talk) 10:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

wiki always uses the most commonly used name, which is usually the simplest, like this, which is about 100 times more common or more :) Sticky Parkin 14:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

"Tibb" is the Arabic word for "Medicine." For example, in the Hadith Shareef of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) there is a chapter called "Tibb an Nabawi" - "Medicine of the Prophet." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.210.106.125 (talk) 10:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Tibb-e-Unani is the proper name in between the period of Golden age when Muslim scholars developed the science of Medicine. Muslim Scholar Abu Nasr Farabi is regarded second master in Hikmat (including science of Medicine i.e. Tibb) after Aristotle being the first master in Hikmat. Nannadeem (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

tibb yunani just means "Greek medicine" in Arabic. But this article is supposed to be about the Indian (South Asian) tradition under Mughal rule -- the article on the reception of Greek medicine in medieval Islam is at Medicine in the medieval Islamic world.

It is unclear (to me) why the term is transcribed as unani, when in Arabic, Persian, Urdu and Hindi it is always yunani (why is the initial y not transcribed if it is present in all relevant languages?) --dab (𒁳) 13:18, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Tib unani means the way of treatment with herbs described and initiated by unan (greak) Msuhail348 (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

unani

what is motto of unani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purvenbhavsar (talk • contribs) 10:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

If there is no motto mentioned in the article, it may be because there is no universal motto. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Yunani medicine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071223064405/http://indianmedicine.nic.in/unani.asp to http://indianmedicine.nic.in/unani.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110226063741/http://ccimindia.org/index.html to http://ccimindia.org/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029200812/http://www.hec.gov.pk/ourinstitutes/pages/default.aspx to http://www.hec.gov.pk/ourinstitutes/pages/default.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120116114959/http://www.pmdc.org.pk/AboutUs/RecognizedMedicalDentalColleges/tabid/109/Default.aspx to http://www.pmdc.org.pk/AboutUs/RecognizedMedicalDentalColleges/tabid/109/Default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Page move

I have moved the page from "Yunani medicine" to "Unani medicine" as it is clearly more used in contemporary as well as scholarly sources. This can be seen from the Google results for the two terms: "Yunani medicine" (12,900 results) [where Google even asks Did you mean: "Unani medicine"]

"Unani medicine" (1,020,000 results)

It is evident by this that "unani" is clearly the much more used term. Even medical dictionaries such as Segen's and Mosby's list it as Unani: https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Unani

It might be even better to move the page to simply "unani" as the term is used. Gotitbro (talk) 00:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Further reading

Archiving here. Not used in article, WP:ELNO. --Zefr (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• Standardisation of single drugs of Unani medicine. Central Council for Research in Unani Medicine (India), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India, 1987.
• Unani: the science of Graeco-Arabic medicine, by Jamil Ahmad, Hakim Ashhar Qadeer. Lustre Press, 1998. ISBN 81-7436-052-2.
• The Unani Pharmacopoeia of India, Dept. of Indian Systems of Medicine & Homoeopathy. Pub. Govt. of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Dept. of Indian Systems of Medicine & Homoeopathy, 1999.
• Physicochemical standards of Unani formulations, Pub. Central Council for Research in Unani Medicine, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of India, 2006.
• Hakim Syed Zillur Rahman (1986), Qānūn-i ibn-i Sīnā aur us ke shārḥīn va mutarajimīn, ʻAlīgaṛh: Pablīkeshan Dīvīzan, Muslim Yūnīvarsiṭī
• Refiguring unani tibb: plural healing in late colonial India, by Guy N. A. Attewell. Orient Longman, 2007. ISBN 81-250-3017-4.
• Hand book on unani medicines with formulae, processes, uses and analysis. National Institute Of Industrial Research, 2008. ISBN 81-7833-042-3.
• Chishti, Hakim (1990). The traditional healer's handbook: a classic guide to the medicine of Avicenna. Inner Traditions / Bear & Company. ISBN 0-89281-438-1.
• Kapoor, Subodh (2002). The Indian encyclopaedia. Archery-Banog, Volume 2. Genesis Publishing. ISBN 81-7755-257-0.
• Bala, Poonam (2007). Medicine and medical policies in India: social and historical perspectives. Lexington Books. ISBN 0-7391-1322-4.
• 10 Unani medicine books online at Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (Govt. of India)
• Hakim Syed Zillur Rahman (1995), Dillī aur t̤ibb-i Yūnānī (Dillī aur t̤ibb-i Yūnānī ed.), Naʾī Dihlī: Urdū Akādmī, Dihlī
• Hakim Syed Zillur Rahman (1962), Daur-e Jadeed aur Tib, Bhopal, India: Tibbi Academy, India
• Hakim Syed Zillur Rahman (1983), Ṣafvī ʻahd men̲ ʻilm-i tashrīḥ kā mut̤ālaʻah, ʻAlīgaṛh: T̤ibbī Akādmī
• Konstantinos Archontakis (2015), Unani Medicine still the active form of Ancient Greek Medicine, ʻAthens: ELINEPA

