You can go with the Ayurveda by adding trust to get the accurate output.
Many Ayurveda brands are out there to pick one. I just want to suggest that, choosing the right one and following the right methods are win-wins. As we all know, considering the wrong methods harm more than we expect.
How about... never considering Ayurveda.
It's not real science. While there are basic parts of it that are effective (such as reducing stress and maintaining good hygiene), it's rooted in folkloric tradition rather than evidence-based research. Medical experts urge you to
only use it as a supplement to conventional care, and to never rely on it for serious conditions like cancer.
I went looking for peer-reviewed studies that might support the effectiveness of Ayurveda, but all I could find were meta-studies (such as ones discussing references to Ayurveda in other papers) and mentions of journals devoted to homeopathy. So, as scientifically sound reports demonstrate, there's no evidence that Ayurveda works in anything but an incidental way.
To address the original poster's falsehood: the problem is not "too many medicines." Science-based, clinically-tested medicines are great; they're a major reason why life expectancies have climbed so sharply in many countries over the past century. About the only major excess in medicine has been an over-reliance on antibiotics, but that's because doctors prescribed them as catch-alls when more targeted (but still science-based) treatments would have reduced the chances of fostering drug-resistant "superbugs."
I may be harsh, but I'm tired of giving pseudoscience a free pass. You don't get to 'feel' that something works just because your great-great-great-grandparents used it, or because it's associated with a religion. It's either shown to be effective using scientific methods, or it isn't. And Ayurveda doesn't hold up under real scrutiny.
