"Touch Wood"

The Story of saying "Touch Wood"

"A gesture that says we still believe, somewhere deep inside, that the universe listens — and that a little humility can help keep fortune on our side."

Have you ever caught yourself saying, “Touch wood,” right after you’ve said something good, just to keep bad luck away? Maybe you’ve said, “I’ve never been sick this year — touch wood.” It’s one of those phrases we say automatically, without really thinking about why. But the story behind it goes back thousands of years — and it’s far more fascinating than most people realize. Long before “touch wood” became a superstition, it was a sacred act. In ancient Europe, people believed trees were alive with divine spirits. The Celts, for example, saw oaks and yews as holy — protectors, guardians, and homes of unseen forces. When people were afraid, or wished for luck, they would gently lay a hand on a tree, asking the spirit within to keep them safe or to share its strength. To touch wood was to connect with nature itself — to reach out to the sacred living world. When Christianity spread through Europe, this old custom didn’t disappear. It simply took on new meaning. Many believe the phrase evolved into touching the wood of the Cross — a quiet gesture asking for divine protection through Christ. By the Middle Ages, “touching wood” had come to symbolize faith, safety, and trust in something higher. But it wasn’t just in Europe. In the Middle East, people say “knock on wood” to protect themselves from the evil eye — the idea that envy or praise could attract misfortune. In Turkey and Iran, people touch wooden beads to keep bad luck away. In India, many people touch their head or the ground after saying something hopeful — a small act of humility before fate. However, saying Touch wood has become quite normal in recent times. Across the world, the message is the same: after speaking of good fortune, we instinctively try to keep fate from hearing us too loudly. By the 19th century, “touch wood” was common in Britain. In America, it became “knock on wood,” perhaps from old children’s games where touching wood made you safe, or from 19th-century spiritualism, when people believed spirits could communicate through taps on wooden tables. Whatever its path, the meaning never changed — a small gesture to hold on to luck, or to keep it from slipping away. And today, in our modern world of science, technology, and reason, we still do it. We still say “touch wood,” half joking, half believing. It’s a habit that links us with our ancestors — a quiet echo from a time when every tree was sacred, and every word carried weight. So the next time you say “touch wood,” remember: you’re continuing a three-thousand-year-old conversation between humans and the world around them. A gesture that says we still believe, somewhere deep inside, that the universe listens — and that a little humility can help keep fortune on our side.

Gold offers wealth protection not generation

Here is what Francisco Blanch, head of commodities and derivatives research at Bank of America Securities, said in a recent interview on CNBC.

Gold is both overbought but also under-owned. And this means that you probably still want to own it in the long run. And that's why we've revised in the last couple weeks—we revised our forecast by about a thousand dollars an ounce to 5,000. We've been bullish gold throughout. We had a 4,000 target. It just happened a lot faster than we anticipated.

The other thing that I would say about the gold market is that the extraordinary volatility we've seen on the way up, coupled with the declining volatility on the way down, makes us think that the market is, as I said, a little overbought right now, a little frothy. And we've seen massive inflows in the past few weeks. So that's really what's triggered this last run-up in August, September, and early October. It feels a little more retail-ish, to be honest.

And again, there's fundamentals on gold. There's a big story of the fracture that we see in global geopolitics between the US and China. The new sanctions that have been applied to Russia this week, and of course there is a constant search by central banks for alternatives to US dollar and euro-denominated assets. So that's been supportive of gold, but we think this market's a little overbought and it's going to be consolidating at these levels, maybe a little lower.

And again, there's fundamentals on gold. There's a big story of the fracture that we see in global geopolitics between the US and China. The new sanctions that have been applied to Russia this week, and of course there is a constant search by central banks for alternatives to US dollar and euro-denominated assets. So that's been supportive of gold, but we think this market's a little overbought and it's going to be consolidating at these levels, maybe a little lower.