Citing Supreme court order

The article is vandalised by quoting a judgement made by the Supreme court of India against fake practitioners existing in India. The SC verdict was on a different topic and here somebody misuses the same for their ulterior motives and to tarnish AYUSH systems. I propose to delete the edition quoting SC verdit against AYUSH systems because it is unethical to do so. The news regarding the SC verdict clearly defines this and the original court order is also available. Please revert the edition: The Supreme Court of India and Indian Medical Association regard unqualified practitioners of Unani, Ayurveda and Siddha medicine as quackery. to Indian Medical Association regard unqualified practitioners of Unani, Ayurveda and Siddha medicine as quackery. Because here, Indian medical association only seems to have the same opinion. Further, as far as Govt. of India is concerned, the opinion of government is to Integrate Ayush in health services as a priority in India. Mohanabhil (talk) 15:00, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Please note that vandalism has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia which is not at all what you're claiming (WP:VANDAL for more information). Without providing a reliable source that says so, editor arguments also have little value. As for the state of the art as pseudoscience, no government statement could change that anyway... If government and medical associations are in conflict, it would be possible to mention that too, provided a reliable source discusses that per WP:RS. —PaleoNeonate – 08:52, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

The quotation from the Supreme Court was taken out of context. At the time that Mohanabil made this comment, the article had this claim:

Identifying practitioners of Unani medicine, the Supreme Court of India stated in 2018 that "unqualified, untrained quacks are posing a great risk to the entire society and playing with the lives of people without having the requisite training and education in the science from approved institutions"

The claim that the Supreme Court singled out Unani practitioners did not have any basis in the cited source. In fact, the case in question was about practitioners of Ayurveda who did not have a licence to practice Ayurveda; the finding in general was that for each tradition of medicine recognised by the government of India, the practitioner must be registered for that particular tradition. DGG changed this in September to "Referring to practitioners of all medical systems".

Based on the IMA source, I have now added to the article that the IMA estimates there to be 400k quacks who are illicitly practicing allopathic/modern medicine, when they are only qualified to practice Indian traditional medicine. However, putting this in the lead section might amount to giving it undue weight because the IMA has not said how many of the 51110 Unani practitioners in particular are illicitly practicing allopathy (the statement was about Ayushists in general); i.e., there is no indication as to whether a significant proportion of Unanists are illicitly practicing allopathy, nor whether a significant proportion of the aforementioned 400k quacks are Unanists. So it is not clear how relevant it is to Unani.

To complicate matters, the government has in the past issued temporary orders, like in 2014 and 2017, that allow practitioners of traditional and homeopathic medicine to prescribe allopathic medications and even perform surgery (against the advice of the IMA).

