“When there were no external records that you could refer to, even the outline of your own life los[es] its sharpness.” – George Orwell, “1984,” Chapter 3, Part I
I hope this missive finds you well. If not, I’ll blame it on yet another act of technofascism.
Your rights to be healthy without drugs and speak freely are being thwarted. Alas, a large swath of the general populace will never know their health choices are being eliminated.
This is an uphill battle of Sisyphean proportions. A virtual witch hunt. A deletion reminiscent of the Library of Alexandria burning. A multi-tentacled greedy schema.
Those of us who stand for health freedom and, who criticize Big Anything, are losing posting privileges, getting banned, being buried, finding ourselves deranked, and proverbially becoming imprisoned.
It sounds conspiratorial because it is. We are blowing the whistle. But it’s become a silent one.
Content is literally disappearing from the Internet. High-quality online health sites that have been negatively affected include HoneyColony, Greenmedinfo, Dr. Axe, Erin Elizabeth of Health Nut News, SelfHacked and Dr. Joseph Mercola.
The stifling of natural remedies in favor of peddling pharmaceuticals and monetizing medicine isn’t new. We gave our health over to the faux faith of maligned science and technology ages ago, back in 1910, when a teacher—not a doctor—wrote the so-called Flexner Report. Since WWII, the pharmaceutical industry has steadily netted increasing profits to become the world's second largest manufacturing industry after war toys.
Health journalist S.D. Wells wrote in his eBook, "25 Amazing (and Disturbing) Facts About the Hidden History of Medicine:”
“Five score and two years ago, a man named Abraham Flexner was hired by John D. Rockefeller to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies being taught by medical colleges and institutions, with the ultimate goal of dominating control over pharmaceuticals.
“With partnerships including Andrew Carnegie and JP Morgan, a new ‘doorkeeper’ would exist to influence legislative bodies on state and federal levels to create regulations and licensing ‘red tape’ that strictly promoted drug medicine while stifling and shutting down alternative, inexpensive natural remedies.”
What is new and novel is that now Big Tech is collaborating with Big Pharma to suppress free speech. They’ve now modified search algorithms to align and appease an arguably sick agenda in the name of the supposed safety and protection of the public.
“Evidently, the fact that a level playing field of information—which is exactly what the Internet was promised to be—must be worrying to those who rely on the financial support of Big Pharma and establishment medicine.”
The future is now. The zombies are here.
It was just four years ago that Chet Bowers, the now-deceased author, lecturer and environmental activist, wrote: “Is the Digital Revolution Sowing the Seeds of a Techno-Fascist Future?” Bowers described technofascism as “an increased reliance upon computer-mediated learning at all levels of education to spur conformity of thinking.”
For technofascism to operate seamlessly, Bowers said, “there needs to be a significant percentage of the population that is hyper-patriotic, thinks in clichés and is willing to support the use of imprisonment and torture of those who challenge the rise of techno-fascism, especially those labeled as environmentalists(...).”
It’s 2019, for fuck’s sake. Or wait, is it “1984?”
More than 10 years after directing the documentary film, “Vanishing of the Bees,” my message has evolved to include all of us: We, like the bees, are slowly being subjected to sublethal doses of poisons. Not only are we subjected to more than a billion pounds of pesticides each year that make us sicker, these pesticides are also are literally robbing us of IQ points.
And, as we become aware of the role of epigenetics on physical and mental health, we realize that the absorption of (or exposure to) toxins extends well beyond the food supply.
Social media platforms—toxins for the mind and intellect—are using “persuasive technology” to feed the masses processed manufactured information while omitting or fudging whatever doesn’t jive with Big Healthcare aka Sick Care.
As Bowers puts it:
“The populace assumes they are being given accurate information and over time are only able to digest short explanations. In addition to conformity, fascism necessitates the loss of historical memory and a perceived crisis or endpoint that requires the collective energy and loyalty of the young and old.”
So now it’s about making Trump the enemy. Look over here while we do all this shit and make veritable sick enemies out of all of you.
