linguistic:voice_change, information:highlighting, structural:reformatting
Classification and efficacy

Ayurvedic medicine is considered pseudoscientific because its premises are not based on science. Both the lack of scientific soundness in the theoretical foundations of ayurveda and the quality of research have been criticized.

Although laboratory experiments suggest that some herbs and substances in ayurveda might be developed into effective treatments, there is no evidence that any are effective in themselves. There is no good evidence that ayurvedic medicine is effective to treat or cure cancer in people. Although ayurveda may help "improve quality of life" and Cancer Research UK also acknowledges that "researchers have found that some Ayurvedic treatments can help relieve cancer symptoms", the organization warns that some ayurvedic drugs contain toxic substances or may interact with legitimate cancer drugs in a harmful way.

Ethnologist Johannes Quack writes that although the rationalist movement Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti officially labels ayurveda a pseudoscience akin to astrology, these practices are in fact embraced by many of the movement's members.

A review of the use of ayurveda for cardiovascular disease concluded that the evidence is not convincing for the use of any ayurvedic herbal treatment for heart disease or hypertension, but that many herbs used by ayurvedic practitioners could be appropriate for further research.