wakingtimes--2020-01-28--Google — A Dictator Unlike Anything the World Has Ever Known

Robert Epstein , who received his Ph.D. in psychology from Harvard in 1981 and served as the former editor in chief at Psychology Today , is now a senior research psychologist for the American Institute of Behavioral Research and Technology , where for the last decade he has helped expose Google ’ s manipulative and deceptive practices .
He explains what got him interested in investigating the internet search monopoly in the first place : “ In 2012 , January 1st , I received some emails from Google saying my website contained malware and that they were somehow blocking access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of Google ’ s blacklists .
My website did contain some malware .
It was pretty easy to get rid of , but it turns out it ’ s hard to get off of a Google blacklist .
That ’ s a big problem .
I started looking at Google just a little bit differently .
I wondered , first of all , why they were notifying me about this rather than some government agency or some nonprofit organization ?
Why was a private company notifying me ?
In other words , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Second , I learned they had no customer service department , which seemed very strange , so if you have a problem with Google , then you have a problem because they don ’ t help you solve the problem .
I learned also that although you can get onto a blacklist in a split second , it can take weeks to get off a blacklist .
There have been businesses that have gotten onto their blacklists and have gone out of business while they ’ re trying to straighten out the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my eye — because I ’ ve been a programmer my whole life — was I couldn ’ t figure out how they were blocking access to my website , not just through their own products … Google.com , the search engine , or through Chrome , which is their browser , but through Safari , which is an Apple product , through Firefox , which is a browser run by Mozilla , a nonprofit organization .
How was Google blocking access through so many different means ?
The point is I just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company , and later in 2012 , I happened to be looking at a growing literature , which was about the power of search rankings to impact sales .
This was in the marketing field and it just was astonishing .
In other words , if you could push yourself up one more notch in their search results , that could make the difference between success or failure for your company ; it could mean a lot more income .
It turns out that this initial research was saying that people really trust @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply asked a question .
I wondered whether , if people trust those higher rank search results , I could use search results to influence people ’ s opinions , maybe even their votes.
” What Epstein discovered through his subsequent research , which began in 2013 , is that yes , biased search results can indeed be used to influence public opinion and sway undecided voters .
What ’ s more , the strength of that influence was shocking .
He also eventually discovered how Google is able to block website access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His findings were published in 2016 in U.S. News & World Report .
1 .
They ’ re a surveillance agency with significant yet hidden surveillance powers .
As noted by Epstein : 2 .
They ’ re a censoring agency with the ability to restrict or block access to websites across the internet , thus deciding what people can and can not see .
They even have the ability to block access to entire countries and the internet as a whole .
The most crushing problem with this kind of internet censorship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what you don ’ t know .
If a certain type of information is removed from search , and you don ’ t know it should exist somewhere , you ’ ll never go looking for it .
And , when searching for information online , how would you know that certain websites or pages have been removed from the search results in the first place ?
The answer is , you don ’ t .
For example , Google has been investing in DNA repositories for quite a long time , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to Epstein , Google has taken over the national DNA repository , but articles about that — which he has cited in his own writings — have all vanished .
3 .
They have the power to manipulate public opinion through search rankings and other means .
While surveillance is Google ’ s primary business , their revenue — which exceeds $ 130 billion a year — comes almost exclusively from advertising .
All that personal information you ’ ve provided them through their various products is sold to advertisers looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Google Can Shift Your Perception Without Your Knowledge Epstein ’ s controlled , randomized , double-blind and counterbalanced experiments have revealed a number of different ways in which Google can shift public perception .
The first effect he discovered is called SEME , which stands for search engine manipulation effect .
For a full description of the basic experiment used to identify this effect , please listen to the interview .
In summary , the aim of his experiment was to see whether search results biased toward a particular political candidate would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and leanings .
“ I had predicted , when we first did this , that we would get a shift , ” Epstein says , “ because … people do trust higher ranked search results , and of course we had biased the search results so that , if in that first group , someone was clicking on a high-ranking search result , that would connect them to a webpage which made one candidate look much better than the other … I predicted we could get a shift in voting preferences of 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way off .