We’re being reduced to pawns in a game of divide and conquer, obsessively gazing at blue-lit screens, like in a twisted version of the Greek myth of Narcissus where we never recognize who we truly are: a magnificent species worthy of complete health and vitality. But alas, in this rendition, we are too busy engaging in palatable online vitriol and trollism, and ingesting toxic bullshit. Instead of debating the subjects at hand with civilized decorum, we’re being polarized and we’re engaging in red herrings and ad hominem attacks. For instance, you begin talking about the negative impacts of 5G and someone on social media calls you a tin hat-wearing loon and discredits you, instead of focusing on all the experts that have spoken up and shared scientific evidence against this technology.
In this balkanization, we become part of sub-tribes, making it easier for corporations and government to manage and manipulate us.
Smoke and mirrors. Cloak and daggers. Crowd control.
All sickness. No health.
#GoogleExposed during the decade of vaccines
In 2006, Google became so popular that the Oxford English Dictionary officially minted the company into a verb. Thirteen years later, Google is not only the most powerful search engine, it’s also a drug company. It's a beautifully crafted Trojan Horse for Big Pharma.
Simply put, Google's parent company, Alphabet, owns pharmaceutical subsidiaries. In 2013, Google founded Calico, run by Arthur Levinson, former CEO of the biotechnology corporation Genentech (a subsidiary of Roche). Calico’s mission is to understand the biology that controls lifespan and to treat age-related diseases. Two years later, Alphabet founded Verily Life Sciences (previously Google Life Sciences). Both pharma companies are partnering with others and having babies of their own.
Verily joined forces with the European pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to form a new drug company, Galvani Bioelectronics. The $715-million collaboration aims to treat diseases by targeting electrical signals in the body, a novel field of medicine called “bioelectronics.” Incidentally, GlaxoSmithKline generates billions by manufacturing vaccines.
Next, in 2016, Sanofi SA and Verily partnered to address the diabetic epidemic, a condition that from a functional medicine point of view can be addressed without prescription drugs.
Meanwhile, Google’s peeps are also fraternizing with Big Pharma. For instance, in January 2019, BusinessWire reported that Mary Ellen Coe, Google’s president of Customer Solutions, was joining Merck’s Board of Directors. Merck is another huge vaccine producer.
Founded by scientists at Oxford University, Vaccitech’s end goal is to develop a vaccine that would be the first in the world to fight all types of flu.
If all goes well, Vaccitech’s shot could potentially be ready for launch in 2023. The potential development has been described as a “Holy Grail.” Yet to others, a one-size-fits-all flu shot sounds like a disastrous future. It doesn’t take into account or respect biodiversity. Not to mention that as sovereign humans, we should be able to choose what we do with our bodies, not be forced to subject ourselves to questionable medicine.
Is it just coincidence that vaccine safety has become so maligned in the media as of late? People are being ostracized like never before for merely questioning alternative views. Vaccine safety has become such a polarizing topic because it’s meant to be. To pave the way for what is coming—mandatory vaccines, not only for children, but for adults, too.
Stated another way: Google And Friends stand to earn a shitload of money from vaccinating whatever they can stick a needle into, multiple times over.
In 2012 alone, the world's 11 top pharmaceutical companies generated $700 billion-plus in profits on vaccines. Take into account that long before the age of instant internet communication and social media, lofty goals were set in motion in regards to vaccinations.
Sherri J. Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM, writes:
“The National Vaccine Plan, developed by the U.S. Department of Human Services (HSS), is the roadmap for a 21st century vaccine and immunization enterprise. It lays bare the incestuous public-private relationship between the pharmaceutical vaccine manufacturers, the U.S. government and the World Health Rulers.”
For more on the plan, read the objectives of “Healthy People 2020,” put forth by representatives from more than 50 Federal Agencies, including the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODHP).
“The objectives in 'Healthy People 2020' represent the massive expansion of a nanny-state government, intent on taking over every area of a person’s life and eliminating health choices,” writes Tenpenny.
Did you know that partners from all over the world came together with a global commitment to vaccination, declaring 2010 - 2020 the “Decade of Vaccines?” Meanwhile, in January 2019, the World Health Organization—in perfect timing—stressed the importance of getting your child vaccinated to protect them, and others, from deadly diseases. Not doing so poses a “global threat.”
