Visit our Re-post guidelines
What If I told you that Google is now a drug company that uses mind control tactics to manipulate behavior? Would you believe me?
"The censorship being applied (by Google) to alternative health is nothing less than demonic," Zach Vorhies, Google Whistleblower
"Google betrayed its mission statement of making info 'universally accessible & useful.' They're now weaponizing their monopoly to censor info that challenges corporate interests."
The Google Grid
I started investigating the ties between Google and Big Pharma in late 2018, soon after my employees and I noticed that HoneyColony, our online health and wellness magazine, was losing organic traffic.
In 2016, following four years of existence and hundreds of well sourced articles, we were getting 500,000 unique visitors a month. Whoot Whoot. But then traffic started dwindling in 2018 and by August 2019, we'd lost more than 45 percent of our traffic.
Our newly engaged SEO editor informed us that Google's changes were made under what was called 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.
Google described the change as "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.
Today, accredited professionals who run websites such as Mercola.com, Greenmedinfo, Natural News, and SelfHacked are also losing posting privileges, getting banned, deranked, and basically being digitally assassinated. It's happening to those who stand for health freedom and natural remedies and who criticize Big Anything.
Dr. Mercola, a reputable physician and author, whose website predates Google, personally told me at this year's biohacking conference that he had lost 90 percent of his traffic. When I told him I was dubbing the censorship "technofascism," he found the term apropos. In his keynote talk, he not only warned people about the dangers of electromagnetic pollution but invited hundreds of attendants to stop using Google altogether. A Google Detox, is a huge undertaking.
Today Google's influence on our lives and in the digital marketing space is immeasurable. There are about two TRILLION searches a year on Google.
Alas, now Google is a weaponized tool serving a sick agenda, one that ultimately serves their own interests.
One excellent reason to stop using Google is that organic searches are dead. What I mean is that the most popular search terms will no longer come up. They're now using "autosuggestions," which is known to be a simple yet powerful mind control tool. (In the past few weeks the Google search terms have gotten a bit more friendly. (See this video to learn more).
Maybe that's why Google incredulously 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.
Update: in the past few weeks, Google has peppered in some positive keywords.
September 1st 2019 results
September 17th 2019 results
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 on an extremely biased political and socio-economic agenda--one that is jeopardizing the health and human rights of everyone on the planet."
Here's a memorable quote from Orwell's 1984: [The Truth] was "reissued without any admission that any alteration had been made. Even the written instructions which Winston received, and which he invariably got rid of as soon as he had dealt with them, never stated or implied that an act of forgery was to be committed; always the reference was to slips, errors, misprints, or misquotations which it was necessary to put right in the interests of 'accuracy'."
Google: Don't Be Evil
In the 2013 novel, The Circle by best selling author Dave Eggers, the main character Mae Holland lands what she views as a dream job, working for a powerful tech company called "The Circle."
I read the book while on a secluded beach in Greece in the summer of 2017; I was living as a digital nomad in a small village in the Peloponnese. The state of America was just starting to get unhinged in an audacious new way. The Circle with its sprawling campus, perks, supposed utopian company culture and new age of civility and transparency was obviously about a parallel-universe that very much resembled Google.
Alas, Mae's idealism and perception are slowly squashed as she uncovers she's been working for a company whose hidden agenda will affect the lives of all of humanity... in a very negative way. She then exposes the truth and tries to undo part of the harm she was an accomplice to.
You could say that Zach Vorhies experienced a similar fate but in actual life. The 39-year-old senior software engineer for Google/Youtube for eight and a half years used to think "Google was what was right in the world."
By 2017 (maybe at the same time I was reading The Circle) he was waking up to the truth and undeniable deception: Google was really building what he refers to as "AI censorship weapons." So he summoned the courage, risked his life, and turned into a whistleblower, leaking 950 damning pages to the Department of Justice and Project Veritas.
"The censorship that is being applied (by Google) to alternative health is nothing less than demonic," says Zach Vorhies. "Google betrayed its mission statement of making info 'universally accessible & useful.' They're now weaponizing their monopoly to censor info that challenges corporate interests."