We got … a shift of 48 % , which I thought must be an error because that ’ s crazy … I should note that in almost all of our experiments , especially those early ones , we deliberately used undecided voters .
That ’ s the key .
You can ’ t easily push the opinions or voting preferences of people who are partisan , who are strongly committed to one party or another , but people who are undecided , those are the people who are very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always find a way to use undecided voters .
In these early experiments , the way we guaranteed that our voters were undecided was by using people from the U.S. as our participants , but the election we chose was the 2010 election for the prime minister of Australia .
They ’ re real candidates , a real election , real search results , real webpages , and of course , because our participants were from the U.S. they were not familiar with the candidates .
In fact , that ’ s why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we get this almost perfect 50/50 split regarding who they ’ re going to vote for , because they don ’ t know these candidates .
The information they ’ re getting from the search , that , presumably , is why we get a shift.
” Another thing Epstein noticed was that very few seemed to realize they were seeing biased search results .
In other words , the manipulation went virtually undetected .
In a second experiment , they were able to achieve a 63 % shift in voter preference , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by inserting a pro-opponent result here and there — they were able to hide the bias from almost everyone .
What this large-scale investigation revealed is that the few who actually notice the bias are not protected from its effects .
Curiously , they actually shift even further toward the bias , rather than away from it .
As evidenced by other studies , the pattern of clicks is a key factor that makes search bias so powerful : 50 % of all search selections go to the top two items and 95 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first page of search results .
Subsequent experiments revealed that this click pattern is the result of conditioning .
Most of the things people search for are simple matters such as local weather or the capital of a country .
The most appropriate and correct answer is always at the very top .
This conditions them to assume that the best and truest answer is always the most high-ranked listing .
Google May Have Shifted Millions of Votes in 2016 Elections The ramifications of the search engine manipulation effect can be immense .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ public opinion is one thing ; actually using that power is another .
So , Epstein ’ s next target was to determine whether Google is using its power of influence or not .
“ Early 2016 , I set up the first-ever monitoring system , which allowed me to look over the shoulders of people as they were conducting election-related searches on Google , Bing and Yahoo in the months leading up to the 2016 presidential election .
I had 95 field agents ( as we call them ) , in 24 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which took a lot of work .
And this is exactly , by the way , what the Nielsen company does to generate ratings for television shows .
They have several thousand families .
Their identities are secret .
They equip the families with special boxes , which allow Nielsen to tabulate what programs they ’ re watching … Inspired by the Nielsen model , we recruited our field agents , we equipped them with custom passive software .
In other words , no one could detect the fact that they have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that software allowed us to look over their shoulders as they conducted election related searches … We ended up preserving 13,207 election-related searches and the nearly 100,000 webpages to which the search results linked … After the election , we rated the webpages for bias , either pro-Clinton or pro-Trump … and then we did an analysis to see whether there was any bias in the search results people were seeing .
The results we got were crystal clear , highly significant statistically … at the 0.001 level .
What that says is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were seeing was real , and it didn ’ t occur because of some random factors .
We found a pro-Clinton bias in all 10 search positions on the first page of Google search results , but not on Bing or Yahoo .
That ’ s very important .
So , there was a significant pro-Clinton bias on Google .
Because of the experiments I had been doing since 2013 , I was also able to calculate how many votes could have been shifted with that level of bias… At bare minimum , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have shifted to Hillary Clinton.
” On the high end , Google ’ s biased search results may have shifted as many as 10.4 million undecided voters toward Clinton , which is no small feat — all without anyone realizing they ’ d been influenced , and without leaving a trace for the authorities to follow .
According to Epstein ’ s calculations , tech companies , Google being the main one , can shift 15 million votes leading up to the 2020 election , which means they have the potential to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Google Has the Power to Determine 25 % of Global Elections Many who look at Epstein ’ s work end up focusing on Google ’ s ability to influence U.S. politics , but the problem is much bigger than that .