How about the $4 billion-plus paid out to those who have been impacted by vaccine injuries? Given what is in the pipeline, isn’t it a bit odd that simply engaging in an educated conversation/exploration, or presenting opposing evidence, results in being ixnayed from the Internet? Oftentimes, opposers do not have informed arguments nor are they scientifically literate. And if you use intuition on what’s best for your own body? Fuggedaboutit. Here’s more about vaccine censorship.
“It’s really scary what is happening,” says one health influencer who wished not to be named. “So many being shut out of Google, now Vimeo rejecting [anti] vaccine content. Mailchimp shutting down accounts and keeping the lists of people that email about anti-vaccine. The lengths they go.”
In early July, Vimeo announced that it will no longer publish sites critical of vaccines, or sites that question vaccine safety.
Facebook, whose committee members include former Big Pharma employees, has also censored legitimate scientific inquiry and debate regarding vaccine safety.
But let’s table this particularly inflammatory "V" word for right now. The focus of this story is not about the very sensitive topic of vaccines. You may believe in them despite your criticism of Big Pharma. And I personally am not one to throw out the baby out with the bathwater. With that said, the "V" word is arguably a linchpin. Or the great divider.
The point I’m illustrating here is that Big Pharma’s tentacles—full of suction and sway—now extend to Big Tech, and that prohibiting the sharing of (health) information—a tenet of the Net—is wrong. Unless you do not believe in the First Amendment.
If you bother to look, the conflicts of interest are obvious. Google has a clear agenda that serves pharmaceuticals, and its success is now directly built into its search algorithms.
Read the ingredients: Google is now processed & non-organic
Today, social media platforms “want you to tow a line,” Podcast Host Joe Rogan told Jesus Hotep in a recent episode.
Back in the good ole’ days, organic search results closely matched the user’s search query. The algorithm was based on relevance and popularity, unless you paid Google extra to get listed on top as an obvious ad—just like you need to fork over more money if you want a beloved’s crypt to be stored at eye level in a mausoleum.
Popular vertible search terms helped connect Googlers with the information they were actually looking for. This in turn spurred writers to pivot and employ search engine optimization—such as keywords—when crafting content online.
By June 2016, our online magazine and marketplace HoneyColony—whose mission is to empower you to be your own health advocate—was getting about 500,000 unique visitors a month, according to Google Analytics. We were genuinely and organically garnering interest and offering value with solid well-researched articles.
Until we weren’t.
What happened? Google changed its algorithms.
Updates on Google aren’t new. The company has gone through thousands of updates throughout its existence. And every once in a while, it rolls out a major algorithmic update. But until now, there’s been nothing as sinister as the recent changes, which apparently are powerful enough to do serious damage to a health-oriented site’s revenue, alongside the site's organic traffic. Unless those sites tow the line, of course.
In the past, Google has said:
“As with any update, some sites may note drops or gains. There’s nothing wrong with pages that may now perform less well. Instead, it’s that changes to our systems are benefiting pages that were previously under-rewarded."
However, in reality, we’ve witnessed a slow sneaky purge where crowdsource relevance is now seemingly irrelevant. In short, Google—and other tech companies—are exercising more and more control over what pops up when you search. (Social media companies, by the way, are currently conducting surveys to gauge if people are upset. I’ve seen one on Instagram. And I was just invited to participate in a focus group about tech companies, where I’ll need to sign a non-disclosure agreement).
In August 2018, traffic to HoneyColony.com dwindled 30 percent. We scratched our heads during marketing meetings, wondering what we were doing wrong, based on Google’s standards. And then, we learned we had been impacted by what would be referred to as the “Medic Update.”
Google described the change as a “a broad, global, core update.” But according to Search Engine Land, upon further analysis from SEO consultants, the focus of the changes made under the "Medic Update" centered around the medical and health space, as well as “Your Money Your Life” types of sites that focus on money and life events.
“This specific focus is something Google will not confirm,” said Search Engine Land.
Here are some of the sites, many in the health and wellness space, that have lost visibility, according to Search Engine Land:
Sites impacted in previous core updates were once again affected. “On average, the impact was smaller than the August ‘Medic Update,’” as measured by MozCast.
