Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Barbara Gerke
(University of Vienna)
Dagmar Wujastyk
- Location:
- 13L11/13
- Start time:
- 23 July, 2014 at
Time zone: Europe/Zurich
- Session slots:
- 2
Short Abstract:
This panel analyses the rationale of 'traditional' South Asian pharmacists 'taming,' purifying, alchemically transforming, or removing what they consider 'poisonous' substances for use in medicines. What might the characterisation of a substance as 'poisonous' mean for the formulation of a medicine?
Long Abstract:
With Asian medicines increasingly becoming part of the global market, safety and the role of toxicity in medicines—whose centuries-old recipes might include arsenic, aconite, or mercury—are hotly debated. Today, the toxicity of a substance is defined following an almost irrefutable set of standards, often forgetting the contexts in which toxicology developed in the nineteenth century. However, questions on how toxicity is actually understood in South Asian pharmacological traditions are just beginning to be raised by anthropologists, Indologists, Tibetologists, ethno-pharmacologists, medical historians, and others.
We invite researchers to this multi-disciplinary panel to analyse the role of the 'poisonous' in 'traditional' remedies and pharmacological practices in South Asia, including Nepal, Burma and Tibetan populations across the Himalayas. The panel will bring together ethnographic, textual, historical, and contemporary research on polysemous ideas of the poisonous in South Asia's healing traditions, discussing what the characterisation of a substance as poisonous might mean for the formulation of a medicine. Is a substance's toxicity understood as a marker of its efficacy? How is the poisonous harnessed for medical use? How is it 'tamed,' purified, alchemically transformed, or even removed?
We want to avoid hegemonic biomedical judgements in approaching South Asian 'purification techniques' and at the same time position our analysis within existing legal constraints of trade, use, and safety of poisonous substances in medicines, also addressing the impact of current national and international regulations on drug toxicity. Our aim is to understand and 'translate' some of these idioms of toxicity for a broad audience.
Accepted papers:
Session 1Dagmar Wujastyk
Paper short abstract:
My paper will give an overview and analysis of different ayurvedic discourses on toxic materials with a particular focus on 10th-16th century Sanskrit medical texts.
Paper long abstract:
Poisons (Skt. viṣa) are a central concern in classical Indian medicine and are discussed in varying contexts. The earliest Sanskrit medical works known to us, the Carakasaṃhitā and the Suśrutasaṃhitā, name toxicology as one of eight traditional branches of medicine. In chapters dedicated to the subject of poisons, these works describe the symptoms of and treatment for poisoning caused by vegetable and mineral poisons or animal and insect bites. The focus is on explaining their mode of action on the human body and on describing how to counteract their effects. At the same time, however, a number of the listed poisonous plant materials also appear in recipes for medicines.
Later ayurvedic works, beginning with the thirteenth-century Śārṅgadharasaṃhitā, introduce the use of poisonous plant materials as agents for processing heavy metals, in particular mercury. Mercury, which in older works is not discussed in terms of its toxicity, is newly defined as having certain kinds of faults that need to be addressed before mercury can be used as a medicine. Poison, or poisonousness is defined as an innate fault of mercury and considered one of its most severe faults as it may cause death. Special attention is therefore given to its eradication, achieved (or at least aimed at) through triturating mercury with the juice of poisonous plants such as leadwort (one of the poisonous plants already mentioned in the Suśrutasaṃhitā), a process that could be described as fighting fire with fire.
Carmen Simioli (L'Orientale University of Naples)
Paper short abstract:
This study analysis the procedures to detoxify mercury as described in the Big Measure of Gold, a fourteenth century medical collection by Penden Gyeltsen (Dpal ldan rgyal mtshan) of the Drangti medical lineage.
Paper long abstract:
The present contribution focuses on the Precious Necklace of the Methods of Composition of the Black Mercurial Medicine according to Orgyenpa (O rgyan pa'i dngul chu'i nag sman sbyor ba rin chen phreng ba), which is included in the Instructions of Brangti Doctor's Medical Lineage called the 'Big Measure of Gold' (Brang ti lha rje rim brgyud man ngag gser bre chen mo) by Penden Gyeltsen (Dpal ldan rgyal mtshan, fourteenth century). These instructions, which are ascribed to Nāgārjuna and Vyāḍipa, were introduced to Tibet by Orgyenpa Rinchen Pel (O rgyan pa rin chen dpal, 1229/30-1309), an important master of the Töd Drukpa Kagyü lineage. The text deals with the detoxification of mercury-sulphide ash (bsto thal). The process starts with the method to subdue mercury ('dul thabs) through 'purifying the tarnish or oxide' (g.ya'phyi dug 'don). The next method of cooking is meant to eliminate the 'penetrating substances' ('ci phigs btso thabs). This is followed by the union or 'confrontation' with sulphur, and the amalgamation of mercury with eight minerals that devour its poison (za khams brgyad) and eight metals that bind it ('ching khams brgyad). Besides, the Precious Necklace describes other minor methods of detoxification and treatments of poisonous substances. I will offer insight into the content, the structure, and the terminology of these instructions.