“ As I explained when I testified before Congress , the reason why I ’ m speaking out about these issues is because , first of all , I … think it ’ s important that we preserve democracy and preserve the free and fair election .
To me , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem is much bigger than elections or democracy or the United States .
Because I calculated back in 2015 that … Google ’ s search engine — because more than 90 % of searches worldwide are conducted on Google — was determining the outcomes of upwards of 25 % of the national elections in the world .
How can that be ?
Well , it ’ s because a lot of elections are very close .
And that ’ s the key to understanding this .
In other words , we actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections around the world , which tend to be very close .
In that 2010 Australian election , for example , the win margin was something like 0.2 % … If the results they ’ re getting on Google are biased toward one candidate , that shifts a lot of votes among undecided people .
And it ’ s very , very simple for them to flip an election or … rig an election … It ’ s very , very simple for Google to do that .
They can do it deliberately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In other words , some top executives at Google could decide who they want to win an election in South Africa or the U.K. or anywhere .
It could be just a rogue employee at Google who does it .
You may think that ’ s impossible … [ but ] it ’ s incredibly simple … [ A ] senior software engineer at Google , Shumeet Baluja , who ’ s been at Google almost since the very beginning , published a novel that no one ’ s ever heard of called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s fictional , but it ’ s about Google , and the power that individual employees at Google have to make or break any company or any individual .
It ’ s a fantastic novel .
I asked Baluja how Google let him get away with publishing it and he said , ‘ Well , they made me promise I would never promote it.
’ That ’ s why no one ’ s ever heard of this book.
” A Dictator Unlike Anything the World Has Ever Known Another , and even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could allow its biased algorithm to favor one candidate over another without caring about which candidate is being favored .
In 2016 , Epstein also discovered the remarkable influence of search suggestions — the suggested searches shown in a drop-down menu when you begin to type a search term .
This effect is now known as the search suggestion effect or SSE .
Epstein explains : “ Initially the idea was they were going to save you time .
That ’ s the way they presented this new feature .
They were going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or based on what other people are searching for , what it is you ’ re looking for so you don ’ t have to type the whole thing .
Just click on one of the suggestions .
But then it changed into something else .
It changed into a tool for manipulation .
In June 2016 , a small news organization … discovered that it was virtually impossible to get negative search suggestions related to Hillary Clinton , but easy to get them for other people including Donald Trump .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that could influence people somehow .
So , I tried this myself , and I have a wonderful image that I preserved showing this .
I typed in ‘ Hillary Clinton is ’ on Bing and on Yahoo , and I got those long lists , eight and 10 items , saying , ‘ Hillary Clinton is the devil .
Hillary Clinton is sick ’ … all negative things that people were actually searching for .
How do I know that ?
Because we checked Google trends .
Google trends shows you what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough , people were actually searching for all these negative things related to Hillary Clinton .
Those [ were ] the most popular search terms .
So , we tried it on Google and we got , ‘ Hillary Clinton is winning , Hillary Clinton is awesome.
’ Now you check those phrases on Google trends and you find no one is searching for ‘ Hillary Clinton is awesome.
’ Nobody .
Not one .
But that ’ s what they ’ re showing you in their search suggestions .
That again got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing experiments because I said , ‘ Wait a minute , why would they do this ?
What is the point ?
’ Here ’ s what I found in a series of experiments : Just by manipulating search suggestions , I could turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into a 90/10 split — with no one having the slightest idea that they ’ ve been manipulated.
” YouTube , which is owned by Google , also has enormous influence on public opinion .
According to Epstein , 70 % of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Google ’ s top secret Up Next algorithm , which recommends videos for you to view whenever you ’ re watching a video .
Just like the search suggestions , this is a phenomenally effective ephemeral manipulation tool .
There ’ s no record of the videos recommended by the algorithm , yet it can take you down the proverbial rabbit hole by feeding you one video after another .
Most people now have Amazon Prime .