But many in the space would disagree on the severity of the impact. “Devastating” may be a more appropriate word than “smaller,” depending on if you’ve personally experienced content go from page one of a Google search to being buried on page six.
“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth,” said George Orwell, in “1984.”
Furthermore, unless you add "HoneyColony.com," or "Mercola.com" to a key term, you won’t find the content our sites publish. “Even skipping ".com" will minimize your search results,” writes Mercola, whose Google search results had been topping the charts organically for years. Since these updates, Mercola’s site traffic has been slashed by about 99 percent.
Shadow-banned. Ostensibly scrubbed.
Also, Google used to rank pages based on whether an author could prove his/her expertise, on how many people visited a page or on the number of other reputable sites that linked to that page. How about when an author has a degree? No more.
Google now buries expert views if they're deemed "harmful" to the public, explains the SEM post:
"There has been a lot of talk about author expertise when it comes to the quality rater guidelines (…) This section has been changed substantially … [I]f the purpose of the page is harmful, then expertise doesn't matter. It should be rated Lowest!"
Who decides? What qualifications do Google quality checkers possess? Who is deciding what’s harmful?
And dare I ask, what happens to those of us who stand for health freedom, who believe that lifestyle changes and addressing nutrient deficiencies are the foundation of health? You do realize that Big Pharma just pilfers from nature, isolating, patenting and synthesizing to make money?
How will you know if well-sourced information filled with facts are buried from the one search engine you’ve taken for granted or trusted a bit too much? The cyber realm is sadly no longer the place to look for valid information, and yet our reliance is undeniable.
No room for independent thought. Swallow the pill and trust. We got your back. Are some of us just waking up like in an episode of WestWorld, or has shit has just reached a new level of terror?
“It’s impossible to know what is what because nothing is what it seems,” to quote “The Great Hack, ”an upcoming documentary about the explosive Cambridge Analytical/Facebook data scandal.
Which brings me to another change: autosuggestions.
The most popular search terms will no longer come up. Incredulously, Google states that the auto-suggestions are actually "predictions, not suggestions."
Here's Google’s official statement:
"You’ll notice we call these autocomplete ‘predictions’ rather than ‘suggestions,’ and there’s a good reason for that. Autocomplete is designed to help people complete a search they were intending to do, not to suggest new types of searches to be performed. These are our best predictions of the query you were likely to continue entering.
“How do we determine these predictions? We look at the real searches that happen on Google and show common and trending ones relevant to the characters that are entered and also related to your location and previous searches."
HocusPocus Google, who made you resident magician?
This is just Googledygook. Gross. Bullshit. A brilliantly sinister way to program the masses. Autosuggestions are arguably the simplest yet strongest tool for mind control.
Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedinfo, writes:
“Google is auto completing the search fields of billions of users with false information (topics ranging from natural health to candidates for election), based not on objective search volume data, but o n an extremely biased political and socio-economic agenda—one that is jeopardizing the health and human rights of everyone on the planet.”
The articles we publish at HoneyColony.com are referenced to studies published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature—the commonly recognized gold standard for research. But that doesn’t matter now that Big Pharma propaganda is disseminated via Google.
This way to your FEMA camp!
In late June 2019, a top Google executive-turned-whistleblower divulged to investigative journalist James O’ Keefe, founder of Project Veritas, that Google is indeed manipulating search results, filtering content and dubbing information news based on Google’s agenda.
Don’t believe you are being bamboozled? View the disparities in volume yourself by going to Google Trends. Compare the actual search volume with Google’s amazing new "predictions" feature.
These actions trump principles of truth and justice. It’s called social engineering. Human experimentation even. What it isn’t is a search engine synonymous with looking for and finding objective answers. The Veritas video was promptly removed by YouTube (owned by Google) and then by Vimeo.
Sick ties: Big Pharma & Big Tech
While I found another CDC study on Duckduckgo to illustrate this point, the original link (below) is no longer working, even though it did just a week ago.
I called the CDC's press department to ask if they could tell me where the link had gone. So far, no word.
