|
 
 |
| RESPONSE TO LETTER TO EDITOR |
|
| Year : 2021 | Volume
: 5
| Issue : 4 | Page : 208-209 |
|
Response regarding comments on publication entitled Consequences of Madhurarasa Atiyoga: A case–control study
Manisha Talekar1, Govind Reddy2, Prashant Deshmukh3
1 Regional Ayurveda Research Institute, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
2 Raja Ramdeo Anandilal Podar Central Ayurveda Research Institute for Cancer, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
3 Vaidya Yagya Dutt Sharma Ayurved Mahavidyalaya, Khurja, Uttar Pradesh, India
| Date of Submission | 26-Feb-2022 |
| Date of Decision | 15-Mar-2022 |
| Date of Acceptance | 16-Mar-2022 |
| Date of Web Publication | 29-Apr-2022 |
Correspondence Address:
Manisha Talekar
Regional Ayurveda Research Institute, Nagpur 440006 Maharashtra
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
DOI: 10.4103/jras.jras_34_22
How to cite this article:
Talekar M, Reddy G, Deshmukh P. Response regarding comments on publication entitled Consequences of Madhurarasa Atiyoga: A case–control study. J Res Ayurvedic Sci 2021;5:208-9 |
How to cite this URL:
Talekar M, Reddy G, Deshmukh P. Response regarding comments on publication entitled Consequences of Madhurarasa Atiyoga: A case–control study. J Res Ayurvedic Sci [serial online] 2021 [cited 2023 Jun 5];5:208-9. Available from: http://www.jrasccras.com/text.asp?2021/5/4/208/344409 |
We would like to thank the editor for intimating us regarding the concerns raised by the author of the Letter to Editor, and we are also thankful to him for his insight as well as genuine attempt to improve the content of our published research.
In his Letter to the Editor, the author noted potential concerns with the odds ratio (OR) for young, middle, old, male, and female groups and eight dependent variables. We agree that the OR for young, middle, old, male, and female groups was incorrectly quoted and may be read as given in [Table 1]. However the OR for eight dependent variables, Sthaulya, Alasya, Nidra, Anannabhilasha, Agnimandya, Aanaha, Galashopha, and Asyamadhurya, were correctly calculated and presented as given in Table 3 of the original article.[1] | Table 1: Distribution of cases and overuse of Madhurarasa with respect to age and gender
Click here to view |
The concern raised by the author in the Letter to Editor regarding the justification for the nonselection of cases with complications such as Mardava, Gourava, Swasha, Kasa, Pratisyaya, Alasaka, Sitajwara, Jwara, Gandamala, which are also mentioned as complications of Madhurarasa Atiyoga in the classical text of Ayurveda. The suggestion is acceptable; however, it can be mentioned that the aforementioned criteria are rare and thus they are not feasible to be include in the study before the evaluation of major consequences of Madhurarasa Atiyoga. Therefore, emphasis was given on the inclusion of most commonly presenting symptoms such as Sthoulya, Aalasya, Nidradhikya, Anannavilasa, Agnidourbalya, Anaha, Gala Sopha, and Aasyamadhurya.[2] In view of detailed and comprehensive analysis, in the future study, all complications related to Madhurarasa Atiyoga can be included. The raised concern can be considered as a limitation of the published work.
The author has also expressed concern regarding fixing the estimated levels for Atiyoga and the normal intake of various items. No pre-existing data from the previous publication was available for fixing the estimated levels for Atiyoga and the normal intake of various items. In this regard, we already mentioned in the article that to gauge the excessive ingestion of Madhurarasa, the screening of the local population was done based on specially prepared questionnaires on the consumption of Madhur-rarasatmaka Ahara routinely. In Ayurveda, there is no quantifying method for the assessment of Atiyoga of Rasa, but the term Atiyoga (excess intake) can be gauged in two ways, i.e., in high quantity and/or for longer duration. In the survey study, the concept of Atiyoga was considered as the higher intake of Madhura rasa for longer duration, and then the consumption of each sweet food item routinely used was measured. Many people were asked about the pattern of routinely consumed sweet item’s and after that, the normal and excessive use of it was determined. Further to this, it was discussed with the expert scientific committee of the institute and then finalized. The quantity of each sweet food item was recorded and categorized into normal intake and excessive intake, such as monitoring the intake of buffalo milk of more than two glasses/day for more than a month in the last 1 year was considered as excess intake of the sweet food.
In this study, Sthoulya was assessed with the help of the height–weight chart, and all who were showing various Lakshana of Sthoulya mentioned in Charaka Samhita were considered as Sthoulya.[3] The objective of the study was to establish the relationship between the excessive use of Madhurarasatmaka Ahara and signs/symptoms produced by it; therefore, the relevant data were only presented in the article.
Another concern raised by the author is about the validation of designed questionnaire. We agree that the questionnaire is not completely validated, because this was preliminary study and time duration of the study was limited, and only face validity was taken from subject experts. Regarding local language questionnaire, the questionnaire of survey proforma was open-ended and designed in both Rajasthani and English language. For better understanding and wider dissemination, only English version of the questionnaire was provided in the article.
A concern was expressed regarding the citation of reference substantiating the assessment of variables for Agnimandya, and it is commented that the variables justify only Jarana Shakti. Recommendation was made for the inclusion of reference for Abhyavaran Shakti. Jarana Shakti represents individual capacity to digest the consumed food and Abhyavaran Shakti represents the capacity of food intake. In terms of research, it is more appropriate to study individual capacity to digest the consumed food as it is the actual variable that can have pharmacological action. It can be understood that the variable “Abhyavarana Shakti” is an independent variable which expect manipulation of factors such as the type of food, persons’ interest (psychological factors), traditional dietary habits, and digestive capacity too. Since the study has not involved manipulation of such factors, therefore only, Jarana Shakti was considered in the study, and a reference related to it was mentioned.[4]
As a fundamental research on a classical concept, there can be different views and opinions. Each of them can have their own scope and limitations. It is difficult to include all aspects especially in a case when a fundamental research is planned on an Ayurveda concept. Based on individual priority toward specific aspect, there may be differences in the planning of fundamental research. For a comprehensive fundamental research, it is indeed difficult to include, study and analyze all criteria mentioned in the literature. Moreover the view towards significance of one or more criteria may differ from researcher to researcher. Therefore, clarifications in author’s perspectives are provided for some of the raised concerns regarding the published work and the relevant limitations are accepted.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References | |  |
| 1. | Talekar M, Nareshrao DP, Reddy RG. Consequences of Madhurarasa Atiyoga: A case–control study. J Res Ayurvedic Sci 2017;1:303-8.  |
| 2. | Chakrapanidatta. Chikitsasthana, Atreyabhadrakapyiyadhyaya 26/42(1). In: Acharya YT, editor. Charaka Samhita, with Ayurveda Dipika Commentary. 1st ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthana; 2013. p. 143. |
| 3. | Agnivesha, Charaka. Sutrasthana, Ashtauninditiyadhyaya 21/5–9. In: Sastri K, Chaturvedi G, editors. Charaka Samhita, revised by Dridhabala. 1st ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthana; 2005. p. 411. |
| 4. | Agnivesha, Charaka. Sutrasthana, Atreyabhadrakapyiyadhyaya 26/42. In: Sastri K, Chaturvedi G, editors. Charaka Samhita, revised by Dridhabala. 1st ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthana; 2005. p. 504. |
[Table 1]
|