If you are one of those who do , you can watch the following documentary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well worth your time to do so .
Epstein and many other experts provide a very compelling overview of the dangers that we discuss in our interview .
In my view , this is a must-watch and one to recommend to your friends and family .
A question Epstein raises is , “ Who gave this private company , which is not accountable to any of us , the ability to determine what billions of people around the world will see or will not see ?
” That is perhaps one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to answer this question in this documentary , “ The Creepy Line , ” which is a direct quote from Google ’ s executive chairman Eric Schmidt .
In his article “ Seven Simple Steps Toward Online Privacy , ” Epstein outlines his recommendations for protecting your privacy while surfing the web , most of which don ’ t cost anything .
You can access the article at : MySevenSimpleSteps.com “ My first sentence is ‘ I have not received a targeted ad on my computer or mobile phone since 2014.
’ Most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re bombarded with targeted ads constantly .
More and more people are telling me that they ’ re just having a conversation with someone , so they ’ re not even doing anything online per se , but their phone is nearby — or they ’ re having a conversation in their home and they have Amazon Alexa or Google Home , these personal assistants — and the next thing they know they start getting targeted ads related to what they were talking about .
This is the surveillance problem … The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use the internet , tablets and mobile phones , to preserve or protect your privacy , but almost no one does that .
So , the fact is that we ’ re now being surveilled 24/7 , generally speaking , with no awareness that we ’ re even being surveilled .
Maybe some people are aware that when they do searches on Google the search history is preserved forever … But it goes so far beyond that because now we ’ re being surveilled through personal assistants , so that when we speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] .
It goes even beyond that , because a few years ago Google bought the Nest company , which makes a smart thermostat .
After they bought the company , they put microphones into the smart thermostats , and the latest versions of the smart thermostats have microphones and cameras .
Google has been issued patents in recent years , which give them , basically , ownership rights over ways of analyzing sounds that are picked up by microphones in people ’ s homes .
They can hook you up with dentists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex therapists , with mental health services , relationship coaches , et cetera .
So , there ’ s that .
Location tracking has also gotten completely out of hand .
We ’ ve learned in recent months that even when you disable location tracking … on your mobile phone , you ’ re still being tracked.
” This is one of the reasons I strongly recommend that you use a VPN on your cellphone and computer , as this will prevent virtually anyone from tracking and targeting you .
There are many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one Epstein recommends , Nord VPN , which is only about $ 3 per month and you can use it on up to six devices .
In my view , this is a must if you seek to preserve your privacy .
How Google Tracks You Even When You ’ re Offline You can learn a lot about a person by tracking their movements and whereabouts .
Most of us are very naïve about these things .
As explained by Epstein , location tracking technology has become incredibly sophisticated and aggressive .
Android @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Google-owned operating system , can track you even when you ’ re not connected to the internet , whether you have geo tracking enabled or not .
As soon as you reconnect to the internet , all that information stored in your phone is sent to Google .
So , even though you may think you ’ ve just spent the day incognito , the moment you reconnect , every step you ’ ve made is shared ( provided you had your phone with you ) .
In terms of online tracking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realize that Google is tracking your movements online even if you ’ re not using their products , because most websites use Google Analytics , which tracks everything you do on that website .
And , you have no way of knowing whether a website uses Google Analytics or not .
To protect your privacy , Epstein recommends taking the following steps , seven of which are outlined in “ Seven Simple Steps Toward Online Privacy.
” The last one , Fitbit , is a more recent concern .

