Siddha Medicine

Manobala V R et al. (2026) · Bioinformation

This single-arm pilot trial with 30 participants explored whether a 90-day Siddhar yogam programme could reduce the symptom burden of varicose veins, which are dilated, twisted veins of 3 mm or more in the legs. Siddhar yogam belongs to the Siddha system of medicine, a South Indian tradition that explains illness through three humors, Vatham (air), Pitham (fire) and Kabham (water), and counts Siddhar yogam among its Kayakarpam (rejuvenation science) methods. The practice combines yoga postures, controlled breathing and meditation. The authors note that no standardized, non-invasive therapy exists for varicose veins, a condition they say affects about 5% of people in India. The 30 patients (10 men and 20 women, aged 30 to 55) were recruited at the National Institute of Siddha's Ayothidoss Pandithar Hospital. All practised the same 35-minute routine for 90 days: a few minutes of relaxation, 21 minutes of postures such as raised-leg pose, half plough, inverted pose and cycling pose, and 5 minutes of Thirumoolar breathing practice. Symptoms and quality of life were scored with the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), where a lower score means less impact, before and after the programme. There was no comparison group. Average AVVQ scores dropped from 16.2 to 12.0 (a fall of 4.2 points; reported as significant at p < 0.05 by Wilcoxon signed rank test). Most participants (over 85%) reported long periods of standing, and the Siddha assessments, which grade humors, body constituents and an eight-fold examination, showed derangement mainly in Vatham and Pitham before treatment and a reduction in these findings afterwards, though the paper gives no figures for that change. The authors suggest the postures lower pressure in the leg veins and help blood return to the heart by working the calf muscles, but they did not measure this. Because the trial had one arm, no follow-up and only one outcome measure, and excluded severe cases, the authors say the efficacy of the regimen cannot be established. They recommend larger randomized trials.

Rajendra K Arumugam et al. (2025) · Advanced biomedical research

This open-label, randomized proof-of-concept trial protocol, from the Siddha Regional Research Institute in Puducherry, India, sets out to test Thiriloga Chendhuram (TC) — a herbometallic (herb-and-mineral) preparation from Siddha medicine, a traditional healing system from South India — against another Siddha remedy, Annabedhi Chendhuram (ABC), for treating iron deficiency anemia (called Veluppu Noi in Siddha terms) in women of reproductive age. Iron deficiency anemia is one of the most common nutritional deficiencies worldwide, and the conventional iron supplements used to treat it (governing red blood cell production) often cause stomach upset, part of why researchers are exploring gentler alternatives. The planned trial will randomly assign participants 1:1 to receive either TC or the active-comparator ABC, with clinical check-ins at days 4, 18, 33, and 49. Assessment blends classical Siddha diagnostic methods — examining body constitution, the body's three vital humors, and its seven bodily tissues — with modern blood testing, including a full hematology panel, iron studies, oxidative stress and antioxidant markers, and safety labs covering the liver, kidneys, and heart (via ECG). Because this publication is a trial protocol rather than a finished study, there are no outcome results to report yet (zero completed participants' data are described here). The authors state the trial was expected to finish roughly 12 months after publication, with results to follow separately. What the protocol does spell out clearly is how success will be measured: two markers singled out for their sensitivity in catching iron deficiency early — reticulocyte hemoglobin content (CHr, the iron content inside the newest red blood cells) and the percentage of hypochromic (pale, iron-poor) red cells — alongside a broad standard panel (serum ferritin, transferrin, erythropoietin, and markers of oxidative stress and antioxidant defenses). This groundwork is what will let a future analysis distinguish a genuine treatment effect from noise once the trial completes. The practical takeaway right now is limited: this is a promise of evidence, not evidence itself. Anyone considering TC for anemia today has no controlled outcome data to weigh, only the traditional-use rationale that motivated the study. Limitations to watch for once results appear include the open-label design (participants and clinicians will know their group assignment) and the small, single-center, proof-of-concept scale — both of which limit how confidently any eventual finding could generalize.

Galib Ruknuddin et al. (2026) · JMIR research protocols

This paper is not a study of a treatment — it is a detailed, PROSPERO-registered plan (protocol) for a future systematic review that will evaluate India's AYUSH traditional medicine systems (Ayurveda, yoga and naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa Rigpa/Tibetan medicine, and homeopathy — governing prevention and personalized care) for managing prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes affects roughly 537 million people worldwide, a number expected to more than double by 2050, and India alone had over 74 million cases in 2021 — with about half going undiagnosed — making a clear-eyed evidence review of its traditional treatment options a genuine public-health priority. Once underway, two independent researchers will search major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase) plus AYUSH-specific sources, screening for studies conducted in India that test any of these six systems — whether used alone or alongside standard diabetes care — measuring outcomes like blood sugar levels (fasting and after meals), long-term blood sugar control (HbA1c), and insulin resistance, alongside safety data. As of this publication, there are no results to report (the review had not yet started; database searching was planned for September 2025). What the protocol does establish is exactly how quality will be judged: each study will be scored with standard tools (from the NIH, and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials) and then sorted into a visual "evidence map" — graded green, yellow, or red by the World Health Organization's A/B/C evidence-quality scale — showing at a glance where each traditional system has strong support and where the gaps are. The completed review and its findings are expected around December 2026, with publication in early 2027. For now, the practical takeaway is that this protocol tells us what will be studied and how carefully, not what was found. Until the finished evidence map is published, none of the six systems named here has established evidence for diabetes management; the protocol itself states upfront limitations even for the eventual review: English-language sources only, India-based studies only, and no pooled statistical meta-analysis planned.