Loneliness increases death risk by 32% but we know how to fix it. Real solutions that cut loneliness in half, from mindfulness to community…
Chronic loneliness increases mortality risk by 32% and dementia risk by 31%, with biological pathways now proven through inflammation, immune dysfunction, and epigenetic changes affecting over 2.2 million studied individuals. Evidence-based interventions combining cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, and community programs demonstrate measurable success — with some achieving 48% reduction in loneliness within six months and generating £3.42 in healthcare savings per £1 invested. The most effective individual strategies include structured 8-week mindfulness programs reducing daily loneliness by 22%, while community-based social prescribing has reached 9.4 million healthcare visits in the UK alone, proving that this epidemic is both scientifically understood and practically treatable through targeted interventions.
Introduction
I’ve been thinking alot about loneliness lately. Not because I’m particularly lonely myself. Living between two cultures sometimes makes you feel like you’re standing in a doorway that belongs to neither room. But because everywhere I look, I see people drowning in it, and nobody seems to talk about it properly.
Last week, my neighbor a sweet elderly woman who always greets me in the hallway told me she hadn’t had a real conversation in three weeks. Three weeks. And she’s not alone in being alone, if that makes sense. When I moved from Germany to write here, I thought the hardness would be the language or finding good bread (still looking, by the way). But what really hits you is how many people are carrying this invisible weight.
We treat loneliness like it’s just feeling sad or maybe needing to get out more. But your body? Your body treats it like you’re being hunted by a wolf. I’m serious. The research shows loneliness literally changes how our genes work, makes our immune system go haywire, increases our chance of dying young by almost a third. A third! That’s more dangerous than obesity, and we have entire industries built around fighting that.
The thing is, I grew up in a Turkish family where being alone was practically impossible. There’s always someone dropping by for tea, always a cousin calling, always food being shared. But even in my family now, I see it creeping in. My uncle in Berlin, divorced last year, suddenly looks ten years older. My friend’s daughter, surrounded by hundreds of Instagram friends, tells me she feels completely disconnected from everyone.
Loneliness operates as an immunometabolic syndrome
Recent meta-analyses examining 2.2 million individuals across 90 cohort studies reveal that social isolation and loneliness trigger measurable biological cascades comparable to traditional disease risk factors. The physiological response involves 175 proteins associated with disease pathways, with Growth Differentiation Factor 15 showing the strongest link to social isolation (OR 1.22) and PCSK9 to loneliness (OR 1.15). These proteins directly influence cardiovascular, metabolic, and neurodegenerative disease processes.
The inflammatory response stands out as the primary mechanism. Lonely individuals show consistently elevated C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and fibrinogen levels, creating a state of chronic inflammation. This “Conserved Transcriptional Response to Adversity” involves upregulation of pro-inflammatory genes while simultaneously downregulating antiviral responses, leaving lonely individuals more vulnerable to infections while their bodies attack themselves through inflammation. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis becomes dysregulated, producing flattened cortisol rhythms and glucocorticoid resistance that perpetuates inflammation even when stress hormones are elevated.
Epigenetic aging accelerates measurably in lonely individuals. The GrimAge biological clock advances faster than chronological age (β = 0.07, p = 0.003), mediating 20% of the relationship between loneliness and multiple chronic diseases. Twenty-five specific DNA methylation sites change with loneliness, primarily affecting inflammatory and metabolic pathways. These changes aren’t just correlational — they represent causal mechanisms linking social experience to physical disease.
Scientific interventions achieve measurable success rates
Analysis of 256 randomized controlled trials reveals that evidence-based interventions can effectively reduce loneliness, with success rates varying by approach and population. Cognitive behavioral therapy emerges as the most rigorously tested intervention, achieving effect sizes of 0.43–0.66 across multiple studies. The key lies in targeting maladaptive social cognitions — the negative thought patterns that perpetuate loneliness regardless of actual social contact.
Multi-component interventions show the highest effectiveness at 85% success rate when combining social skills training, cognitive restructuring, social support enhancement, and behavioral activation. A Barcelona community program achieved remarkable results: 48.3% of participants no longer felt lonely after 18 sessions combining education, mindfulness, yoga, and neighbor-organized activities, compared to 26.9% of controls. Mental health scores improved from 36 to 48 on the SF-12 scale, while depressive symptoms nearly halved.