Frederick Smith (University of Iowa)
Paper short abstract:
This ethnography of a living alchemist in Pune discusses his education, processes of treating mercury and other heavy metals, and provides a few stories that should shed light on his practice.
Paper long abstract:
This paper presents an ethnography of an alchemist near Pune (who requests anonymity). He was interested in alchemy early in life and studied in France and India. He models his research and practice on "philosopher's stone for metals as a correspondent to the elixir of life." He has studied the textuality of the hermetic traditions (in Old French and Latin) and homeopathy (especially the work of Rudolf Steiner). He is equally grounded in Indian alchemical and nāth traditions. Most of his present work (which has enabled him to make a very good living) is based on the transformation of sunlight and moonlight into fluids that he captures through complex equipment and catalytic compounds, which then over several months transmute into alchemical or potable gold. He deploys mercury and sulfur (or lead) as primary metals, although he has experimented with dozens of other chemical agents since he completed his "practicum" with his teacher in Gujarat in the 1980s. He deals with dangerous poisons every day, but in his sophisticated lab has learned how to control them. Every batch he produces is tested by the National Chemical Laboratory in Pune for heavy metal amounts before he exports the finished product to Europe, where it is most frequently used by pharmaceutical companies in producing their own medicines. I shall describe his studio (with the help of photos), his processes of purifying mercury, and provide a few stories of his meetings with alchemists in India from his vast storehouse of knowledge and experience.
Barbara Gerke (University of Vienna)
Paper short abstract:
This paper analyses the social construction of toxicity and safety in the context of a private, family-lineage based ayurvedic manufacturing unit in North India manufacturing herbo-metallic ash medicines (bhasmas) involving the distillation and trituration of mercury.
Paper long abstract:
At first thought, the evaluation of a substance as toxic or non-toxic seems to be based on an unquestionable and universal understanding of toxicity. This paper argues that perceptions of toxicity and related ideas of safety remain culturally constructed despite WHO definitions and hegemonic scientific proclamations concerning globally acceptable limits for the consumption of and exposure to poisonous substances.
Presenting an ethnographic example from a private, family-lineage based ayurvedic manufacturing unit for multi-compound herbo-metallic ashes (bhasmas) in northern India, which included the direct observation of the distillation of mercury from artificial cinnabar and the trituration of mercury and sulphur with gold and herbal juices, this paper analyses how the supervising Vaidya (ayurvedic doctor) perceives and deals with the known toxicity of mercury during the manufacturing process.
The difference in paradigms of toxicity becomes obvious as the ethnographer stays upwind to avoid exposure to the fumes and the Vaidya proceeds without apparent caution. Conversations on toxicity follow and the Vaidya explains that he 'knows' that mercury is toxic but has not 'seen' any toxic effects, neither in his family, teachers, assistants, nor himself. While he is sure that the final bhasma is non-toxic—although its chemical composition is 'unknown'—he concentrates on the efficaciousness of the bhasma, which he sees is effective in treating severe 'known' diseases in his patients. 'Knowing,' 'not-knowing,' and 'seeing' as culturally constructed experiences and sources of knowledge are analysed in the context of how safety is constructed, articulated, and negotiated throughout his practice.
Herbert Schwabl (Padma AG)
Paper short abstract:
The European directive for traditional herbal medicines was established in 1995. Consequently, some herbs are practically banned despite their potential therapeutic effectiveness. What are the consequences for Asian medicines containing a blend of potent (mostly herbal) ingredients?
Paper long abstract:
The European directive for Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products (THMP) was a breakthrough at the time of its inception in 2005. The directive offers products consisting of herbal substances/preparations with a 15-year period of traditional use within Europe an avenue to be registered as a medicine. The Herbal Medicinal Product Committee (HMPC) at the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has developed guidelines how to register THMPs, especially regarding their quality and safety.
The talk describes the European framework for THMPs. Overall, the present regulatory environment offers many opportunities to register THMPs. Such a registration is a national process, and the figures collected from the national medicines authorities show a steady increase of THMP-registrations.
Within the same framework many restrictions exist regarding the use and development of herbal formulas, which apply even more to those medicines which are derived from traditional Asian medical systems. Only selected herbal ingredients in a certain dosage range are permissible, whereas even simple animal products such as honey or ghee are not allowed, and minerals are only allowed to a certain extent. The therapeutic indications permitted for THMPs are those of minor, self-limiting diseases or ailments. Due to the unfavourable benefit/risk ratio, safety concerns increase. As a consequence, herbs with a high content of active substances (i.e. high potency) are even considered obsolete for medical use and are practically banned despite their potential therapeutic effectiveness.
This leads to the crucial question: is the European lawmaker interested in herbal medicines with a strong therapeutic potency?