In this brave new world, if you are looking for holistic health and nutrition websites, those articles are now buried in favor of Big Pharma. You have to add the site's address, i.e greenmedinfo.com, to the search for any articles to come up. Clearly, Big Pharma wants to shut down sites that empower people to be their own best health advocate cut into the profits of pharmaceutical companies.
"The establishment medical sites like WebMD are b.s.," says Vorhies. "What [people] are finding is that what independent medical journalists are saying actually makes a lot of sense and are improving health. So what is happening is that they are going those [sites]."
He confirmed that the recommendation engine was just saying 'well this is obviously better than that' so it was boosting up the real content that people were searching for.
"Google is putting their thumb down on that," confirmed Vorhies. "Because they can't have that because what it does is derails the plan for socialized health care, [they don't want people] to prevent the diseases that they are supposedly needing to cure via supposed expensive pharmaceutical intervention."
Meanwhile, other social media platforms like Youtube (owned by Google) are also demonetizing channels they deem "dangerous", including ones that speak out against vaccines, for instance. Vimeo has forbidden any users to publish anti vaccine information, MailChimp blocked members from sending emails about vaccine awareness, while Amazon has actually removed books from its collection regarding vaccine safety, claiming that they're peddling misinformation.
How is this not the modern version of the burning of the Library of Alexandria?
Sick Ties: Big Pharma & Google
Consider that people use Google to search for about 1 billion health questions a day, states author and health professional Joe Cohen in his article about being censored. At some point, 80 percent of Internet users have searched for a health-related topic online, according to a recent study.
That means that now, a large swath of the population will be funneled to information that benefits Google and Big Pharma.
Why would Google care about promoting Big Pharma? Because they have much to gain. Google's owner, Alphabet, whose annual revenue rose 23 percent to $136.8 billion last year, also owns pharmaceutical subsidiaries.
In 2013, Google founded Calico, run by Arthur Levinson, former CEO of the biotechnology corporation Genentech's (a subsidiary of Roche). Calico's mission is to understand the biology that controls lifespan and treat age-related diseases. Two years after that, 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 collaboration cost $715 million and 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 sans prescription drugs. And to top it off, GV, the venture capital arm formerly called Google Ventures, has invested in Vaccitech--a company described as "the future of mass vaccine production." 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.
Given that Google is not only a search engine, but also a drug company, it can hardly claim to be a neutral arbiter of information. "We can't have the pharmaceutical industry buying search results and pushing down competitors. That is the definition of antitrust collusion," says Vorhies.
Fake News To Defend Google: Don't Believe the Bull
Recently a colleague, the editor in chief of Health Freedom News, shared with a propaganda piece with me titled Why Google's Crackdown on Fake Medicine Is So Important.
"Look at this garbage," he wrote in an email. "The article flat out LIES about the safety of supplements being unregulated."
Before even diving into the piece and that particular fallacious point, let's establish that mainstream media has become the establishment's little bitch, propagating tons of fake news stories. Not only because journalists are lazy or asleep or bias, but because there are paid pseudo-journalists and big ag/big pharma apologists who get into mainstream rags.
The first thing I generally do as a reporter when I've identified fake news is look up the author to see who sent them. In this particular case, Lloyd Minor just happens to be the Dean of the Stanford University School of Medicine. Most readers wouldn't blink at this. Harumph. Google and Stanford have a long and close history. In other words, there's a conflict of interest:
- Founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin are Stanford graduates.
- When Google went public, Stanford made hundreds of millions selling Google stock. (Perhaps Stanford still owns stock but privacy regulations prohibit revealing specific investments).
- Stanford's Center for Internet and Society has long been generously funded by Google. Ironically, according to Propublica, "the center's privacy research proved damaging to the search giant in the past two years." Two Stanford researchers at the center helped uncover Google privacy violations that led to the company paying a record $22.5 million fine). Not surprisingly Google called one of them the "Bolshevik of the Internet world" and accused the other of being "incompetent."
