Reviewers

## What has been reviewed **Dr. Awadesh Pratap Singh, BAMS, of the Shree Baidyanath Research Institute (SBRI), has reviewed the sections below and passed them.** Review is running section by section, and this page is generated from the record of it, so it changes only when a batch is actually done.

Section	What it covers	Reviewed	Outcome
The Shirodhara guide and the practice section	13 guide pages and 43 procedure pages: what each procedure is, who may perform it, its classical basis and its cautions.	18 September 2026	Passed
Herb monographs, A to E	125 single-herb pages whose name begins A to E.	18 September 2026	Passed

Each page inside those scopes carries his name and the date of review at its foot, and names him in its structured data. A page outside them carries nothing, which is the point. The practice section is the clinical half of this site and the half where being wrong would matter most: a procedure page written as home instructions for something that needs a vaidya is the failure it exists to avoid, and that judgement is now a practitioner's rather than an editor's. The herb monographs from A to E are the first slice of the larger half. ## What has not been reviewed **629 pages have not been read by a named practitioner.** That is 380 herb monographs from F onward, 143 formulations, 53 reference entries, 37 instruments and 16 glossary and text pages. Nothing on any of them carries a review credit, and this page will not imply otherwise. Also unreviewed: - Independent verification of every research summary against the original paper. - The safety records, which are gated by their own judge panel and schema rather than by a practitioner's signature. ## What stands behind the unreviewed pages Not expert review, and this is worth being plain about, because these are mechanical protections rather than clinical ones: - Every monograph derives from sourced reference material rather than generated prose, and the sources are listed on each page. - Botanical identity is anchored to the Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India where a monograph exists, and left blank where the sources genuinely disagree. - Formulation compositions are transcribed from the Ayurvedic Formulary of India and checked row by row against it. - Research claims carry a PubMed ID or a DOI, or they were deleted: 755 were. - Mechanical checks run on every build. No page may state the contested classical herb count for Chyawanprash. No disease term may appear inside a product block. No dose or therapeutic claim may appear in a page's opening summary. Restricted and metallic preparations are excluded from publication entirely. The verification ledger gives the rejection rate for every one of those passes, computed from the run records rather than typed in. ## Why this page is written this way Search engines and answer engines both weight named, credentialled review, which makes a vague gesture at expertise tempting and cheap. "Reviewed by our Ayurvedic team" would cost nothing to write and would be worth nothing, because it commits to no one. So this page names a person, states his qualification and institution, gives a date for each section, and draws the line around exactly what he read. As further sections are reviewed, the table grows and the count of unreviewed pages falls, with the same precision each time. ## If you are qualified and want to help The monographs are the open front. We are looking for qualified Ayurvedic physicians willing to be credited by name for reviewing sections of them. Corrections from anyone, credentialled or not, are welcome at corrections.