Mindfulness-based interventions demonstrate particular promise through smartphone delivery. A 14-day program requiring just 20 minutes daily reduced loneliness by 22% while increasing social interactions by two per day. The critical factor was the “Monitor + Accept” approach — observing lonely feelings without judgment proved essential, as monitoring alone showed no benefit. This suggests that acceptance orientation toward present-moment experiences, rather than fighting loneliness, facilitates social connection.
Animal-assisted interventions achieved 100% effectiveness in studies with older adults, whether using living animals, robotic pets, or virtual companions. Group-based programs consistently outperformed individual interventions, with optimal duration ranging from 8–34 weeks. Sessions incorporating active participation, skill-building, and between-session practice showed superior outcomes to passive support groups.
Conclusion
So here’s what I keep coming back to. We know loneliness is killing people. Literally rewiring their bodies to self-destruct. We know exactly how to help them. But we’re still treating it like some personal weakness instead of the health crisis it really is.
When I think about my neighbor, about my uncle, about all the people quietly suffering behind closed doors, I get angry. Not at them, but at how we’ve built a world where feeling disconnected is normal. Where asking for help feels like failure. In my Turkish family, we have this saying about how a shared meal makes the table stronger but somewhere along the way, we forgot to keep setting places for each other.
The research I’ve been reading, it gives me hope though. Those programs in Barcelona where almost half the people stopped feeling lonely? The mindfulness stuff that works in just two weeks? Even the robot pets for elderly people “it all works”. We’re not talking about maybe or possibly here. This stuff actually works.
What gets me is that fixing loneliness doesn’t require some massive revolution. Twenty minutes of mindfulness a day. A weekly volunteer shift. Even just accepting that you feel lonely instead of fighting it. That alone makes a difference. In the UK they’re writing prescriptions for social activities and saving money while saving lives. If that’s not proof that we can turn this around, I don’t know what is.
I guess what I’m trying to say is, if you’re reading this and feeling that hollow ache of disconnection, you’re not broken. Your body is having a totally normal response to an abnormal situation. And there are real, tested ways to feel better “not perfect, but better”.
We don’t need to accept loneliness as the price of modern life. We know too much now to keep pretending it’s just in people’s heads. It’s in their blood, their genes, their mortality statistics. But more importantly, we know how to heal it. We just need to start taking it as seriously as any other threat to human health.
In the end, we’re not meant to do this alone.
None of us are.
Read the original article
Comments
By paraknight 2025-09-2914:3016 reply I haven't dug into all the sources, but I think there's a potential confounder here, or maybe even reverse causality. The author seems to assume causation when the studies only indicate correlation. E.g. the first link says "chronic loneliness increases mortality risk" but the actual source says "actual and perceived social isolation are both associated with increased risk for early mortality".
So for example, it's possible that if you already have chronic illness, a disability, or any other kind of health issues, you're more likely to have higher social isolation and therefore be more lonely, in addition to having a higher mortality risk. There's an outside variable (your health) that is correlated with both (loneliness and mortality), but that doesn't necessarily mean that loneliness causes mortality. If this were the case, we could defend claims like "autism increases mortality", because we already know that autism increases social isolation.
Poor health increasing social isolation isn't even a hard casual path to argue. Common health problems can physically restrict how often and how long one leaves the house: people on oxygen can only travel as far as their supply and weakened lungs can take them, or people with bowel disorders might be reluctant to be do anything without easy and discrete bathroom use, people with visible symptoms might be embarrassed and avoid socializing.
The loneliness-associated protein study linked in TFA doesn't seem to control for health status. So preexisting conditions may have affected the correlations.
By oncallthrow 2025-09-2917:251 reply Yes, this seems blindingly obvious to me. Maybe because I have chronic health problems myself. Perhaps those blessed with good health are blissfully ignorant.
When you are chronically ill, socializing falls pretty rapidly down your list of priorities.
By observationist 2025-09-2922:04 That said, it seems pretty clear that incentivizing healthy socialization can significantly improve quality of life, reducing perceived suffering and quite possibly improving outcomes through reinforcement of the various social needs we have.