On why one should be including gold in a portfolio, Francisco replied: Look, gold makes a lot of sense in a portfolio. So, I think that's the first thing I would say, but also I don't think it makes a lot of sense to try to chase gold prices higher. Remember, we've had a lot of volatility in a few corners of the market. We've had volatility in a number of equity markets—in particular, we've had volatility in miners. We had volatility in nuclear stocks and so on. And perhaps also some of the AI stocks. And what's going on in the gold market is somewhat similar. We've seen silver also joining that rally.

So I wouldn't be necessarily chasing it, but I would be buying dips and trying to establish a more formal core position in gold in a portfolio over time because I do think gold is money. And 50 years ago, 10 ounces of gold bought you a car, and today 10 ounces of gold buy you a car. So that's what you're buying there—you find some asset that over very long periods of time is going to more or less maintain its value. But I wouldn't be necessarily looking for gold to generate wealth for you. It's more of a protection against what may come.

Aging and illness are separable

Aging and illness are separable, said Manel Esteller MD PhD., the chairman of genetics at the University of Barcelona School of Medicine and senior author of a study published recently in Cell Reports Medicine. 

Aging and Illness Are Separable: New Study Uncovers Secrets to Living to 117

Dr. Manel Esteller

Barcelona, Spain – A groundbreaking study published in Cell Reports Medicine reveals profound insights into the extraordinary life of Maria Branyas Morera, who, at 117, was the world’s oldest person when she passed away in 2024. Conducted by researchers at the University of Barcelona, the study highlights that “aging and illness are separable,” offering hope for healthier longevity through an in-depth analysis of Morera’s genetics, immune system, microbiome, and lifestyle.

Born in San Francisco in 1907 and a resident of Catalonia, Spain, since age 8, Maria Branyas Morera lived a simple yet vibrant life, enjoying yogurt, gardening, walks, reading, playing the piano, and spending time with friends and dogs. Despite outliving Catalonia’s average female life expectancy of 86 years by over three decades, she remained in relatively good health until her passing. This remarkable longevity prompted scientists to explore what made her exceptional.

Led by Dr. Manel Esteller, chairman of genetics at the University of Barcelona School of Medicine, the research team, with Morera’s full cooperation, analyzed her biology at age 116. By collecting samples of her blood, urine, saliva, and stool, and documenting her lifestyle, they identified a unique combination of genetic, physiological, and environmental factors contributing to her long life.

Morera “won the genetics lottery”

The study found that Morera “won the genetics lottery,” as Dr. Esteller described. Her genome contained numerous variants linked to longevity, including those supporting DNA repair, clearing malfunctioning cells, controlling inflammation, and powering robust mitochondria. Researchers also discovered seven previously unidentified genetic variants likely critical to her extended lifespan. Notably, Morera lacked gene variants associated with major chronic diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, or diabetes, none of which she developed, with arthritis being her primary health concern.

Her immune system was exceptionally resilient, maintaining a robust supply of T cells that retained memories of past infections, including her survival as Spain’s oldest covid-19 patient. Unlike many elderly individuals, her immune system remained efficient, avoiding overactivity that could lead to autoimmune issues. Her gut microbiome further supported her health, rich with bacteria that produce anti-inflammatory substances, bolstering her immune system and overall well-being.

Morera’s lifestyle amplified her biological advantages. In her final decade, she consumed three plain yogurts daily and adhered to a Mediterranean diet rich in fish, olive oil, and fruit, eating lightly. She stayed active through walking and gardening until her later years and maintained healthy cholesterol and blood-sugar levels, resulting in a biological age 23 years younger than her chronological age. Socially, she engaged with residents at her assisted-living facility and welcomed visitors, fostering a sense of community.

Though Morera showed signs of aging, such as joint pain and elevated amyloid protein levels—a potential dementia marker—she never developed serious illnesses. As Dr. Esteller noted, “aging and illness are separable,” a key takeaway from her ability to delay disease until her peaceful passing in her sleep on August 19, 2024, at 117.

