They Compared the Spice to the Drug. The Spice Won — Again. (Part 2)

Drugs and Coffee

Nature continues to put drugs to shame, yet why has no one heard of this research?

In Part 1, honey beat a steroid fourteen-fold for chronic cough, turmeric stopped prediabetes in 100% of trial participants, and saffron ran even with Prozac. The response told us something: people are hungry for the studies nobody puts in a press release.

So for Part 2, we went back into the archive — 455,000 studies, hand-mapped since 2008 — and pulled ten more. This time we went after the drugs people take every day: the antibiotic for recurrent UTIs, the beta-blocker for blood pressure, the Alzheimer’s blockbuster, the stimulant given to millions of children, the benzodiazepine for sleep, and the antidepressants tens of millions of people take every morning.

Same rules as Part 1. Every study is a human trial. Every one is indexed in our database. Every one links to the long-form article or abstract so you can check the work yourself.

And the same caveat: this is research information, not medical advice. Some of these trials are large and well designed — the St. John’s wort meta-analysis covers 27 trials and 3,808 patients; the mindfulness trial ran in The Lancet. Others are smaller or single studies. I’ve given you the design and the numbers for each so you can weigh them. Never stop a prescribed medication without your practitioner.

Finish reading: https://open.substack.com/pub/sayerji/p/they-compared-the-spice-to-the-drug-5ba

IUDs Emit Hormones

IUDs Emit Hormones

From a friend on Facebook:
Birth control is one of the most common gateway drugs into psychiatry for young women.

I see the pattern over and over. She starts the pill or an IUD. Months later she’s anxious, irritable or depressed. Nobody connects the dots, so she gets a diagnosis and a psych med while the hormones keep destabilizing her mood.

A Danish study followed over 1 million women. Every hormonal method raised the risk of ending up on an antidepressant, and for teens on the hormonal IUD that

The Potential Risks of Hormone Replacement Therapy

(Part Two of my reporting on the resurgence in hormone replacement therapy. Part One, on the 2002 findings of the Women’s Health Initiative, is here.)

Let’s get this part out of the way first.

Garnet Anderson is a woman.

And in menopause.

And a University of Washington professor and the lead author on the 2002 Women’s Health Initiative paper that reported estrogen-progesterone hormone replacement therapy carries increased risks of heart attacks and breast cancer.

Let’s get this out of the way second: Anderson does NOT want to pull hormone replacement therapy from the market.

She does not minimize menopause symptoms or the reality that hormone therapy treats them for many women. When I emailed her to ask her what she thought of the recent HRT resurgence and the attacks on her 2002 paper, she answered:

We all acknowledge that they [hormone therapies] are quite effective for [menopausal symptoms]. There was no reason to test hormone therapy for menopause.

What was the point of the WHI research, then? As Anderson explained, the National Institutes of Health funded the study to see if hormone replacement therapy could reduce cardiovascular disease in women:

We were simply trying to develop high-quality data to support (or refute) that claim, since the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] had refused to approve the heart disease indication based on the observational data. As surprising as it was to all of us, the WHI data revealed that hormone therapy effects are inconsistent with disease prevention…

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-lead-author-of-the-jamawomens

Quote of the Day

“The first rule is to keep an untroubled spirit. The second, is to look things in the face and know them for what they are.”
Marcus Aurelius – Roman Emperor and Philosopher (121 – 180)

Our Milky Way

Our Milky Way

The Milky Way galaxy travels through space at 600 kilometers per second relative to the cosmic microwave background, pulled along by the immense gravitational forces of massive structures like the Great Attractor. As it makes this high-speed journey, its outer stellar disk does not sit perfectly flat; instead, it undergoes a slow, wave-like vertical oscillation where stars and gas ripple up and down. This warped, vibrating motion across opposite sides of the disk closely resembles a giant butterfly flapping its wings, a cosmic distortion that scientists believe is triggered by ongoing gravitational tugs from nearby satellite galaxies and invisible halos of dark matter.

Click to view the video: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1JGG11ygLV/

Ups and Downs

Ups and Downs

The downs in your life are not mental illnesses or abnormalities to be suppressed with mind-altering psychotropic medications. They are a natural part of the ebb and flow, the yin and yang of life.

If you ever feel that the down is too deep or too long I have written an article containing several ways to address that:  https://www.tomgrimshaw.com/tomsblog/?p=14412

And I have more up my sleeve if you wish to erase all the pain from your life so you can be happier and more creative.