We are fundamentally social primates; there are prior studies demonstrating the overt harms of isolation and ostracization in humans, primates, and other mammals. Our immune systems, metabolism, and cardiovascular health are all tied intimately to things like stress and hormones, with feedback effects that can amplify disorder, or suppress it, depending on the directionality of the inputs.
I see the "just so" element of explanation to this study, but I think that even if the underlying causal factors are more complex, it is so directionally correct that I have no problem with the conclusion of the study, even if it's not correctly justified scientifically.
And don't forget that physical loneliness, that is, actually being alone, eliminates one major feedback source that something could be wrong with your health, or a source of immediate aid if e.g. you go into cardiac arrest.
Maybe the researcher above touches on these things, but more generally, there should be a standardized probability and statistics exam for ALL aspiring scientific researchers, and a high score should be the minimum cutoff. The influence that a statistically flawed study can have over our collective futures is too dangerous.
By fn-mote 2025-09-2921:20 > The influence that a statistically flawed study can have over our collective futures is too dangerous.
An even bigger danger: with all of the flawed / p-hacked / over-hyped studies, the public (and the legislature) will start to believe that NO science is real.
It worries me how much argument there is over things I consider to be facts. And how much effort goes into undermining science when it is not in the corporate interest (eg cigarette manufacturers funding “inconclusive” studies).
By ramblingrain 2025-09-2917:13 The first source I clicked into was a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
What you say sounds true about chronic illness and isolation. These researchers are looking at research done using actual interventions and real results.
What should they do to analyze this more than RCTs and then meta-analysis of RCTs?
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s... Tackling social disconnection: an umbrella review of RCT-based interventions targeting social isolation and loneliness
By citizenpaul 2025-09-2919:11 Another huge factor is probably lack of feedback loop. Its surprisingly easy to press on by yourself through various health issues until its too late. However someone around you might say you look pale recently you should see doctor as an obviously contrived example.
My dismissive but practical take is "well yeah there's nobody in the room to call an ambulance when you have the heart attack you'll most likely have", which mindfulness classes and support groups don't help with. There's practical benefits to having people around.
There was a funny statistical artifact I read once (well, for some value of 'funny') that home was a terrible place to have a heart attack, because people are willing to 'just lie down and see how I feel' rather than in a restaurant or movie theater where an ambulance will be called.
By arandr0x 2025-09-2915:59 It would be interesting then for similar studies to add a dimension in addition to self-reported loneliness on self-reported time spent outside the home. While it's likely that sedentary elders are lonelier, it's not a 100% overlap (some elders live with close family and some lonely people are still very physically active/outside). You would expect lonely, active people to have lower death rates than lonely, sedentary people with similar pre-existing conditions under your hypothesis, and it would be a powerful thing to prove because it's a lot easier to make people go out than to make them make friends.
By stackbutterflow 2025-09-2916:401 reply Then what about work from home? Does it increase mortality?
By Qem 2025-09-2919:58 I bet any change in mortality due to increased isolation is offset by decreased deaths due to traffic acidents.
Or related: there's no one to nag you about going to get that funny ache checked out. Men particularly are notoriously reluctant to go to a doctor for various reasons but a worried partner might persuade them.
By AnimalMuppet 2025-09-2917:20 When this happens to us, my wife says, "This is another reason why married men live longer."
She's not wrong...
By AndrewKemendo 2025-09-2914:531 reply By these statistics there aren’t enough healthy people to provide care for those that are less healthy
The challenge here is that healthy people don’t desire to be around unhealthy people.
Society provides no incentive or social benefit for otherwise healthy people to be around the unwell to call the ambulances. Even as a nurse, hospice worker or caregiver, the pay/benefits are non existent for the amount of emotional and physical labor needed for care.
You don't have to be that healthy to call an ambulance! As long as not everyone in the sick-and-poor commune has a heart attack at the same time this should be a safe enough system.
Ambulances are expensive enough that people are hesitant to call them, sometimes even in life threatening situations.
And if the person is unsure whether the situation is critical, they might try to "sleep it off" rather than driving or getting a ride, because ER is also kind of expensive and you could be stuck there all day.
By Qem 2025-09-2920:02 In US. But there are places with proper socialized health systems, where one must not be afraid of bankruptcy by calling an ambulance.