While the study focuses on a single individual, it underscores the interplay of genetics, immune function, microbiome health, and lifestyle in achieving extreme longevity. Dr. Nir Barzilai, founder of the Longevity Genes Project at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, emphasized the need for further research into supercentenarians to draw broader conclusions. Still, this study lays the groundwork for future discoveries about aging and potential interventions for healthier lives.

Dr. Esteller suggests that while Morera’s genetic advantages are unique, adopting aspects of her lifestyle—such as a balanced diet with yogurt, regular physical activity, and social engagement—could promote healthier aging. “Maybe try one yogurt a day,” he advised.

Maria Branyas Morera’s legacy continues to inspire scientists and those seeking a long, healthy life. For more information about the study, contact the University of Barcelona’s research office. 

(Courtesy: Gretchen Reynolds Washington Post)

Ukraine is basically Putin’s white whale. This is what he wants, and he’s not going to stop until he gets it, or until he’s convinced that he can’t get it”

Nate Reynolds

"Ukraine is basically Putin’s white whale. This is what he wants, and he’s not going to stop until he gets it, or until he’s convinced that he can’t get it” said: Nate Reynolds, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former Russia director at the National Security Council.

Reynolds was quoted saying this in an analysis by Robyn Dixon and Catherine Belton published in today's Washington Post. 

Russia is sticking to maximalist goals in the conflict and has not been open to the compromises needed for a Trump-led peace agreement. “Part of the reason that Russia is unwilling to bend reflects the fact that Ukraine is basically Putin’s white whale. This is what he wants, and he’s not going to stop until he gets it, or until he’s convinced that he can’t get it,” said Nate Reynolds, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former Russia director at the National Security Council.

At times, he said, Russia seemed to struggle to get its message through to the Trump administration.

“The Russians, to some extent, probably have been surprised by a couple of things. One, that they can’t get the U.S. to understand what they’re asking for, and two, that they can’t get the United States to accept it,” he said. “Putin and his advisers keep coming out of these meetings with U.S. interlocutors, who then highlight what seem to be misunderstandings, frankly, about what the Russian demands are.”

Recent summits in Anchorage and Washington over Ukraine’s future revealed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s overplayed hand in seeking a favorable resolution to the ongoing conflict. Despite a chance to leverage his rapport with U.S. President Donald Trump, Putin’s inflexible stance and insistence on military victory have stalled progress. Russia’s continued obstacles, including Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s demand for a veto over Ukraine’s security arrangements, underscore Putin’s reluctance to align with the White House’s push for a swift resolution. While Putin secured a temporary reprieve from tougher U.S. sanctions by persuading Trump to prioritize a long-term peace deal, the subsequent Washington summit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders reaffirmed strong support for Ukraine’s independence. This shift places pressure on Putin to engage directly with Zelensky, a move Russia resists, citing the need for pre-negotiated terms that favor Moscow’s maximalist goals, including Ukraine’s capitulation. Analysts note Putin’s pursuit of Ukraine as a personal obsession, viewing it as central to restoring Russia’s global influence and reversing the Soviet Union’s Cold War losses. However, Moscow’s demands for territorial concessions and control over Ukraine’s sovereignty have been rejected by U.S. officials, highlighting a disconnect in U.S.-Russia talks. As Russia remains confident in a battlefield victory, the prospect of a quick peace deal fades, with experts warning that complex issues could delay resolution for months or years, leaving Putin’s strategic ambitions at risk.

Read the full Washington Post article here.

"Walk out of a meeting when it is obvious, you aren’t adding value. It’s not rude to leave, it’s rude to make someone stay and waste their time."

"Walk out of a meeting when it is obvious, you aren’t adding value. It’s not rude to leave, it’s rude to make someone stay and waste their time" said: Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, in an email to the company employees on April 17, 2018. His full email was published by Jalopnik. 

Elon Musk

In a lengthy email, Musk laid out a number of changes he planned for the company with respect to production, hiring, expenses and earnings, and overall progress. 

