Migros Customers

Migros Customer

Imagine a supermarket chain that dominates its national market and yet won’t sell you a beer or a pack of cigarettes, pays no dividends to outside investors, and actively cuts its prices whenever it decides it has made too much money. That describes Migros, the largest retailer in Switzerland, and it has run on roughly this logic for nearly a hundred years.

The key to understanding how Migros works is its unusual ownership. Rather than answering to shareholders, the company is organized as a cooperative belonging to around two million members, a huge share of the Swiss population. That reorients the whole enterprise away from maximizing returns for investors and toward serving the people who both own and shop at it.

That cooperative structure produces some genuinely unusual policies in day-to-day practice. Migros caps the profit it is willing to keep, and when the business earns beyond that limit it lowers prices to give the surplus back to customers rather than banking it. It also commits one percent of its total revenue to cultural and social causes, funding schools, courses, concert halls and community projects. That long-standing program has made it a major patron of Swiss cultural life.

The refusal to sell alcohol and tobacco goes right back to the founder, Gottlieb Duttweiler, who built the company in the 1920s and 1930s around ideas of affordable goods and social responsibility. That principle has survived into the present day even as the chain grew into a sprawling retail empire. Migros insists throughout that it is a commercial operation rather than a charity, one that simply measures success differently from most of its competitors.

The result is a paradox that has worked for generations, a hard-nosed, market-leading business whose stated goal is to give as much of its success as possible straight back to the members who own it.

Cries for Help Buried in V-Safe Data

Late last week, Brownstone Institute released a remarkable document. It grew out of a system called V-safe, started by the CDC, built by Oracle, and deployed in December 2020 to underscore how much the government really cared for our health. It would monitor vaccine safety in real time, person by person, and call to help people who experienced adverse events. The purpose of the system was actually to shore up confidence, and pretty much nothing else.

More than 10 million people readily signed up to help the CDC in its monitoring efforts. These were the eager beavers who wanted the shot and were happy to help show how safe it was. They were contacted by the bot the next day, the next, the next week, and so on, up to a year. The form they received depended on the responses they gave.

It was run by machines, not people. No one was reading, though people did not know this. The CDC did not want to release any of it but finally coughed up the check box results. They held onto the really grim stuff: the free text boxes that people filled out. Those had to be obtained by a FOIA issued by the Informed Consent Action Network, finally forced on the CDC by a federal judge.

These responses fell to an organization we support, React19, which assembled them into a document which we then typeset into a 1,048-page book. Warning: it makes for very difficult reading. These are real people, not just statistics. The suffering in these pages is tough to take.

We have used our media access to X to embark upon a full reading of the book live on air. It is taking time. Now 3 two-hours sessions in, with tens of thousands of views, we are only at page 127. This job is going to take weeks. It’s hard reading, dark night of the soul. But the content is uniquely powerful in a way that nothing else truly is.

We hear that the CDC is now panicked about this book and reading.

Good.

Finish reading: https://brownstone.org/articles/cries-for-help-buried-in-v-safe-data/

Banana Peel Heavy Metal Remediation

Banana Peel Heavy Metal Remediation

Chopped up banana peels pulled lead straight out of polluted river water in a Brazilian lab test.

Chemists in Brazil dried and minced banana peels, then ran polluted river water through them.

The metals stuck to the peel within about ten minutes, and the same filter worked for eleven reuses.

Banana peels are free food waste doing a job that usually needs costly, sometimes toxic filters.

The banana peel isn’t chemically “destroying” the lead. It is adsorbing it — essentially binding the metal ions to functional groups on the peel’s surface.

The resulting banana peel is now contaminated with concentrated lead. You can’t simply put the used peel on the compost heap or use it as fertiliser. The captured lead has to go somewhere safe.

Sources: Sao Paulo State University

See sustainable farms doing more with less near you on Localize.

Brighter Daytime Light Is Linked to a Lower Dementia Risk

Enjoying Sunshine

Research suggests that spending more time in bright daytime light was linked to a lower risk of developing dementia, with measurable brightness targets that are often reached outdoors. However, the researchers caution these thresholds may not transfer directly to other populations.

In the study’s machine-learning analysis, bright daytime light ranked as a stronger predictor of future dementia risk than several familiar factors, including alcohol consumption, obesity, hearing loss, and traumatic brain injury.

The strongest association between brighter daytime light and lower dementia risk was found in people already at higher risk, including those with an evening chronotype and people who carry the APOE4 gene variant.

Research suggests sunlight supports your body in ways that extend beyond vitamin D, influencing compounds involved in circulation, mood, sleep, immune function, and your body’s natural daily rhythm.

Building simple habits such as spending time outdoors in the morning, taking daylight breaks during the day, and reducing dependence on dim indoor lighting may be a practical way to support long-term brain health.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2026/09/17/brighter-daytime-light.aspx

The Human Body Is Remarkably Forgiving

The Human Body Is Remarkably Forgiving

This is one of the premises behind the wide range of ingredients in my products. If you have eaten such as to develop a deficiency, my aim is to have such a wide range of nutrient dense ingredients that chances are very strong that my Greens Plus will help rectify that deficiency so your body can restore optimal operating efficiency.

7 Gut-Loving Desserts That Actually Taste Amazing

Chocolate Bark

For years, “healthy dessert” meant one thing: take something delicious and start removing bits of it. Less sugar. Less butter. Less of whatever made it worth eating in the first place, until you’re left with something that’s technically fine but nobody actually wants seconds of.

I don’t think that’s the right way to think about it anymore.

Finish reading: https://goodnesslover.com/blogs/health/7-gut-loving-desserts

Can a Spice Rival a Drug? 10 Head-to-Head Trials Put It to the Test

Spice vs Drug 10 Trials

Ten head-to-head clinical trials — pulled from the GreenMedInfo archive — in which honey, turmeric, saffron, ginger and a handful of other kitchen staples matched or outperformed prescription medications. Each one links to the full research write-up.

For nearly two decades, GreenMedInfo has done one thing most health publishers never bother with: we go into the National Library of Medicine and pull out the studies where researchers put a natural substance directly against a drug — same condition, same patients, same scoring — and then publish what they found.

Those studies exist. There are thousands of them. They just don’t get press releases, because nobody holds a patent on honey.

Below are ten of the most striking. Every one is a human trial. Every one is indexed in our database. And every one links to the long-form article where you can read the methodology, the numbers and the citations for yourself.

A word before we start: this is research information, not medical advice. Several of these trials are small. Some are single studies that have not been replicated. I have flagged which ones have the strongest designs. Read them, bring them to your practitioner, and decide for yourself. That is the entire point of having the archive.

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