Google — A Dictator Unlike Anything the World Has Ever Known
Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times
Robert Epstein, who received his Ph.D. in psychology from Harvard in 1981 and served as the former editor in chief at Psychology Today, is now a senior research psychologist for the American Institute of Behavioral Research and Technology, where for the last decade he has helped expose Google’s manipulative and deceptive practices. He explains what got him interested in investigating the internet search monopoly in the first place:
“In 2012, January 1st, I received some emails from Google saying my website contained malware and that they were somehow blocking access. This means I had gotten onto one of Google’s blacklists. My website did contain some malware. It was pretty easy to get rid of, but it turns out it’s hard to get off of a Google blacklist. That’s a big problem. I started looking at Google just a little bit differently. I wondered, first of all, why they were notifying me about this rather than some government agency or some nonprofit organization? Why was a private company notifying me? In other words, who made Google sheriff of the internet? Second, I learned they had no customer service department, which seemed very strange, so if you have a problem with Google, then you have a problem because they don’t help you solve the problem. I learned also that although you can get onto a blacklist in a split second, it can take weeks to get off a blacklist. There have been businesses that have gotten onto their blacklists and have gone out of business while they’re trying to straighten out the problem. The thing that really caught my eye — because I’ve been a programmer my whole life — was I couldn’t figure out how they were blocking access to my website, not just through their own products … Google.com, the search engine, or through Chrome, which is their browser, but through Safari, which is an Apple product, through Firefox, which is a browser run by Mozilla, a nonprofit organization. How was Google blocking access through so many different means? The point is I just started to get more curious about the company, and later in 2012, I happened to be looking at a growing literature, which was about the power of search rankings to impact sales. This was in the marketing field and it just was astonishing. In other words, if you could push yourself up one more notch in their search results, that could make the difference between success or failure for your company; it could mean a lot more income. It turns out that this initial research was saying that people really trust those higher ranked search results. I simply asked a question. I wondered whether, if people trust those higher rank search results, I could use search results to influence people’s opinions, maybe even their votes.”
What Epstein discovered through his subsequent research, which began in 2013, is that yes, biased search results can indeed be used to influence public opinion and sway undecided voters. What’s more, the strength of that influence was shocking.
He also eventually discovered how Google is able to block website access on browsers other than their own. His findings were published in 2016 in U.S. News & World Report.
Google’s Powers Pose Serious Threats to Society
Google’s powers pose three specific threats to society:
1. They’re a surveillance agency with significant yet hidden surveillance powers. As noted by Epstein:
“The search engine … Google Wallet, Google Docs, Google Drive, YouTube, these are surveillance platforms. In other words, from their perspective, the value these tools have is they give them more information about you. Surveillance is what they do.”
2. They’re a censoring agency with the ability to restrict or block access to websites across the internet, thus deciding what people can and cannot see. They even have the ability to block access to entire countries and the internet as a whole.
The most crushing problem with this kind of internet censorship is that you don’t know what you don’t know. If a certain type of information is removed from search, and you don’t know it should exist somewhere, you’ll never go looking for it. And, when searching for information online, how would you know that certain websites or pages have been removed from the search results in the first place? The answer is, you don’t.
For example, Google has been investing in DNA repositories for quite a long time, and are adding DNA information to our profiles. According to Epstein, Google has taken over the national DNA repository, but articles about that — which he has cited in his own writings — have all vanished.
3. They have the power to manipulate public opinion through search rankings and other means.
“To me, that’s the scariest area,” Epstein says, “because Google is shaping the opinions, thinking, beliefs, attitudes, purchases and votes of billions of people around the world without anyone knowing that they’re doing so … and perhaps even more shocking, without leaving a paper trail for authorities to trace. They’re using new techniques of manipulation that have never existed before in human history and they are for the most part, subliminal … but they don’t produce tiny shifts. They produce enormous shifts in people’s thinking, very rapidly. Some of the techniques I’ve discovered are among the largest behavioral effects ever discovered in the behavioral sciences.”
While surveillance is Google’s primary business, their revenue — which exceeds $130 billion a year — comes almost exclusively from advertising. All that personal information you’ve provided them through their various products is sold to advertisers looking for a specific target audience.
How Google Can Shift Your Perception Without Your Knowledge
Epstein’s controlled, randomized, double-blind and counterbalanced experiments have revealed a number of different ways in which Google can shift public perception. The first effect he discovered is called SEME, which stands for search engine manipulation effect. For a full description of the basic experiment used to identify this effect, please listen to the interview.
