The central challenge in this area lies in the fact that Ayurvedic science primarily interprets phenomena in an ecological manner and, therefore, relies predominantly on qualitative analysis. Its insights into diet and the nature of food in relation to health emerge from this holistic perspective. In contrast, contemporary scientific paradigms tend to emphasize reductionism and mechanistic analysis, reflecting a quantitative, non-ecological view. Critiques of this epistemological divide can be found in the work of scholars such as Vandana Shiva, who has sought to clarify the fundamental distinctions between these approaches. As a result, the reductionist and nutrient-centric orientation of modern nutritional science is, in many respects, incompatible with the paradigms of traditional Asian medicine with respect to diet. Nonetheless, exploring a meaningful intersection between these distinct frameworks is a worthwhile endeavor, provided that the hegemony of modern technological systems, quantitative analysis, evidence-based ideology, and materialist models does not override or marginalize traditional systems of understanding.

Thank you for sharing this thoughtful perspective. I agree that the holistic, qualitative approach of Ayurveda and the reductionist, quantitative lens of modern science often appear incompatible. In my work on Viruddha Ahara, I’m trying to explore exactly this intersection—how traditional insights on incompatible foods can be correlated with modern evidence on digestion, metabolism, and immunity. Your input strengthens my approach, and I’d love to keep this dialogue going.