"I've asked this question to physicists and the answers I got seem to imply that it's NO, this doesn't have the implications people are drawing from it."

This is almost certainly the correct take, yes. At the macroscopic level, everything you interact with is essentially as real as it seems, even if some other kind of quantum non-realism is true.

It's a strange claim to hear that local realism has just been falsified, because I thought JS Bell had already proved in 1964 that local realism was impossible to reconcile with the evidence!

There's actually two common (and subtly distinct) ways in which the concept of "locality" is used in physics.

In relativity, "locality" is the idea that cause-and-effect must mediate through space and that influences in any one area must only come from adjacent areas of space. This is standard stuff from wave mechanics. No "action-at-a-distance", no wormholes, no instantaneous global influence.

At the turn of the 20th century, it was novel to make this a fully-general principle for the first time, because hitherto some things, like Newton's gravity, had been thought to propagate the universe instantly.

In QM, "locality" is the idea that "variables" are fully encoded in a region of space occupied by the hypothesised "particle". Basically, if you fire a bullet, it's trajectory and speed are the relevant "variables" which determine where it hits.

It's the latter, QM-style of locality which has been proven inconsistent with the evidence.

In the 1930s, it was thought QM was showing such remarkable results that it might be showing inconsistency with realism. And there have always been those with a broadly anti-science and anti-rational agenda who want to fill the gaps.

Indeed we see in hindsight that physicists were largely ignoring the possibilities, tied up with their own theoretical errors, or politically persecuting those with the answers. In 1928 DeBroglie made an ill-received suggestion that proceeded from the same kind of concept as Bohmian mechanics ultimately did in 1952, which was also ill-received.

Von Neumann was also thought in 1932 to have produced a proof which showed QM was incompatible with realism - a proof that was later falsified, although it still seemed to exert a dead-hand effect long afterwards.

Bohmian mechanics is a "non-local realist" theory which posits a guiding "pilot wave". The easiest analogy I find for this is setting a rubber duck onto the sea and letting it travel wherever the waves take it. It is "non-local" because it is the sea which determines where the duck ends up, not the duck - the trajectory and speed of the duck are not variables local to the duck, and where the duck ultimately ends up cannot be determined by any measurement of the duck itself.

I can't see why these facts have any grave implications for our everyday lives, since once physics is wrested from the hands of physicists (many of whom have strange ulterior agendas that directs their behaviour, their attentions, and determines the kind of explanations they want to find or advance), it becomes apparent that the broad concepts are fairly familiar.

Mathematics and the physical sciences have always been abused to draw improper conclusions, going at least as far back as the dawn of civilization, as we seen in the numerology and astrology of Sumer. Stargazing was a useful field that allowed one to organize calendars and predict the best time to plant and harvest. People decided that if the stars can do that, why can't they tell if you are going to win a war or have a successful child? That's how astrology was born. People were extremely impressed with the way that arithmetic could predict how many urns of beer would fit in the hold of a ship, so they thought it should also be able to predict how long a man's life would be and other things.

The Greeks followed this tradition and added more. They were impressed with the discovery that harmony is produced by small whole-number ratios and built a cosmology out of it. Empedocles was impressed how so many colors could be produced by just four base colors (which oddly to modern sensibilities didn't include any cool colors like blue or green), and he invented a chemistry based on four elements, inspired by the science of painting.

Newton's theory of gravitation led to the adoption of a clockwork universe by many scholars. Darwin's discovery of natural selection led to scholars trying to fit absolutely everything into an evolutionary framework, even things like the racial makeup of man (Hitler's attempt to eliminate "less fit" races) and the social acceptance of new ideas (meme theory). Einstein's theory of relativity led to three-quarters of a century of bad philosophy claiming that his theory of how one calculates the motion of particles based on a given frame of reference proved that "everything is relative" including God, morality, and even truth itself.

All of these are nonsense, of course, and were never rationally supported by the mathematics or science that gave rise to them, but people tend to think in terms of paradigms. Evolution is a nice paradigm so they try to understand everything in terms of evolution. Newtonian mechanics is a nice paradigm so they try to understand everything in that paradigm.

This is just another example of the same nonsense, people not understanding the limits of what has been scientifically proven and adopting it as a general paradigm.

