And there goes my interest in reading the rest of the article. Why continue to read what is supposedly a history piece if it opens with pseudoscience? How am I supposed to trust that it's not pseudohistory as well?
To get interesting, focus on what tickles curiosity rather than what triggers rage.
> How am I supposed to trust that it's not pseudohistory as well?
Because this part of the article is actually verifiable history. The Atharva Veda exists and available to grok. The science part is up for debate. You can still read an article for its other merits
Later in the article:
>even as the health benefits of curcumin remain unproven beyond a few preliminary clinical trials that suggest its potential as an anti-inflammatory and an antioxidant
Beyond that, there is a wealth of good evidence about curcumin, the main curcuminoid in turmeric - it has been shown that curcumin has antiinflammatory effects and can reduce blood glucose levels.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-turmeric-became-a-...