In summary, the aim of his experiment was to see whether search results biased toward a particular political candidate would be capable of shifting users’ political opinion and leanings.
“I had predicted, when we first did this, that we would get a shift,” Epstein says, “because … people do trust higher ranked search results, and of course we had biased the search results so that, if in that first group, someone was clicking on a high-ranking search result, that would connect them to a webpage which made one candidate look much better than the other … I predicted we could get a shift in voting preferences of 2% to 3%. I was way off. We got … a shift of 48%, which I thought must be an error because that’s crazy … I should note that in almost all of our experiments, especially those early ones, we deliberately used undecided voters. That’s the key. You can’t easily push the opinions or voting preferences of people who are partisan, who are strongly committed to one party or another, but people who are undecided, those are the people who are very vulnerable. In our experiments, we always find a way to use undecided voters. In these early experiments, the way we guaranteed that our voters were undecided was by using people from the U.S. as our participants, but the election we chose was the 2010 election for the prime minister of Australia. They’re real candidates, a real election, real search results, real webpages, and of course, because our participants were from the U.S. they were not familiar with the candidates. In fact, that’s why, before they do the search, we get this almost perfect 50/50 split regarding who they’re going to vote for, because they don’t know these candidates. The information they’re getting from the search, that, presumably, is why we get a shift.”
Simple Trick Effectively Masks Search Bias
Another thing Epstein noticed was that very few seemed to realize they were seeing biased search results. In other words, the manipulation went virtually undetected.
In a second experiment, they were able to achieve a 63% shift in voter preference, and by masking the bias — simply by inserting a pro-opponent result here and there — they were able to hide the bias from almost everyone.
“In other words, we could get enormous shifts in opinions and voting preferences with no one being able to detect the bias in the search results we were showing them,” Epstein says. “This is where, again, it starts to get scary. Scarier still is when we moved on to do a national study of more than 2,000 people in all 50 states.”
What this large-scale investigation revealed is that the few who actually notice the bias are not protected from its effects. Curiously, they actually shift even further toward the bias, rather than away from it.
As evidenced by other studies, the pattern of clicks is a key factor that makes search bias so powerful: 50% of all search selections go to the top two items and 95% of all clicks go to the first page of search results.
“In other words, people spend most of their time clicking on and reading content that comes from high-ranking search results. If those high-ranking search results favor one candidate, that’s pretty much all they see and that impacts their opinions and their voting preferences,” Epstein says.
Subsequent experiments revealed that this click pattern is the result of conditioning. Most of the things people search for are simple matters such as local weather or the capital of a country. The most appropriate and correct answer is always at the very top. This conditions them to assume that the best and truest answer is always the most high-ranked listing.
Google May Have Shifted Millions of Votes in 2016 Elections
The ramifications of the search engine manipulation effect can be immense. Of course, having power to shift public opinion is one thing; actually using that power is another. So, Epstein’s next target was to determine whether Google is using its power of influence or not.
“Early 2016, I set up the first-ever monitoring system, which allowed me to look over the shoulders of people as they were conducting election-related searches on Google, Bing and Yahoo in the months leading up to the 2016 presidential election. I had 95 field agents (as we call them), in 24 states. We kept their identities secret, which took a lot of work. And this is exactly, by the way, what the Nielsen company does to generate ratings for television shows. They have several thousand families. Their identities are secret. They equip the families with special boxes, which allow Nielsen to tabulate what programs they’re watching … Inspired by the Nielsen model, we recruited our field agents, we equipped them with custom passive software. In other words, no one could detect the fact that they have the software in their computers. But that software allowed us to look over their shoulders as they conducted election related searches … We ended up preserving 13,207 election-related searches and the nearly 100,000 webpages to which the search results linked … After the election, we rated the webpages for bias, either pro-Clinton or pro-Trump … and then we did an analysis to see whether there was any bias in the search results people were seeing. The results we got were crystal clear, highly significant statistically … at the 0.001 level. What that says is we can be confident the bias we were seeing was real, and it didn’t occur because of some random factors. We found a pro-Clinton bias in all 10 search positions on the first page of Google search results, but not on Bing or Yahoo. That’s very important. So, there was a significant pro-Clinton bias on Google. Because of the experiments I had been doing since 2013, I was also able to calculate how many votes could have been shifted with that level of bias… At bare minimum, about 2.6 million [undecided] votes would have shifted to Hillary Clinton.”