--Joshua Issac (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Unani medicine and pseudoscience

@Crossroads: the intro-sentence currently reads, "Unani medicine is pseudoscientific." However per WP:PSCI + WP:FRINGE/PS, "conversely, by its very nature, scientific consensus is the majority viewpoint of scientists towards a topic." However the citation that was used for this statement in Wikipedia is not scientific in basis - it's anthropological and based on the study of religion. Perhaps we need some new citations to support this claim if it will live in the intro? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jooojay (talk • contribs)

References

It's published by a relevant expert in a book by a university press. And anthropology is one of the sciences. The book is a reliable source that unani medicine is pseudoscience; that is, the book is a reliable source for reporting that the scientific community has rejected it. Which is to be expected, given it is based on the four humors theory which has been discredited for centuries. Crossroads ^-talk- 04:59, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@Crossroads: Anthropology is a social science, and that's not what is referenced in WP:PSCI. Do you have other citations to support this? Jooojay (talk) 05:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

When practiced today it's alternative medicine, not mainstream medicine. It relies on flawed and outdated tenets and does not conform to the scientific method, meaning it's pseudoscientific. There are plenty of critical sources about altmed and by extension Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani, Homeopathy, Naturopathy, Acupuncture, Acupressure, etc. There also are many on the history of medicine as well as outdated beliefs like humors. Unani to all those is a single logical inference step. As for anthropology, it's a little complex, it's the study of the human, including archaeology and biology and other subfields. Ethnology in this case is indeed more social with some branches called social anthropology, it specializes on cultures and their comparison. Nonetheless, this is a proper source published via a proper venue and by someone who's qualified to study cultures. Attributing it as the claim of one person would be misleading per WP:YESPOV and WP:GEVAL. —PaleoNeonate – 07:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Johannes Quack is specifically a religious ethnologist. If Unani as a pseudoscience is so commonly known, as you both have stated, why is it difficult to find another supporting RS citation? Jooojay (talk) 07:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm agreed with PaleoNeonate; nevertheless, another source has been found and added. Crossroads ^-talk- 20:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate the extra source added.Jooojay (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps we should look in the other direction, are there sources, (reliable), that suggest that there is any basis in science to validate this alleged system of medicine? -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 23:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Good point, —PaleoNeonate – 02:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

A lot of sources treat "unani" as synonymous with Iranian Traditional Medicine. For example, the article "Science and Pseudoscience in Traditional Iranian Medicine" describes unani theory but only mentions it once (the author prefers his terminology of "quackery traditional Iranian medicine"). JoelleJay (talk) 03:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Based on fake journal of iran where not mentioned anything about Unani, how to put Unani as pseudo science DrTanveerA (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2021

Delete sentence and reference “Unani medicine is pseudoscientific” 2A02:C7F:D869:7400:6428:75F:80AF:9A2B (talk) 11:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done We don't remove well-sourced material. Black Kite (talk) 12:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2022

please don't write wikipedia if you don't know about unani medicine ..unani medicine is originated from Greece.it traveled from Greece to central Asia Dr.Junaid ahmed (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Calling Ayush practitioners quacks violation of law.

Calling Ayush practitioners quacks is violation of law, please correct it. Court order 19 Feb 2022. 2409:4054:506:D47C:0:0:16E3:A8B1 (talk) 21:12, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• The laws of other countries do not affect Wikipedia. Black Kite (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  Nitpick: The laws of countries. "Other" has no place in that sentence since Wikipedia is neither a country nor attached to one. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:32, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

  Respected Sir You cannot quote what IMA said as quack to Unani Practitioner. Wikipedia cannot be biased by any association's view of saying quack. Indian Medical Association is not a government body to issue certificate to any system of medicine. As per Honourable Supreme Court of India in D.K. Joshi case of 2003, clearly mentioned that a person who is not having a knowledge of particular system of medicine and practices will call a quack. While Unani System is as lawful by Govt of India under the Indian Constitution as allopath and as other medical system. So please remove the word QUACK. 2409:4063:4B18:37F8:C4AC:EF70:976B:C400 (talk) 02:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