I once did a course with a paramedic on basic aid. We were discussing choking, which is a condition that really needs a 2nd party to intervene. Someone asked what to do if you live alone (with no close neighbours) - the answer was essentially ‘good luck’
By magneticnorth 2025-09-2916:172 reply The idea of the heimlich is to put sudden force on the diaphragm and force air upward. You can do that alone by pushing your upper abdomen against a chair back, counter, railing, whatever. Not something I've ever tried, but good to know about in case.
By inciampati 2025-09-2916:32 And if you're alone it's worth running with a chair into the street to do it as visibly as possible.
By hhmc 2025-09-2917:05 Sure theoretically. Outcomes are dramatically better if someone else is around
By mh- 2025-09-2916:32 I know how to in theory, and I think I'm probably "above average" at calm-in-crisis, but my confidence that I'd calmly rescue myself via self-heimlich while unable to breathe is not high.
By nh23423fefe 2025-09-2914:541 reply Dying of natural causes is ok though.
By AnimalMuppet 2025-09-2917:21 Preventably dying of natural causes is kind of a waste, though.
By biophysboy 2025-09-2915:051 reply >Recent meta-analyses examining 2.2 million individuals across 90 cohort studies reveal that social isolation and loneliness trigger measurable biological cascades comparable to traditional disease risk factors.
Its frustrating, because cohort study experimental designs like these can in principle chip away at reverse causality (i.e. observe loneliness exposure before a cardiovascular disease prognosis, compare difference-in-difference between treatment/control), but the meta-analysis doesnt clearly state whether this constraint was applied. But even a study like this would have issues with medical participation, so that would need to be controlled, preferably with a prospective design.
By lanstin 2025-09-301:02 Having a spouse or friend nag you into going to the doctor is undoubtably a part of the effect, both for the practical side and for the feeling that someone would care if you were ill. (Assuming this is what you mean by "issues with medical participation.")
By rawgabbit 2025-09-2915:44 As an anecdote, I have a couple of elderly family members who did not mellow with age. Instead they became even more toxic and abusive as they approached their 80s. (I have another who was the complete opposite.). The abusive ones hurled curse words as soon as you entered the door; then they "switched" personalities and acted as if nothing happened. I also know of an acquaintance whose son had the similar personality traits even though he's only in his 40s. The son needed a 24 hour a day caregiver because he's mentally challenged. In short there are a whole host of physical and/or mental problems that confound the situation.
>The author seems to assume causation when the studies only indicate correlation.
once I heard Feynmann say in a youtube video that (paraphrasal) "we don't know what causes gravity, we just know that it exists, it's a property of matter"
then I realized, our experiments never show causation, they only show correlation. gravity has 100% (in our experience) correlation to matter. admittedly, that's a pretty good correlation, but for all we know, gravity causes matter. energy too, apparently.
By schoen 2025-09-2916:25 Philosophers have worried for a long time about whether we can actually observe causation.
David Hume was famous for arguing in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding that we can't observe it and we instead have a "custom" or habit of expecting effects to follow causes.
> After the constant conjunction of two objects—heat and flame, for instance, weight and solidity—we are determined by custom to expect the one from the appearance of the other.
Religious philosophers have sometimes gone to the extreme of occasionalism, where they've maintained that patterns and regularities in nature were just habits or customs that God chooses to follow:
By bluebarbet 2025-09-2917:021 reply Skipping punctuation makes your writing harder to parse. It's a false economy.
By codedokode 2025-09-2923:32 You skip uppercase letters though.
> If this were the case, we could defend claims like "autism increases mortality", because we already know that autism increases social isolation.
Are you aware that life expectancy is much lower for peel with autism than the general public?
By paraknight 2025-10-024:20 I was not aware of this, but this actually supports my point, since the reasons in that study seem to be correlated physical comorbidities, so that makes the claim "autism increases mortality due social isolation" both easier to make (as you can misinterpret the stats) as well as less defensible.
By dfxm12 2025-09-2918:23 Social isolation is also not the same thing as loneliness. The paper recognizes this and gives different outcomes for three distinct categories (social isolation, loneliness and living alone). The blog post mistakenly cites the outcome for living alone as the outcome for loneliness.
By mgh2 2025-09-305:32 By ivape 2025-09-2917:20 If you think things through like that then you can only ever attribute physical, material, biological factors as the only things involved in mapping the causation. In other words, every time we attempt to draw the line to mortality, it gets hacked down as we keep reducing the argument.