The Faux Faith of Modern Science
"Google recently announced that it would no longer accept ads for 'unproven or experimental medical techniques.' This is a welcome first step, and I am hopeful that this action will have an impact and encourage others to follow," Minor writes in what is arguably a sloppily written opinion piece.
The paragraph is really Googleygook and super vague but it basically drives the point home that alternative health is co-opting real science for the sake of profits.
"People want to believe medical science gives us, at any given moment, the best of all possible worlds," writes investigative journalist Jon Rappoport in a piece titled Shocker: Comparing deaths from medical treatment, vitamins, all US wars. "
In another piece titled Faking Medical Reality, Rappoport adds, "when mainstream advocates attack so-called alternative or natural health, they tend to mention that their own sacred profession is based on real science, on studies, on clinical trials."
Modern science took a terrible turn ages ago. Corporate influence, conflicts of interest, ego and greed have corrupted the science of science if you will. The results are bad scientific practices, a dearth of independent research, misinformation and studies designed to produce favorable results -- and not for the health of the individual.
Big Pharma is arguably more concerned with competition than consumer protection.
Now if we dive into Minor's blog, he cites examples of sites that he calls "fake" that promote stem cell therapy and CBD to establish that Google is working to protect our safety. Nonsense.
I'll focus on CBD since I am considered an authority and have been covering the politics and selling the oil since the end of 2015, long before everyone and their mama, including Kim Kardashian West and Martha Stewart were offering CBD Oil.
He purports that CBD is not yet medically proven for most of the conditions for which they are being advertised to the public today. While there certainly are a lot of charlatans who poison the alternative health industry to make a quick buck, this statement follows a false narrative that I have come across before, which serves FDA's agenda to dominate the CBD marketed, estimated at 22 billion by 2022.
Let's set the record straight, there's a lot that we already do know about CBD oil. Government officials and Big Pharma reps would just like the masses to think otherwise because the FDA approved a fake synthetic CBD oil called Epidiolexb which is being promoted as a safer alternative to naturally-sourced CBD oil.
The health benefits of CBD have been established by a variety of studies. Furthermore, the World Health Organization report found CBD to be safe and nonaddictive. And the irony is that government red tape is what stifles more independent research from going forward, to begin with.
"Since this keeps coming up; for those of you that believe or repeat the falsehood that cannabis 'simply hasn't been researched,' there is plenty of research," says Master Herbalist Elizabeth Moriarty. "There are plenty of clinical trials in the US alone and in other nations as well."
As Rappoport puts it, "The FDA and its "quack-buster" allies go after vitamins, demean "unproven remedies," and generally take every possible opportunity to warn people about 'alternatives,' on the basis that they aren't scientifically supported. Meanwhile, the very drugs these mobsters are promoting, and certifying as safe and effective, are killing and maiming people at a staggering rate."
So let's look at some facts.
- The American medical system kills 225,000 people per year---106,000 as a direct result of pharmaceutical drugs, details Dr. Barbara Starfield in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
- Every year, in the US, between 76,000 and 137,000 hospitalized patients die as a direct result of the drugs, according to another study in JAMA.
- According to the National Institute of Health, every year 2.2 million hospitalized patients experience serious adverse reactions to the drugs. (This study does not take into account people taking pharmaceuticals who died as a consequence of the drugs, without being admitted to hospitals.)
Now let's look at how deadly vitamins are!
Rappaport points out that in 2010, not one single person [in the US] died as a result of taking vitamins (Bronstein, et al, (2011) Clinical Toxicology, 49 (10), 910-941).
In 2004, three people reportedly died due to vitamins. Of these, two people were said to have died as a result of megadoses of vitamins D and E, and one person as a result of an overdose of iron and fluoride. Data from: 'Toxic Exposure Surveillance System 2004, Annual Report, Am. Assoc. of Poison Control Centers.'"
"Left unchallenged, the deceptive marketing we see today could undermine real potential benefits for future generations," says Minor.
How ironic. Vitamins are dangerous but pharmaceutical products are supposedly immune from the criminal intentions of big pharma.