At the end of the email he made certain productivity recommendations which are reproduced below:

"Btw, here are a few productivity recommendations:

• Excessive meetings are the blight of big companies and almost always get worse over time. Please get of all large meetings, unless you're certain they are providing value to the whole audience, in which case keep them very short.
• Also get rid of frequent meetings, unless you are dealing with an extremely urgent matter. Meeting frequency should drop rapidly once the urgent matter is resolved.
• Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren't adding value. It is not rude to leave, it is rude to make someone stay and waste their time.
• Don't use acronyms or nonsense words for objects, software or processes at Tesla. In general, anything that requires an explanation inhibits communication. We don't want people to have to memorize a glossary just to function at Tesla.
• Communication should travel via the shortest path necessary to get the job done, not through the "chain of command". Any manager who attempts to enforce chain of command communication will soon find themselves working elsewhere.
• A major source of issues is poor communication between depts. The way to solve this is allow free flow of information between all levels. If, in order to get something done between depts, an individual contributor has to talk to their manager, who talks to a director, who talks to a VP, who talks to another VP, who talks to a director, who talks to a manager, who talks to someone doing the actual work, then super dumb things will happen. It must be ok for people to talk directly and just make the right thing happen.
• In general, always pick common sense as your guide. If following a "company rule" is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, such that it would make for a great Dilbert cartoon, then the rule should change."

Read Jalopnik's full coverage here.

"Of course, the US is not reliable, but it's indispensable."

 "Of course, the US is not reliable, but it's indispensable," Said former Singapore diplomat Bilahari Kausikan during a a thought-provoking discussion during the 3rd India-Singapore Ministerial Roundtable (ISMR) in New Delhi on 13 August 2025.

Bilahari Kausikan

Kausikan, who served as Singapore’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations from 1995 to 1998, highlighted India’s historical commitment to autonomy. He noted that India has cultivated a stronger relationship with the United States for strategic reasons but remains fundamentally self-reliant.

Addressing India’s complex relationship with China, Kausikan dismissed the notion that India’s tensions with Beijing are motivated by a desire to align with U.S. interests. Instead, he pointed to longstanding disputes in the Himalayas and a competitive dynamic encapsulated by the Chinese proverb, “One mountain can only have one tiger.”

Kausikan also contextualized India’s evolving relationship with the United States by reflecting on its historical alignment with the Soviet Union under successive governments following India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. While this alignment was strategically sound during the Cold War, the dissolution of the Soviet Union diminished Russia’s role as a counterbalance in global geopolitics. India’s continued relationship with Russia, though still significant, no longer offers the strategic leverage it once did, making closer ties with the U.S. a logical step. Kausikan described this shift as a pragmatic adaptation to a transformed global landscape.

Commenting on the reliability of the United States as a partner, Kausikan offered a candid assessment, stating, “Of course, the U.S. is not reliable, but it’s indispensable.” He pointed to the volatility of American politics, where shifts in administration every four years can upend policy continuity, even within the same political party. Despite this unpredictability, Kausikan stressed that the U.S. remains a critical global player, and countries like Singapore and India must find ways to work within this reality. He emphasized that neither Singapore nor India relies on the U.S. for direct defense. Instead, both nations look to the U.S. to maintain the broader balance of power in the region, driven by Washington’s own interests rather than as a favor to its partners.

The total cost of operations (TCO) of our chips is so good that even when the competitors' chips are free, it's not cheap enough.

Said Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA Corporation, world's largest chip maker having a market cap of more than four trillions. 

When asked, “Is it possible that you'll face competition?” Jensen Huang responded:

Jensen Huang

“People who buy and sell chips think about the price of chips. People who operate data centers think about the cost of operations. Our time to deployment, our performance, our utilization, and our flexibility across all these different applications collectively impact the total cost of operations—what they call TCO. Our TCO is so good that even when competitors’ chips are free, they’re still not cheap enough. That’s our goal: to add so much value that the alternative isn’t about cost.”