We cannot explore the possibilities of truth if we do that, but I can appreciate the due diligence. It’s a tricky subject, but life experience informs many of us that there is something more going on than “I materially feel like shit”.
There is a taboo element to loneliness that isn’t often discussed, and that is “I feel hurt that I can be left alone, or that anyone can be left alone or isolated”. So, while the source of the isolation could be material, the feeling that manifests from it is an actual hurt that one feels from the actual thing (isolation). For example, we may be killing our elders when we isolate them in care facilities.
I can’t say if we have the sense as a society to accept data that suggests this pain can be linked to mortality. Isolation in itself isn’t the killer, it’s the pain of “well how could any society leave anyone alone”, and such a phenomenon can be witnessed in the macro outside of yourself (how can we leave people on the street? Etc).
Loneliness and isolation is often in sequence, after abandonment, or negligence, or unforgivingness (if the person “deserved” the isolating). A phantom, immeasurable pain. And even more painful, to deny it afterwards.
By mr_toad 2025-09-3010:21 There is considerable evidence that people who live alone are at greater risk of hospital re-admission, probably because they are less able to care for themselves properly.
By FuriouslyAdrift 2025-09-2920:32 By blablabla123 2025-09-2917:09 The myth of the lonely hero (and probably risk taker) has been mentioned as a problematic factor before
Of course there is no direct causation between loneliness and death. You don't directly die from lack of social interaction, but you do directly die from lack of food. However, there is a clear causal link between loneliness and habits that increase mortality.
By Taek 2025-09-2914:53 No I believe its reasonably well established that being lonely itself takes a toll on your health. Stress goes up etc.
The problem is that this article is overstating the effect on mortality because its not controlling for confounding factors very well.
By lynx97 2025-09-2916:12 > Of course there is no direct causation between loneliness and death.
Of course there is. If you are alone at home, who calls an ambulance if you have a heart attack or similar condition? If you are living together with someone, the chance they are arund while it happens is all thats needed to skew the statistics.
By mrkickling 2025-09-2915:34 Do you not believe that mental well being is affected by loneliness? And that mental well being could affect mortality?
I've seen this happen in person, to my grandmother. She hitched her identity to the man of the house, even signing checks "Mrs. grandad's name." She was the accountant of their farm along with housewife and cook and chicken tender. He was most of the muscle until he had to relinquish the work to their youngest son, who had moved out and into his own house. She was in relatively good health when grandad died at 76. She suddenly lost her identity, being alone in that farmhouse which she helped build and maintain, it was too full of ghosts to live alone, she moved in with the son. I never saw her smile after that. She died within months.
My great-grandmother was different. her husband died young. she had 50 more years of life after that. She gardened, she sewed, she pickled and canned. She established a strong personal identity and experienced evergreen personal growth. She was a happy woman, cackling all of the time when we'd visit. When she died at 95, it was a surprise, she seemed very alive and healthy shortly beforehand. She died in her sleep, no chronic diseases.
Makes me think that 32% might be traced to psychological/sociological factors.
By fullstop 2025-09-2915:07 It sounds like your grandma passed from a broken heart.
My mother in law lost her husband when she was in her early 60s, and I was worried that she would suffer the same fate as your grandma. She sold her house after a few years to escape the ghosts and moved into a condo near me. Her social schedule is jam-packed.
There is so much to be said about having your own identity, hobbies, and passions.
> She hitched her identity to the man of the house, even signing checks "Mrs. grandad's name."
That was quite common for much of the 20th century.
By jabroni_salad 2025-09-2915:43 Yep. I have been doing genealogy, and the women are very hard to track down because of this. There is a lot of "Mrs. Joe Schmoe" in the papers.
By gaoshan 2025-09-2918:11 The person she spent her life with died. She could have just been sad and lonely over that, not some lack of "identity".
I've been married for over 30 years and we both have our own independent identities and successes (as well as shared ones). We are still very close and loving. Neither needs the other to live but after so long our emotional involvement with each other is as deep and foundational as the roots of a great tree. Losing her (or her me) would be utterly devastating and how we identify ourselves has nothing to do with it.
By al_borland 2025-09-2914:465 reply Mindfullness as a treatment for loneliness is strange to me. This doesn't actually help with the problem of being alone, it could just make someone be more OK with it.