Consider that in his book, “1984,” Orwell describes how history and facts are recalled and rewritten again and again, invariably reissued without any admission that any alteration had been made. Journalists have witnessed information go missing before their eyes while doing research. I now use different search engines to look for stuff, and often find opposing narratives. I take extra precautions to link to the actual source and also to actually interview people.
Now back to pill popping. Americans do it more than anywhere else in the world. In 2016, more than 4.5 billion prescriptions were filled, earning the pharmaceutical industry more than $200 billion, according to an article by Gary Null published on The Centre for Research on Globablization (CRG), an independent research and media organization based in my hometown of Montreal.
Despite all the pill gobbling, we’re still the sickest country on the planet. And all these drugs are often just adding to the problem. Take into account that many of the FDA-approved pills also cause harm. According to a 2011 report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, in that same year drugs were associated with 2 – 4 million people in the U.S. experiencing “serious, disabling or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.”
Meanwhile, America also ranks pretty low when it comes to life expectancy. According to America’s Health Ranking, “Compared with other developed and many developing nations, the United States continues to rank at or near the bottom in indicators of mortality (...) while continuing to exceed other countries in health spending."
In 2019, the U.S. will spend about $3.5 trillion on healthcare, in addition to a $1.5-trillion loss in work and wages due to illness.
What’s fascinating is that prescription meds like xannies and SSRIs are a part of American culture, woven into narratives, songs, movies and casual conversation. It’s accepted and common, but still sick—what German-born American social psychologist Erich Fromm would have described as a “socially patterned defect.”
So let’s put things into perspective: Opioid crisis. Antibiotic-resistance epidemic. Grotesque obesity stats. Rising rates of metabolic syndrome. Skyrocketing autoimmune conditions. Modernized health crime like never before.
According to the New York Times, cities are even suing major drugstore chains and Walmart, contending they helped orchestrate the distribution of billions of painkillers that devastated communities.
Pills and needles aren’t really about us, despite the convincing guise. To hell with the Hippocratic Oath of do no harm; profits trump the long-term care of patients.
Null writes, “Instead of making efforts to fund disease prevention and educate the public, prevention has been abandoned altogether.”
There is no money in cures. Management of symptoms is what keeps Big Pharma in business. Curing patients isn’t a sustainable business model.
With all these facts laid out, can we safely say—both figuratively and literally—that western medicine may not have all the answers? It’s no wonder so many are going elsewhere for answers. Sectors such as nutrition, preventative medicine and personalized holistic health have grown by leaps and bounds. In 2016, alternative medicine industry revenue was estimated to at about $14.3 billion in the U.S. (Of course this industry also has its own host of issues).
Congress, corruption, and censorship
What is the U.S. government—federal agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—doing about all this you may ask? While some politicians, even presidential candidates, have spoken out against Big Pharma and the lack of proper oversight, it’s all ultimately useless. Big Pharma doesn't just own Google. It owns Congress, too.
Dr. Raeford Brown, a pediatric anesthesia specialist at the UK Kentucky Children's Hospital and chair of the FDA Committee on Analgesics and Anesthetics, told Yahoo Finance:
“The pharmaceutical industry pours millions of dollars into the legislative branch every single year. In 2016, they put $100 million into the elections. That’s a ton of money.”
As one reporter wrote in the Guardian, “Drug money is coursing through the veins of Congress.”
And we’re worried about the Russians? Really?
Overall, Congress gets paid to grant Big Pharma carte blanche. The billions of lobbying dollars Big Pharma has spent over the years, and the different lobby groups involved, is enough to make a woke person nauseous.
Lobbying is how big business controls government. Big Tech has followed suit, which will come handy given what OpenSecrets.org characterizes as the recent “tremendous pressure from regulators and lawmakers . . . over a litany of issues ranging from privacy to antitrust.” Big Tech is now spending millions on lobbyists (paid persuaders), too, joining the top “Usual Suspects,” which predominantly includes Big Pharma.
Currently, tech companies like Google are indemnified against lawsuits for manipulating content on their platform under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, says Sayer Ji. Until this act is repealed, tech companies will continue to operate with impunity, essentially above the law.
In June 2019, Senator Josh Hawley(R-Mo.) introduced Senate Bill 1914, “A bill to amend the Communications Decency Act to encourage providers of interactive computer services to provide content moderation that is politically neutral.”