  Wikipedia is not subject to the courts of India. Sue in San Francisco County, California, if you seek legal action. tgeorgescu (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2022 (2)

Remove the sentence "Unani medicine is pseudoscientific.[2][3] The Indian Medical Association describes Unani practitioners who claim to practice medicine as quacks.[4]" And add Unani system of medicine along with Ayurveda, Homeopathy and Siddha are well recognised by Govt. of India under the Ministry of AYUSH. Presently more than 60 undergraduates and around 15 PG Unani Medicine colleges are running all over India. Lakhs of qualified Unani medicine graduates holding the degree of BUMS and MD are registered in different states of the Indian Union and serving mankind. Furthermore, the Govt. of India under the flagship of the Ministry of AYUSH is allocating huge budgets for the promotion of these traditional systems of medicine to improve the health care system through the AYUSH.

Hence, using words like "pseudoscientific" and "quacks" by IMA or other authors look arrogant, which is unacceptable and insulting to the qualified physicians serving humanity. KhaleeqR (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2022

please remove a sentence -The Indian Medical Association describes Unani practitioners who claim to practice medicine as quacks.[4] which is purely wrong Mohd Muzammil Ibrahim (talk) 07:53, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

No. The IMA disagrees with you, and as a reliable source, it is stronger than you. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:32, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2022

Change "is psuodoscientific"to "scintists are graduallly believing that ot is 100%scientific". 103.22.173.55 (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done - there is no WP:RS to indicate any change is needed. Zefr (talk) 15:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Unani is not a pseudo scientific medicine

1. Unani is a part of AYUSH system ..
2. BUMS is a degree 5-1/2 years of program in undergraduate..
3. its equally treated with MBBS course .
4. Unani have scientific approach.
5. being a unani doctors we have our factual & practical knowledge in science,
6. if it’s only a pseudo science , then how can our unani system survives?? How can patients be able to treated by the science…
7. Don’t discuss on that topic which you don’t know,
8. Am giving you instruction / warnon change that statement as soon as possible you can’t call unani system as a pseudo science, first check and re-verify your facts .. Dr Khazi Misba Ahmed (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I changed your formating because it did not do what you wanted it to do.

1. So what?
2. So what?
3. So what?
4. That is what you say. It is not what reliable sources say.
5. That is what you say. It is not what reliable sources say.
6. There are many cases where pseudosciences persist for very long.
7. reliable sources know, that is enough.
8. Empty statement.

Your case is not convincing. Even if it were, it would be pointless because you need reliable sources saying that. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@Hob Gadling #8 is a clear threat and misspelled warning. (looks like he is implying legal threat). Venkat TL (talk) 20:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

It's an "if... then" without the "then". You can think up a "then" WP:LEGAL if you want, but one does not have to. You could say I was being generous. --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Comment : I want a degree in bums. -Roxy the dog 20:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect Information and Misrepresentation in Wikipedia Article on the Unani Medicine

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I am writing to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding the inaccuracies and misrepresentations present in the Wikipedia article titled "Unani Medicine." As a passionate advocate and follower of the Unani system of medicine, I find it crucial to address the misinformation propagated by this article, which does a disservice to both the system itself and its practitioners.

The Unani system of medicine, with its roots in ancient Greece and later developments in the Arab world, has a rich history and a strong foundation in traditional healing practices. Unfortunately, the article on Wikipedia appears to have several factual errors and misleading statements that misrepresent the essence and effectiveness of this system.

First and foremost, the article erroneously portrays the Unani system of medicine as an outdated and obsolete form of treatment. This characterization is not only factually incorrect but also undermines the continued relevance and importance of the system in contemporary healthcare. Unani medicine, with its emphasis on individualized patient care, holistic approaches, and natural remedies, has been successfully used to treat a wide range of ailments and has garnered recognition from various medical bodies worldwide.