As someone who spends a lot of time alone, one of my big fears is having a medical emergency, even just choking on food, and dying from something that would be easily avoided had another person been in the house. I've gone and looked up how to give myself the Heimlich maneuver on myself, and play out that scenario in my head all the time... or trying to get to a neighbor's house or just outside where someone might see me. Mindfulness won't help if this is how I meet my fate, actually community and relationships would.
It's quite a rare thing to die by choking. It just doesn't feel like it, which is where mindfulness can help. You do more dangerous things every day like walking (falls) and driving, eating (obesity), and brushing your teeth (gum disease), so if you want to work on prevention it's better to have a head that correctly assesses risk and spends your limited time/money/effort optimally.
By SirHumphrey 2025-09-2915:592 reply But then choking is not the only health emergency when having people around is a plus. Even active people sometimes suffer from heart attacks and having someone being there doing chest compressions or at least calling for help leads to quite difficult health outcomes versus being found hours later. Same goes for strokes…
By al_borland 2025-09-2916:131 reply Exactly. Many of the statistically more dangerous things are either chronic issues (obesity) or inherently in public (driving). Choking, a heart attack, etc are acute issues happening in private, which is where the fear lies. Some of those acute issues could be made more likely by the chronic issue, but not always. And if the chronic issues are known, a person can proactively get tests to hopefully avoid an acute issue. My dad just had a quadruple bypass, identified as a need based on a proactive calcium scan, rather than waiting for a heart attack.
I had a mildly embarrassing shower fall that ended in a deep wound. I tried to sleep it off not realizing how bad it was and ended up having to get surgery. Because of the location of the injury, there was a big risk of infection.
I was alone, but luckily I was only 19 and healthy at the time. But I came away with a new understanding of the dangers of these things and whys there’s so much advertising to older people it. I can imagine a frail individual not surviving something like that if alone.
By al_borland 2025-09-2919:17 Glad you were able to make it out ok. That’s another thing I think about often. I will often double back to grab my phone before I do something knowingly risky, like climbing on something. I don’t want to test how hard my survival instinct kicks in to find other means to get to help if left in a bad spot.
I’m thankful my dad is into tech and has an Apple Watch. He does a lot of walking, watch is good to keep him mobile. But just last year he stepped backward off a curb and fell in a parking lot. The Apple Watch went off and was ready to call for an ambulance had he needed it.
20 years ago he was worried about falls with his mom, he was thinking of solutions for this and wanted to make a device the seniors would need to check-in with every hour. A missed check-in would trigger a call to emergency contacts. The various monitors on the watch seem much more elegant and less annoying, while being a step up from Life Alert.
However, with the Apple Watch needing a smart phone, charging, and general know-how, I don’t see it as a viable general purpose safeguard for seniors. At least not for a while longer. I don’t think my would get a smart watch for fall detection, and she’s made some comments that worry me. I think she’s fallen several times and hasn’t really told anyone.
By Herring 2025-09-2916:16 Yes, roughly speaking meditation is inner work. You are still gonna have things to do out in the world.
It's like someone advises you to go to the gym and you say but I drive everywhere. Yes they're not conflicting. In fact unless you live in a place like NYC or London, you need to be good at both.
By BobaFloutist 2025-09-2916:371 reply I think probably the idea is that Mindfulness helps you make peace with yourself and trouble-shoot your personality, both of which could make it easier to make connections with other people.
By criddell 2025-09-2920:22 Are people who lack connections with other people lonely by definition?
By jmkni 2025-09-2916:50 "Mindfullness" only works for people who are already happy
By jimkleiber 2025-09-2916:09 I think so much of it is our fear of dealing with conflicts and running away. Mindfulness, if it helps us have the courage to talk with people, apologize, forgive, and reconcile relationships with ourselves and others, can probably be super helpful. However, I think a lot of it has us actually move farther away from others, retreating into ourselves and then yeah, if you need someone to take you to the hospital, the relationships aren't there or aren't so immediate to help with that.
I think I feel you and I hope that if something like that were to happen, you would have people willing to offer and give that help and you'd be willing to ask for and receive that help.
By bookofjoe 2025-09-2915:00 Here you go: https://www.bookofjoe.com/2025/09/my-entry-47.html
