Beware before you pick
up chyawanprash from a drug store. The most popular brands of this
ayurvedic tonic has artificial sweeteners, which have unconscionable
side-effects. On January 11, 2008, Ranbaxy Laboratories launched a
sugar-free version of chyawanprash, which it calls ‘Chyawan Active’.
Unlike the classical chyawanprash, which is 50-60 per cent sugar, the
Ranbaxy product uses the artificial sweetener sucralose as a taste
enhancer. Other versions of the tonic, like Alkem Laboratories’s Jeevan
Prash and Dabur India’s Chyawan Prakash, also use artificial sweeteners.
“Our product offers an excellent nutritional formulation, especially to
calorie-conscious, diabetic, obese and overweight people,” said
Malvinder Mohan Singh, CEO, Ranbaxy.
Other than the sweetener, the product also has sorbitol. The Dabur
version uses this chemical as well to provide bulk.
In its classical form, chyawanprash is a mix of herbs, minerals,
crystallized sugar and ghee with honey. It stands to reason if the
tonic’s constituents are changed, the product may not work as well.
Ranbaxy’s spokesperson maintains that Chyawan Active provides the same
benefits as the classical chyawanprash since it has the same
constituents.
But there are question marks over artificial sweeteners. Sucralose, a
chlorinated version of sucrose has, for instance, been shown to shrink
the thymus gland and enlarge kidneys and liver. Consumer groups and
experts say the chemical, used in Jeevan Prakash as well, has not been
studied adequately. Sodium saccharine, used in Dabur’s Chyawan Prakash,
is less suspect, mostly because it’s been used for a long time.
Besides, the sorbitol in Dabur and Ranbaxy’s version of chyawanprash,
has been linked to diarrhoea and eye problems. The products have
unspecified amounts of this chemical.
Use of chemical additives add a new dimension to the practice of
deviating from classical ayurvedic recipes. Past modifications to
chyawanprash include adding gold and silver dust to the tonic. But
these were still substances recommended in ancient texts, albeit for
other remedies. Such modifications were also permitted under the Drugs
and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Use of chemical additives is a recent
practice, facilitated by a 2005 amendment to the rules of the Drugs and
Cosmetics Act. Some senior officials at the Union Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare’s Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy,
Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (AYUSH) insinuate that the amendment
allowed chemical additives under pressure from industry. But one
official said the “use of the sweetener was allowed after consultation
with the ministry’s ayurvedic pharmacopeia committee”.
There is another concern. State drug controllers are supposed to
examine safety data provided by companies before issuing manufacturing
licences. But experts say this doesn’t happen because the state
authorities don’t have the capacity to analyse the data.
Misbranding
Companies like Ranbaxy and Dabur tend to see the use of sweeteners as
an innovation necessary to retain a foothold in the Rs 250-crore
chyawanprash market. But ayurvedic practitioners deride the practice as
misbranding. “A company that modifies a classical recipe should not
derive sanction from ayurveda. It should have the conviction to say
that it has developed a new remedy,” says Balendu Prakash, an eminent
ayurvedic physician. Ancient texts do not prescribe chyawanprash for
diabetics, he adds, in obvious reference to products that use
sweeteners.
Misappropriation of classical chyawanprash recipes came in for special
discussion at a meeting of AYUSH’s Ayurveda Siddha Unani Drug Technical
Advisory Board on December 6, 2007—the minutes of which are with Down
To Earth. Much of the discussion centred on the use of prefixes like
‘chyawan’ that suggest a link with classical ayurveda. The drug
controller general of India said that the practice constitutes
misbranding according to the drugs and cosmetics act. It was suggested
that state licensing authorities review products that draw their names
from classical remedies and give companies 30 days to mend matters. The
meet also suggested reviewing licences of chyawanprash variants with
gold and silver.
Industry is unrepentant. Ranjit Puranik, general secretary, Ayurvedic
Drug Manufacturers Association, says firms have made proper distinction
in names and consumers have been told of differences with classical
recipes.
S Madhavan, advisor to AYUSH, says an order censuring misbranding units
and revoking licences if they do not change brand names is awaiting the
health minister’s approval. But he isn’t sure it will change things
substantially.
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp?foldername=20080215&filename=news&sec_id=4&sid=4
Copyright
© Society for Environmental Communications.