You make a valid point. The discovery regarding quantum non-locality is certainly groundbreaking, but it's important to clarify the actual implications. The research doesn't definitively prove anti-realism or unreality, as some might suggest. It shows that quantum particles can influence each other without being physically close, which is different from saying reality itself is non-existent or subjective. Many physicists agree that we still lack a clear understanding of how or why this happens, and there's much more to explore. The findings mainly apply to quantum systems and don’t directly impact our classical experiences or understanding of reality.

Yes. It plays an important role in enabling publishers to sucker the public into buying content in which sensational speculations are erected on a vanishingly thin foundation of scientific justification.

No, it won't mean that you will have randomly whales and bowls of petunias falling from the sky.

It may, however, affect future quantum cryptography:

Device-independent quantum key distribution allows two users to set up shared cryptographic key without the need to trust the quantum devices used. Doing so requires nonlocal correlations between the users.

So, there is some real use for it..

You ask:

Does the universe not being locally real mean anything for our daily lives?

If you are wondering if quantum entanglement being true means gravity will cease, cats really will walk around dead and not dead simultaneously, and whether or bodies will start crawling out of graves, I think you can safely reject the idea that non-locality has a sudden and important impact on our daily lives. As others have pointed out, quantum computation may or may not eventually influence our lives. WP points out the challenges with applied QM:

Quantum computers are not yet practical for real work. Physically engineering high-quality qubits has proven challenging. If a physical qubit is not sufficiently isolated from its environment, it suffers from quantum decoherence, introducing noise into calculations. National governments have invested heavily in experimental research that aims to develop scalable qubits with longer coherence times and lower error rates

Since the beginning, QM has been a source of philosophical conflict with scientists like Einstein looking for ways to undermine the implications. Physicists prior to QM had a very mechanistic understanding of the universe that comes in no small part of Newtonian mechanics. General relativity also affords us a wonderful mathematical framework for making calculations. Einstein is still showing us how powerful math is with recent research validating his theory. Here's an article explaining how data from observations of double pulsars affirms Einstein's calculations. (spaceaustralia.com). QM undermines our certainty and powers of prediction in the world.

Today, there are still multiple interpretations of QM findings, and the Copenhagen interpretation from my understanding as a non-physicist is that it is the interpretation taught at the undergraduate level making it the received view. There are certain topics in QM like wave-particle duality, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and Bell's theorem which can be unsettling to people invested in their worldviews particularly where they clash with these aspects of QM above. The SciAm article you reference notes it saying:

The journey from fringe to favor was a long one. From about 1940 until as late as 1990, studies of so-called quantum foundations were often treated as philosophy at best and crackpottery at worst. Many scientific journals refused to publish papers on the topic, and academic positions indulging such investigations were nearly impossible to come by.

For modern "skeptics", QM is a constant source of woo (rationalwiki.org). Consciousness is caused by QM. Telepathy is supported by QM. QM in this way becomes like a magical force that shaky arguments can use to take a legitimate, but arcane topic in physics as a means of support of an otherwise specious argument. This even holds in science, where some physicists have begun asking questions about whether some modern physics is pseudoscience. Sabine Hossenfelder, a German physicist has a series of videos (YT) questioning some physics research which has no empirical evidence.

What is important to understand is that science has a social dimension. Researchers in the philosophy of science like Fleck, Kuhn, Feyerabend, and Gross have explored how science is actually done, and surprise! people aren't computers and behave like people. That means science is vulnerable to human motivations like sensationalism, specious argumentation (formal and otherwise), and other excesses of rhetoric and venality. Max Planck has contributed his name to a physics constant, a first-rate research institute, and the Planck's principle:

In sociology of scientific knowledge, Planck's principle is the view that scientific change does not occur because individual scientists change their mind, but rather that successive generations of scientists have different views.

You say:

I just find it odd that people are drawing conclusion like anti-realism when the research doesn't say that.

You shouldn't find it odd. Modern psychological research in the spirit of Kahneman and Tversky show that human beings are very susceptible to cognitive bias. Research by Dunning and Kruger show human beings struggle with self-insight. And the power of emotions and the limbic system to, as Goleman calls it, engage in "limbic hijacking" means that human beings, for all their capacity to do logic still struggle mightily with irrationality which is itself a topic of much philosophical contention.

If there's any doubt in your mind that intellectuals are somehow above irrationality themselves just because they are scientists or medical doctors, I encourage you to read up on the life Ignaz Semmelweiss. He entered into a conflict with the medical establishment by insisting that after working with corpses, doctors could reduce infant death by washing their hands. Given miasma theory was dominant at the time, he was ignored, ridiculed, and eventually betrayed by his wife and thrown into an asylum. It just goes to show that MDs and PhDs are just as susceptible to the disease of stupidity as the rest of us.