On the high end, Google’s biased search results may have shifted as many as 10.4 million undecided voters toward Clinton, which is no small feat — all without anyone realizing they’d been influenced, and without leaving a trace for the authorities to follow.
According to Epstein’s calculations, tech companies, Google being the main one, can shift 15 million votes leading up to the 2020 election, which means they have the potential to select the next president of United States.
Google Has the Power to Determine 25% of Global Elections
Many who look at Epstein’s work end up focusing on Google’s ability to influence U.S. politics, but the problem is much bigger than that.
“As I explained when I testified before Congress, the reason why I’m speaking out about these issues is because, first of all, I … think it’s important that we preserve democracy and preserve the free and fair election. To me, it’s pretty straight forward. But the problem is much bigger than elections or democracy or the United States. Because I calculated back in 2015 that … Google’s search engine — because more than 90% of searches worldwide are conducted on Google — was determining the outcomes of upwards of 25% of the national elections in the world. How can that be? Well, it’s because a lot of elections are very close. And that’s the key to understanding this. In other words, we actually looked at the win margins in national elections around the world, which tend to be very close. In that 2010 Australian election, for example, the win margin was something like 0.2% … If the results they’re getting on Google are biased toward one candidate, that shifts a lot of votes among undecided people. And it’s very, very simple for them to flip an election or … rig an election … It’s very, very simple for Google to do that. They can do it deliberately, which is kind of scary. In other words, some top executives at Google could decide who they want to win an election in South Africa or the U.K. or anywhere. It could be just a rogue employee at Google who does it. You may think that’s impossible … [but] it’s incredibly simple … [A] senior software engineer at Google, Shumeet Baluja, who’s been at Google almost since the very beginning, published a novel that no one’s ever heard of called ‘The Silicon Jungle’ … It’s fictional, but it’s about Google, and the power that individual employees at Google have to make or break any company or any individual. It’s a fantastic novel. I asked Baluja how Google let him get away with publishing it and he said, ‘Well, they made me promise I would never promote it.’ That’s why no one’s ever heard of this book.”
A Dictator Unlike Anything the World Has Ever Known
Another, and even more frightening possibility, is that Google could allow its biased algorithm to favor one candidate over another without caring about which candidate is being favored.
“That’s the scariest possibility,” Epstein says, “because now you’ve got an algorithm, a computer program, which is an idiot … deciding who rules us. It’s crazy.” While this sounds like it should be illegal, it’s not, because there are no laws or regulations that restrict or dictate how Google must rank its search results. Courts have actually concluded that Google is simply exercising its right to free speech, even if that means destroying the businesses they demote in their search listings or black listings. The only way to protect ourselves from this kind of hidden influence is by setting up monitoring programs such as Epstein’s all over the world. “As a species, it’s the only way we can protect ourselves from new types of online technologies that can be used to influence us,” he says. “No dictator anywhere has ever had even a tiny fraction of the power that this company has.” Epstein is also pushing for government to make the Google search index a public commons, which would allow other companies to create competing search platforms using Google’s database. While Google’s search engine cannot be broken up, its monopoly would be thwarted by forcing it to hand over its index to other search platform developers.
