The gobar (cow dung) and gomutra (cow urine) debate refuses to rest. Nearly a week after IIT Madras director Prof. V Kamakoti highlighted the medicinal properties of cow urine, important people are busy voicing their view on the matter. Some have opined that Kamakoti is a disgrace to an institution like the IIT, which was built to foster scientific spirit in the country, while others see affirmation of ancient Indian knowledge. The problem, however, is not the debate, but the lack of a conclusion to it.
Sridhar Vembu, the CEO and co-founder of Zoho, an organisation into making computer software and web-based business tools, was quick to defend Kamakoti, observing those mocking great properties of cow urine didn’t know how fecal transplants and fecal pills from healthy individuals were evincing interest in the scientific community. It’s not some superstitious quackery. Modern science, he opined, was converging to that understanding.
In a post on X, Dr. Cyriac Abby Philips, liver specialist and clinician-scientist, was rather uncharitable in his response to Vembu. “Hey science illiterate boomer uncle, your so-called Indian traditional medicine, Siddha also encourages fecal transplants. How long will you keep putting your foot in your mouth and speak through your rear, misinform your followers, and make a fool of yourself?” The post said.
Neurologist Anand Venkatraman on Wednesday joined the debate, defending the merits of cow urine. “The hate for cow urine is dumb and irrational. Cow milk is far dirtier, has more pus cells, bacteria, skin, and hair than cow urine. Raw cow milk can give you Salmonella, Listeria, and E. coli. Urine from healthy cows is sterile and contains antibacterial compounds.”
An extensive study on cow urine at the Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Bareilly, in 2022 concluded that cow urine was not fit for human consumption as it contained at least 14 types of harmful bacteria. It cannot inhibit bacterial growth, it revealed.
Phew! The argument can go on and on. It’s rather odd that in the age of quantum computing, artificial intelligence, astrobiology, nanotechnology and synthetic biology space India would be debating cow dung and cow urine. We know no amount of proof through scientific research would end it. Because the underlying conflict is much bigger. It’s modern science vs ancient knowledge – one with faith in rigorous tests and scientific logic and the other with implicit trust in the infallibility of ancient works in medicine.
In such a situation, a good idea would be to let both of them operate in separate realms entirely independent of each other. An IIT professor advocating the efficacy of cow urine based on research not subjected to adequate peer review, doesn’t do justice to the reputation of an esteemed institution, neither does the IIT Bombay offering space for a lecture on the ancient science of getting a good progeny (garbha vigyan). The research and advocacy of such ideas should be left to researchers on the other side. It should be the responsibility of the latter to convince people of their system of medicine. it is simply because the method of reaching a conclusion is so different in both cases.
It should be a free choice for people to consume or make use of gobar and gomutra. Both modern and ancient science can exist with disagreements.
(By arrangement with Perspective Bytes)