The intersection with theoretical physics and our daily lives is vanishingly small. It simply doesn't concern most people. It's why political philosophy or the social sciences can safely ignore physical ontology and whether or not the universe is locally real or not.

This came out after my writing the below answer:
Quantum Teleportation, one fanciful consequence of non-locality, seems to have moved a step from sci-fi to everyday reality.

Original answer

While your question focuses on non-locality in daily life, it's better to take it in the broader framing of non-locality, causality/non-determinism, duality, superposition, entanglement etc. etc.: In short QM in daily life.

Woo-ology Crash Course

There is a large cottage industry of folks connecting QM ideas (more correctly terms) to mystic/healing/wellness ideas.

In my college days in the 70s and 80s some of my friends and teachers were quite enamored of these: [Ive not read these but I think they set the direction for what follows]

1. Fritjof Capra — Author of Tao of Physics
2. Gary Zukav — Author of The Dancing Wu Li Masters and The Seat of the Soul.
3. Erich von Daniken who 'proved' that God was an extra-terrestrial

This was before Deepak Chopra and a host of like woo-sters:
^{It must be noted that many of these were highly respected scientists before becoming woo-sters}

1. David Bohm — Creator of Bohmian QM, author of Wholeness and Implicate Order
2. Amit Goswami — A theoretical quantum physicist and author of books like The Self-Aware Universe and Quantum Mechanics: An Overview. Link between QM consciousness and spirituality
3. F. David Peat — author of Synchronicity: The Bridge Between Mind and Matter and The Black Hole: Gravity and the Nature of Time
4. Rupert Sheldrake — Morphic resonance, which blends consciousness with a more expansive view of nature, it touches on areas where science and mysticism meet.
5. Fred Alan Wolf — A physicist and author of The Quantum Leap and The Yoga of Time Travel.
6. Michael Talbot — Author of The Holographic Universe, Reality as a hologram

Why do I mention these?

A recurring thread in all these is the link between QM ideas, consciousness and spirituality.

In more detail:

QM-Spirituality (putative) links

1. Water Memory and Quantum Entanglement

Claim: Water has "memory," retaining the energetic imprint of substances even when diluted to the point where no molecules remain.

QM Connection: The quantum entanglement of water molecules supposedly records information about substances.

Real World Connection: This is often cited in explanations of homeopathy, suggesting water can "remember" healing properties and transfer them to the body.

Often cited in discussions of homeopathy. A popular reference is the work of Jacques Benveniste, who claimed water retains the "memory" of substances. For more, Homeopathy and Water Memory.

2. Quantum Fluctuations and Homeopathy

Claim: Homeopathic remedies, despite extreme dilution, work because quantum fluctuations amplify the healing "essence" of the original substance.

QM Connection: Zero-point energy or vacuum fluctuations are claimed to sustain the essence of the original molecule.

Real World Connection: This bridges homeopathy with quantum field theories in very general terms.

Claims connecting quantum fluctuations to homeopathy: Quantum Healing in Homeopathy.

3. Observer Effect and Healing Intentions

Claim: Your thoughts and intentions can directly influence physical systems, like healing a person or altering the structure of water molecules.

QM Connection: The observer effect — where measurement collapses a quantum state — is invoked to argue that human consciousness shapes reality.

Real World Connection: Experiments like Masaru Emoto's "structured water" studies claim that kind or cruel words change water crystals’ shapes.

Masaru Emoto's work on water crystals and the effect of intentions or words on their structure is central to this claim.

4. Nonlocality and Psychic Connections

Claim: Psychic phenomena like telepathy or remote healing are explained by quantum nonlocality, where particles influence each other instantaneously across distances.

QM Connection: Human minds are likened to entangled particles capable of instantaneous communication.

Real World Connection: Cited as proof of the "interconnectedness of all things."

Prominent figures like Dean Radin author of Entangled Minds have written extensively on psychic phenomena and nonlocality.

5. Quantum Coherence and Alternative Medicine

Claim: Alternative therapies like acupuncture or energy healing create "quantum coherence" in the body's energy field, restoring health.

QM Connection: Coherent quantum systems (like Bose-Einstein condensates) are used as metaphors for balance in bodily energy fields.