The bill is referred to as the “Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act.” Per traditional process, it will next be considered by committee before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate for a vote. But according to SkoposLabs, the bill has only a 2-percent chance of being enacted. Meanwhile, a week ago, The House Antitrust Subcommittee launched a bipartisan investigation into "competition in digital markets."
In a press release, Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman David N. Cicilline (D-R.I.), said:
“The growth of monopoly power across our economy is one of the most pressing economic and political challenges we face today. Market power in digital markets presents a whole new set of dangers. After four decades of weak antitrust enforcement and judicial hostility to antitrust cases, it is critical that Congress step in to determine whether existing laws are adequate to tackle abusive conduct by platform gatekeepers or whether we need new legislation to respond to this challenge.”
(Involving government in online policing merits its own story).
Meanwhile, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced in late July that it’s launching an antitrust probe into online platforms. The DOJ is responsible for reviewing and enforcing issues relating to mergers, monopolies, competition and price-fixing. Given the agency’s track record of allowing perverse unjust mergers, I wouldn't hold my breath.
What is happening is that social media platforms are getting fined. But so what? Facebook was just hit with a record $5-billion fine from the Federal Trade Commission and a $100-million fine from the Securities and Exchange Commission, in late July. The EU, meanwhile, has fined Google billions of dollars four separate times in recent years for violations of European monopoly policies.
Fines are paltry in comparison to the power being gained and the profits that Big Tech/Pharma/Government/Elites stand to make. Can we expect any real accountability, given Big Tech is sleeping with all-powerful Big Pharma?
The politicians who drank the Big Pharma KoolAid or have ties with Big Pharma are making arguments that social media and the openness of information is causing harm. In a recent letter to Google and Facebook, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote:
“There is strong evidence to suggest that at least part of the source of this trend [spreading supposed misinformation] is the degree to which medically inaccurate information about vaccines surface on the websites where many Americans get their information.”
What is this “strong evidence?” Why not let the people decide and allow veritable independent journalists to do their job, offering accessibility to independent studies?
“The algorithms which power these services are not designed to distinguish quality information from misinformation or misleading information, and the consequences of that are particularly troubling for public health issues.”
This cuts both ways, or at least it it used to. Instead, Big Tech is taking an unequivocal stance on what constitutes health freedom and safety, blaming the openness of social media as the reason for a measles outbreak. Puhleeze. This hoopla or fake narrative is manufactured to push an agenda that involves pills and needles, while smearing credible people, hiding information and vaporizing sovereignty.
Most people don't understand the power of Google in their lives, nor do they have any idea that Google has rolled out impactful updates and has more in the works. But when I ask, I get a "Yeah, you know what, I did kind of notice something was different about Google."
Abracadabra autosuggestions at play.
And then there is the glut of fake news confusing the public. Take for instance this quote on ThinkProgress concerning evidence of Google’s preferential leanings:
“What appears to be happening is that some conservatives are massively distorting tech companies’ attempts to protect against foreign election interference or restrict the distribution of hateful views, stirring up conspiracy theories that the companies are demonstrating blanket bias against conservatives.”
Bullshit. Don’t believe that the algorithmic changes are being made only to protect you from another “rigged” election or to save you from four more years of Trump. And don't believe that tech companies haven’t been allowed to cross a line. This is a perfect example of both a red herring and a false narrative.
Wikipedia: online encyclopedia or Google sidekick & deathknell?
“I am always looking for ‘all-around raconteurs,’” Jimmy Wales told me via email in 2006, when I reached out to ask if I could write for his company, Wikipedia. That was before I got wrapped up in a swarm of bees. I went on to make my film, "Vanishing of the Bees,” about colony collapse disorder and the systemic pesticides that contribute in large part to their death.
Back then, Wales and Wikipedia co-founder, Larry Sanger, regularly had a banner splattered on their homepage, hitting up online visitors for money to stay in business. Thirteen years later, Google has helped fund a fleet of raconteurs by investing $3.1 million into Wikipedia, bringing Google's total contribution to $7.5 million.
