"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

Dear Prole,

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 de-ranked, 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.

Jason Erickson, a writer for NaturalBlaze.com, says:
"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 f&^$k'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.

But the real clincher is that GV, the venture capital arm of Google's parent company, Alphabet, has also 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.

Mic drop.

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."

Check, please.

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 ix-nayed 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 toe 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:

In June 2019, Google rolled out yet another algorithmic change.

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 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.

supplements goggle
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.

About the author

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.