Real World Connection: Suggests the body operates like a quantum computer, and illness arises from "decoherence."

Claims of "quantum coherence" in energy healing are frequently promoted by alternative medicine practitioners.

Example: Quantum Touch: Healing Through Energy.

6. Superposition and Multidimensional Healing

Claim: Illness exists in a superposition of states, and healing aligns you with the healthiest quantum possibility.

QM Connection: The wave function represents all possible health outcomes, and intention "collapses" this into the desired state.

Real World Connection: Implies you can heal yourself by aligning with the "highest frequency" in the multiverse.

This idea appears in metaphysical and New Age healing literature. Look at popular books or websites like Gaia.

7. Quantum Fields and Vibrational Medicine

Claim: Every organ or cell vibrates at a unique quantum frequency, and diseases disrupt this harmony. Healing involves re-tuning these vibrations.

QM Connection: Quantum field theory (QFT) is taken as a mystical force underlying life and health.

Real World Connection: Devices like "frequency generators" are marketed to restore vibrational balance.

Devices marketed to "retune vibrations" often cite quantum field theories. For example, the Rife machine claims to use frequencies for healing. See Rife Therapy.

8. Time Reversal and Emotional Trauma Healing

Claim: Emotional trauma creates quantum "time loops" in your energy field. Healing techniques can reverse these loops to prevent future illness.

QM Connection : From time symmetry in quantum equations.

Real World Connection: Used in practices like past-life regression and emotional clearing therapies.

Concepts like reversing emotional trauma loops are found in past-life regression therapy and similar practices. Example: Past Life Regression Healing.

So... is this ALL true?

Many people — of many persuasions — will jump and ask: Is this all true?

So first a basic point of logic: some of those cited above may be wrong (some may be ill-intentioned charlatans) and some may be true.
The »all« is unjustified.

On the other hand there is ample evidence that some of these things work. Here is the well-known atheist Matt Dillahunty admitting that in some life-threatening situations prayer is confirmed to work and then trying very hard to explain it away.

I find it all very amusing...

So either prayer works because there's an old guy-in-the-sky who's pleased with the genuflections.
Or its pure placebo effect.

Are there no alternatives like the creation of a positive mindset?

Here is an excerpt from a conversation between the prominent rationalist-atheist Matt Dillahunty and the Christian Glenn Scrivener.

Scrivener: ...the thing that makes you intrinsically religious (as against social questions) is that this is the most important thing in your life or helps me frame the rest of my decisions.

Dillahunty: I wouldn't even dispute that...

The sorts of things that you're describing as religiosity are important to humans and may in fact be beneficial my objection is to whether or not there's actually a truth behind that — well God thing.

I used to irritate some atheists because I would say I can prove to you that prayer works and I can demonstrate it right now:

If you're in a cave-in and you pray you are more likely to be rescued, not because there's some God listening to answer that but because prayer has a calming effect on you which extends the amount of time that you can be trapped which extends the likelihood that you can be rescued. The question then becomes if you know that it's the calming that extends the amount of time could you do the same thing with meditation.

I would like to hope that on a philosophy forum at least we not be hamstrung by scientism-ist preconceptions.

Steven Work's additions

^{Context at meta}

The example of prayer ties together the mentioned statement that 'prayer sometimes works in life threating situations

Also, if ego may shift between many-worlds that are 'close', how far is that from defining consciousness as overlapping? Also psychic connections are implied, and perhaps some worlds more at faster rates so a level of future-sense may be suggested. And since much of your answer above suggests Quantum Theory, hence I thought to make these suggestions.

No, it just means that any theory that explains the predictions of QM must be non local (in the sense that our observations cannot fully be explained by processes that are at or slower than the speed of light).

Any interpretations of these results that imply that the world is “not real” is incoherent from the get go. You can go in the lab and actually view measurements occurring. We can all see them. Even if the property that we are measuring does not fully exist definitely before measurement, we are still dealing with something that is “really there” out there.

As a very crude analogy, a banana does not become food until we put it in our mouths. Thus, the property of it being food doesn’t exist until then. This doesn’t change the fact that there is a banana out there before it enters our mouths. If there was “nothing really out there”, what are we measuring? Even the idea of a measurement is an anthropomorphic term and has nothing to do with physics, which is why the so called “measurement problem” exists.

Anyone who uses QM to posit that the world “isn’t actually real” is engaging in incoherence and is anti scientific.