Jensen Huang (born February 17, 1963, Tainan, Taiwan) is a Taiwanese-born American entrepreneur who cofounded the American semiconductor company NVIDIA Corporation. Under Huang’s leadership, NVIDIA has become one of the leading providers of graphics processing units (GPUs) and has taken center stage in the current artificial intelligence (AI) boom.

"When the richest man in the world wants to pick a fight with the most powerful man in the world, you know, it's not hard to see where the money's going to go"

When the richest man in the world wants to pick a fight with the most powerful man in the world, you know, it's not hard to see where the money's going to go," said political analyst Joe in an interview on Skey News, Australia.

In response to ongoing national conversation sparked by Elon Musk’s recent announcement of his “America Party,” veteran political analyst Joe offered commentary on the implications for the U.S. political landscape during an interview earlier this week.

“The idea of launching a third party because one feels excluded from Washington or has had a falling out with former allies strikes me as politically naïve,” Joe stated. “Elon Musk is a visionary—a generational genius with a profound impact on technology and business—but navigating the emotional terrain of American politics is an entirely different arena.”

Referencing the market's reaction following Musk’s announcement, Joe pointed out that Tesla’s stock experienced a sharp 7% drop, compounded by a report of a 14% decrease in second-quarter vehicle deliveries.

“This feels less like a political movement and more like a very public divorce,” Joe added. “Third parties have historically failed to gain traction in the U.S.—the system simply isn’t designed for them. It’s hard to view this latest development as anything but disruptive.”

He also emphasized the contrast in thinking between Elon Musk and Donald Trump.

“Musk is focused on the long game—Mars colonization, electric mobility, the debt ceiling decades from now. Trump, on the other hand, is thinking short-term. These are two men driven by radically different timelines and philosophies.”

Joe concluded his remarks with both caution and respect:

“There’s no doubt that Musk has changed the world. But politics is not just about logic—it’s about feelings, coalitions, and human unpredictability. That’s a dimension even the sharpest mind can struggle to calibrate.”

In lighter commentary, Joe ended the discussion with a nod to July 4th traditions and cultural quirks—highlighting competitive eater Joey Chestnut’s triumph in the Coney Island Hot Dog Eating Contest.

“Even in a divided America, we can still marvel at someone downing 70.5 hot dogs in 10 minutes,” he quipped.

“Gold is a barometer of anxiety”

Adrian Ash

“Gold is a barometer of anxiety,” said Adrian Ash, director of research at BullionVault, the world-leading physical gold, silver, platinum and palladium market for private investors online.

Adrian Ash has been quoted saying this in Washington Post's article titled "Gold keeps setting records as uncertainty buffets other assets" of today.

The main points discussed in the article are as under:

The surge in gold prices is tied to a mix of economic uncertainty and geopolitical instability. Adjusted for inflation, gold has reached its highest value since 1980, exceeding $3,200 per ounce. Factors driving this include geopolitical tensions such as the Ukraine war, economic disruptions triggered by the Trump administration's tariff plans, sanctions on Russia, and a growing global effort to diversify away from the U.S. dollar.

Gold has historically been a refuge for investors during times of financial instability. Central banks have been accumulating gold to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar, especially in regions like Asia and the Middle East. Retail investors, influenced by headlines and economic fears, have shown heightened interest in gold, whether through exchange-traded funds (ETFs), small gold bars, or coins. Younger investors are increasingly drawn to this commodity, as firms such as Monetary Metals and Money Metals Exchange report record transactions and the opening of new accounts.

While ETFs have made gold investments more accessible by eliminating the need for physical storage, many investors prefer holding physical gold due to concerns about financial institution reliability. Costco has even started selling gold bars, suggesting gold is gaining appeal among mainstream consumers. For many, physical gold represents security in a volatile world—fewer fees, fewer middlemen, and a tangible asset they can hold.

The popularity of gold is also tied to its historical performance during periods of low interest rates or poor stock market conditions. However, skeptics argue that gold offers no dividends or yields, which might limit its attractiveness as an investment. They foresee potential corrections in gold prices if economic conditions stabilize, particularly for its industrial and jewelry applications. Despite this, proponents like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hail gold as a reliable and accessible investment.