Wikipedia is now Google’s obedient sidekick. As journalist Louise Matsakis wrote in Wired:
“The decision isn’t altruistic. The company also has used Wikipedia articles to train machine-learning algorithms, as well as fight misinformation on YouTube.”
Google now ranks Wikipedia in many searches as a totally legit encyclopedia, even though it’s an open source site that has been described as an “often untrustworthy source of information.” On Wikipedia, users can update entries in real time. Sanger himself described it as a “broken system.”
According to Null and Richard Gales:
“Content about medical products and therapeutic regimes are penned by completely unqualified editors with no medical background . . . Yet Wikipedia editors state with authority that there are no proven health benefits in non-conventional and natural medical therapies. Given that their employers are part of Big Pharma, can we really believe them?”
Google’s algorithms are giving better rankings to content from a bunch of anonymous unvetted contributors over veritable independent journalists educated in functional medicine who inspire conversation, question assumptions, challenge the status quo and encourage curiosity. But we’re the castaways?
In truth, there exist tons of studies and articles demonstrating the efficacy of complementary and alternative medicine. Many independent board-certified physicians and functional medicine practitioners utilize them in their practices with excellent results.
Take for example, Dr. Joseph Mercola, an actual board-certified D.O. and respected author whose website predates Google. He has written hundreds of valid articles and has been an inspiration to millions. But now, many will never know his contributions, because, he says, "Google is now manually lowering the ranking of undesirable content, based on Wikipedia’s assessment of the author or site."
Below is what you’ll find if you search for Joseph Mercola. Go ahead kids, try it at home.
"Whatever happened you vanished, and neither you nor your actions were ever heard of again." – from “1984.”
Technofascist future: Will we resist?
I am only scratching the surface of this well spun-out (worldwide) web.
You likely have never heard of me, but I have been banned for life from PayPal, scrubbed off Kiva and GoFundme, had our Facebook ads temporarily shut down, and have been buried by Google. In truth, I can write a whole series about technofascist acts in the health and wellness space.
Just recently, I learned that Care2, a site that connects people with causes, is closing down its “Healthy Living and Causes” sections “as the company sharpens its focus on advocacy work and nonprofit partners.” What does that really mean? Not only are they shutting down the section, they are removing all their articles. Poof. Gone. Vaporized.
“I know it's super frustrating to see content that you've written disappear,” one editor wrote to me. Super frustrating? I’ve never had my content deleted. It’s suspicious. Infuriating. Puzzling. Technofascist.
As Mercola writes:
“It’s a frightening future. Big Tech has joined the movement, bringing in a global concentration of wealth to eliminate competition and critical voices—voices that bring awareness . . . .as our rights, freedoms and competition erode into a fascist sunset, all disguised as a means to protect you from ‘misinformation.’”
"Will enough of the public recognize the dangers that lie ahead and will they be able to articulate the importance of what is being lost, including how what is being lost undermines the diversity of cultural commons experiences that are more ecologically sustainable? The most critical question is whether there will be resistance to how everyday lives are being increasingly monitored, motivated to pursue the increasingly narrow economic agenda of the emerging techno-fascist culture and stripped of historical values and identity?"
In "1984," the torture is too much. Winston, the main character, betrays his lover, Julia, in exchange for his own life. She does the same. "Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing," Orwell writes.
Will we stand up for rights for health freedom and sovereignty? Or sit back and play with our phones while we lose our rights and are forcefully stuck with needles?
"Anytime you are truly free, there is a cost to pay," Dr. Cornel West recently told Joe Rogan.
I agree. But the alternative is ghastly. I don't believe we have to be slaves to Big Brother. Speak out and share. Tend to your gut and your brain with micronutrients, and access the cleanest food. Use Duckduckgo and other search engines.
Meanwhile, Organic Consumers Association is working with Mercola and other Health Liberty allies to create an alternative to technofascism.
As Orwell says, "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."
Maryam Henein, HoneyColony.com, is a Canadian investigative journalist, activist, functional medicine consultant, filmmaker and entrepreneur. She directed the documentary “Vanishing of the Bees.” Follow her on Twitter. Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit grassroots consumer advocacy organization. To keep up with OCA’s news and alerts, sign up here.