Additionally, the article fails to provide a comprehensive overview of the theoretical foundations and principles of Unani medicine. It barely touches upon the concepts of the four humors (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile) and their equilibrium as essential factors in maintaining health. The article also neglects to discuss the significance of Unani pharmacology, which relies heavily on herbal remedies and natural substances.

Moreover, the article presents a distorted view of the Unani system's efficacy and safety. It makes sweeping generalizations about the lack of scientific evidence and clinical trials to support Unani medicine's effectiveness. This overlooks the considerable body of research and studies conducted worldwide, validating the therapeutic benefits of Unani treatments in various medical conditions. While it is true that further research is needed in some areas, it is unjust to dismiss the entire system as unscientific without acknowledging the positive outcomes witnessed by numerous patients.

Furthermore, the article's tone comes across as biased and condescending towards the Unani system of medicine, often comparing it unfavorably to other medical systems. This bias undermines Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality and objectivity, which are fundamental principles governing the content on the platform.

I kindly request the Wikipedia editorial team to rectify these issues and ensure that the article on the Unani system of medicine reflects accurate and unbiased information. It is crucial to include a balanced account of the system's principles, practices, historical context, and notable achievements, as well as provide references to reputable sources and research studies that support the claims made.

I believe that it is essential for Wikipedia, as a widely accessed and trusted platform, to maintain the highest standards of accuracy and impartiality. By addressing these concerns, you will not only rectify the misleading information but also uphold the integrity and credibility of Wikipedia as a reliable source of knowledge.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I hope that you will take the necessary steps to address these concerns promptly. I remain optimistic that together we can ensure that the Wikipedia article on the Unani system of medicine serves as a valuable and accurate resource for all readers.

Sincerely, Hakim Shabeer Ahammed Roy 2405:201:F006:802D:88EA:A4A2:3883:46CD (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

No changes to the article will be made based on what a stranger on the Internet, you, says. You need reliable independent sources that support your unsupported point of view. Roxy the dog 11:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

You may also want to read WP:PSCI, which is relevant to this article. Black Kite (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree with him that this article is openly aggressive in tone towards Unani medicine. Wikipedia is not a place for name-calling either (calling them "quacks" is obviously offensive). I suggest going into detail in a separate heading under the article in a balanced way with a neutral tone.

On another note, a lot of Wikipedia editors themselves are uneducated folks on the topic at hand. Have you studied in any medical field at all? I have a Bsc. in Nutrition and Dietetics. I've done my time in hospitals. I would never call these people quacks and neither would any of my co-workers, except for a fringe radical himself. So let's be more careful with the tone of the writing we allow on Wikipedia, keep it professional and up to a high standard. DivineReality (talk) 03:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2024

Change

The Indian Medical Association describes Unani practitioners who claim to practice medicine as quacks.[4]

To The Unani system of medicine is officially recognized by the Government of India and falls under the Ministry of Ayush, alongside other traditional systems such as Ayurveda, Siddha, and Sowa Rigpa.<[Ministry of Ayush. https://ayush.gov.in/ retrived on 20-01-2024]> Nevertheless, the Indian Medical Association labels Unani practitioners who assert the practice of allopathic medicine as quacks. [4] The government of India also discourages such inter-pathy practices. KhaleeqR (talk) 07:02, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. MrOllie (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Allopathy was Samuel Hahnemann's word for the medicine as it was usually practiced in his time. It was based on the four humours, so, "allopathy" is essentially Unani. What you mean by "allopathy" is "medicine". --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Quacks

"Why are AYUSH practitioners labeled as quacks in this article, which criticizes Unani medicine based on allopathic medical practices? The AYUSH system encompasses traditional medicines like Ayurveda, Yoga, Unani, and Siddha." 2409:40F2:100E:869F:249B:35FF:FEF4:D476 (talk) 10:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

AYUSH=quackery.

If you're seeking to argue that AYUSH has mainstream scientific support: you're at the wrong website. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Revert

@M15s09: I have reverted your edit because it violates the website policy WP:PSCI. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)