Notably, the shift toward gold investments has been amplified by a series of major events, including the coronavirus pandemic, the Ukraine war, and the 2023 regional bank crisis. These occurrences fueled anxiety among investors, leading to spikes in gold transactions. Retail demand for gold bars and coins has been robust, with firms reporting increased interest from buyers across demographics.

In summary, gold's rise reflects its enduring appeal as a safe-haven asset during times of crisis. Its growing accessibility through platforms like ETFs and retailers such as Costco highlights its relevance in both institutional and individual portfolios. Although its price trajectory may face headwinds in the future, gold remains a symbol of stability amid uncertainty.

Read full article here.

“We’ve now got an alliance between a Russian president who wants to destroy Europe and an American president who also wants to destroy Europe.”

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz

“We’ve now got an alliance between a Russian president who wants to destroy Europe and an American president who also wants to destroy Europe,” said a senior EU diplomat, granted anonymity to speak candidly to Politico. “The transatlantic alliance is over,” the EU diplomat added.

Recent developments at the Munich Security Conference have raised profound questions about the future of NATO and the transatlantic alliance that has maintained peace in Europe for over seven decades. This alliance, founded in 1949 with just twelve members, has grown to thirty nations united by common values and mutual defense commitments. Yet today, we find ourselves at a crossroads that few could have imagined even a decade ago. As we analyze these developments, we must understand their implications and chart a course forward that ensures our collective security in an increasingly uncertain world.

The first crucial point is the shifting landscape of security guarantees. U.S. Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth's recent remarks in Brussels suggesting that 'realities' will prevent the U.S. from being Europe's security guarantor represent a seismic shift in transatlantic relations. This isn't merely a policy adjustment - it potentially signals what former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis calls 'the advent of the twilight of NATO.' The implications of this shift extend far beyond diplomatic rhetoric into the realm of practical security considerations. We must consider what this means for Article 5, the cornerstone of NATO's collective defense principle, which has only been invoked once in our history - after the September 11 attacks. The potential weakening of this commitment raises serious questions about the future of European security architecture and the deterrence that has kept peace on our continent for generations.

The current situation bears striking similarities to 1938, when appeasement policies ultimately failed to prevent conflict. As Chatham House's Keir Giles pointedly observes, the acceptance of territorial aggression in exchange for promises of peace eerily echoes past mistakes. We must recognize these patterns to avoid repeating them. The word 'appeasement' has returned to European discourse, and with it comes all the historical weight and warning that term carries. But let's be specific about what's at stake: We're witnessing patterns of territorial aggression, the undermining of international law, and the testing of alliance commitments that mirror the lead-up to previous conflicts. The difference today is that we have the benefit of historical hindsight - if we choose to use it. The question is whether we will learn from these lessons or be condemned to repeat the costly mistakes of the past.

Former German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger's statement that 'maybe Europe needed to be tasered' into self-reliance reflects the shocking reality we face. As Kęstutis Budrys emphasizes, 'We are late, really. We have to speed up and show that we have real defense, and that we are ready and capable and trained to fight.' This isn't just about military capability - it's about political will and strategic vision. We need to consider concrete steps: increasing defense spending beyond the 2% GDP threshold, developing integrated European defense industries, strengthening our cyber capabilities, and creating robust rapid response forces. The European Defense Agency estimates that we need to invest at least €300 billion in military modernization over the next decade. But beyond the numbers, we need to foster a new mindset - one that acknowledges that European security must ultimately be guaranteed by Europeans themselves.

The challenges of today are not insurmountable, but they require immediate attention and decisive action. The potential twilight of NATO doesn't have to mean the end of European security - but it does mean they must adapt to new realities. The erosion of traditional guarantees, the dangers of historical repetition, and the need for European self-reliance all point to one conclusion: the time for action is now for the EU.