Trump on Iran: “We’re making a fortune!”

War has always been very profitable for guys like President Trump and his friends.
John Leake
Oct 27

A fascinating character to emerge during the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) was Albrecht von Wallenstein, Duke of Friedland (September 1583 – 25 February 1634), a Bohemian military leader and statesman who fought on the Catholic side as supreme commander of the armies of Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II. His successful military career made him one of the richest and most influential men at the time of his death by assassination.

Wallenstein built his initial fortune through the Kipper und Wipper financial crisis by participating in the debasement of coinage. He used those profits to buy estates confiscated from defeated Protestant nobles by Emperor Ferdinand II. Wallenstein organized these lands into a vast enterprise that funded a large private mercenary army.

While many criticized Wallenstein’s war profiteering and opportunism, no one accused him of lacking bravery. Early in the war, he personally led a breakthrough with his newly raised regiment of cuirassiers against Count Ernst von Mansfeld’s forces at Theyn in Bohemia.

In this respect, Wallenstein contrasts with most US Presidents. The last to serve in combat was George H.W. Bush, who flew 58 combat missions as a carrier-based torpedo bomber pilot in the Pacific Theater, was shot down twice, and earned the Distinguished Service Flying Cross.

For those who are well positioned, war can be extremely profitable. Some observers who were in a position to know—such as Major General Smedley Darlington Butler (1881–1940), one of the most decorated officers in U.S. Marine Corps history— have concluded that War Is a Racket (as he characterized it in a 1935 pamphlet).

As he saw it, war’s primary purpose is to enrich powerful commercial interests while the enormous costs are borne by ordinary citizens. Butler advocated restricting military force to genuine national defense and removing the financial incentives that encourage war.

I was just reminded of Butler when I read the following essay by Ron Paul titled “Who Is Making Billions from the Iran War?” reproduced on the LewRockwell newsletter.

By Ron Paul, MD
The Ron Paul Institute

October 27, 2026

At a campaign rally over the weekend, President Trump dismissed Americans’ concerns over high oil and gas prices, claiming that it’s a small price to pay for the hundreds of billions of dollars “we” are making from these higher prices.

“We’re making a fortune,” he said. “Hundreds of billions of dollars. Trillions of dollars.”

People are paying a little bit more for gas, he explained, but it doesn’t matter because “we” are making so much money.

The question is, “Who is ‘we’?” We know it is not the American people. They are seeing wage stagnation, inflation, and more pain at the pump. An Economist/YouGov poll earlier this month found that inflation and prices are the top concern among Americans by a wide margin. And in second place were jobs and the economy.

The same poll asked Americans how they rate the state of the US economy and in first place – again by a long shot – was “poor.”

If “we” as in the American people were making hundreds of billions of dollars from the war, you would think these would not be their top two concerns.

But we understand what the President meant by “we.” He meant that part of the “private” sector directly or indirectly in bed with the government war machine. From oil companies to weapons manufacturers and everything in between, war and conflict drive up profits in well-connected corporations at the expense of the rest of us.

That is why we are in a constant state of war. Twenty years in Afghanistan and a similar length in Iraq. Endless bombing in places like Somalia. A twelve-year (and counting) proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Military bases and covert operations across the globe.

And if we find that the largest military budget in the world does not deliver enough actual weapons to win a war? Well, that’s all good too: just double military spending and accuse anyone who objects of not being patriotic!

“Private” companies with enormous political power – many of them revolving doors between government and business – “make so much money” on war, as Trump would say. Whether these wars produce US wins, loses, or stalemates, these corporations in bed with government always win. The money-printing machine makes sure the money cycles into government-favored companies, while campaign contributions are made to the politicians who support the wars.

And if you don’t support the wars? You get the Thomas Massie treatment.

Endless war produces more corporatism, where the private sector does not exist to provide goods to compete in the free market, but to serve political power and strengthen governmental control over the population. Think of it as welfare for the rich at the expense of the poor. The result is tyranny.

This is the very reason our Founders intended to make it as difficult as possible to wage war. As well-educated students of history, they understood how the concentration of war-making power in the hands of one ruler or an oligarchy would impoverish the masses and lead to a moral and financial bankruptcy. They placed war-making power in the “people’s branch” – Congress – hoping that the people would hold their representatives accountable. We have strayed very far from what they intended and if we are to survive, we must reclaim that authority and responsibility.