The Influence of Search Suggestions
In 2016, Epstein also discovered the remarkable influence of search suggestions — the suggested searches shown in a drop-down menu when you begin to type a search term. This effect is now known as the search suggestion effect or SSE. Epstein explains:
“Initially the idea was they were going to save you time. That’s the way they presented this new feature. They were going to anticipate, based on your history, or based on what other people are searching for, what it is you’re looking for so you don’t have to type the whole thing. Just click on one of the suggestions. But then it changed into something else. It changed into a tool for manipulation. In June 2016, a small news organization … discovered that it was virtually impossible to get negative search suggestions related to Hillary Clinton, but easy to get them for other people including Donald Trump. They were very concerned about this because maybe that could influence people somehow. So, I tried this myself, and I have a wonderful image that I preserved showing this. I typed in ‘Hillary Clinton is’ on Bing and on Yahoo, and I got those long lists, eight and 10 items, saying, ‘Hillary Clinton is the devil. Hillary Clinton is sick’ … all negative things that people were actually searching for. How do I know that? Because we checked Google trends. Google trends shows you what people are actually searching for. Sure enough, people were actually searching for all these negative things related to Hillary Clinton. Those [were] the most popular search terms. So, we tried it on Google and we got, ‘Hillary Clinton is winning, Hillary Clinton is awesome.’ Now you check those phrases on Google trends and you find no one is searching for ‘Hillary Clinton is awesome.’ Nobody. Not one. But that’s what they’re showing you in their search suggestions. That again got my research gears running. I started doing experiments because I said, ‘Wait a minute, why would they do this? What is the point?’ Here’s what I found in a series of experiments: Just by manipulating search suggestions, I could turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into a 90/10 split — with no one having the slightest idea that they’ve been manipulated.”
YouTube’s Up Next Algorithm
YouTube, which is owned by Google, also has enormous influence on public opinion. According to Epstein, 70% of the videos people view on YouTube are suggested by Google’s top secret Up Next algorithm, which recommends videos for you to view whenever you’re watching a video.
Just like the search suggestions, this is a phenomenally effective ephemeral manipulation tool. There’s no record of the videos recommended by the algorithm, yet it can take you down the proverbial rabbit hole by feeding you one video after another.
“There are documented cases now in which people have been converted to extreme Islam or to white supremacy, literally because they’d been pulled down a rabbit hole by a sequence of videos on YouTube,” Epstein says. “Think of that power. Again, it’s not powerful for people who already have strong opinions. It’s powerful for the people who don’t, the people who are vulnerable, the people who are undecided or uncommitted. And that’s a lot of people.”
The Creepy Line
Most people now have Amazon Prime. If you are one of those who do, you can watch the following documentary for free on Prime. It is well worth your time to do so. Epstein and many other experts provide a very compelling overview of the dangers that we discuss in our interview. In my view, this is a must-watch and one to recommend to your friends and family.
A question Epstein raises is, “Who gave this private company, which is not accountable to any of us, the ability to determine what billions of people around the world will see or will not see?”
That is perhaps one of the biggest issues. Epstein and others attempt to answer this question in this documentary, “The Creepy Line,” which is a direct quote from Google’s executive chairman Eric Schmidt.
“Traditional media have very serious constraints placed on them, but Google, which is far more penetrating and far more effective at influencing people, has none of these constraints,” Epstein says. “There are lots of good people in [‘The Creepy Line’], lots of good data, and it explains my research very clearly, which is wonderful. It explains my research better than I explain my research. ‘The Creepy Line’ is available on iTunes and on Amazon. I think it costs $3 or $4 to watch … If you’re an Amazon Prime Member it’s free. It’s an excellent film.”
Google Runs a Total Surveillance State
In his article “Seven Simple Steps Toward Online Privacy,” Epstein outlines his recommendations for protecting your privacy while surfing the web, most of which don’t cost anything. You can access the article at: MySevenSimpleSteps.com
“My first sentence is ‘I have not received a targeted ad on my computer or mobile phone since 2014.’ Most people are shocked by that because they’re bombarded with targeted ads constantly. More and more people are telling me that they’re just having a conversation with someone, so they’re not even doing anything online per se, but their phone is nearby — or they’re having a conversation in their home and they have Amazon Alexa or Google Home, these personal assistants — and the next thing they know they start getting targeted ads related to what they were talking about. This is the surveillance problem … The point is that there are ways to use the internet, tablets and mobile phones, to preserve or protect your privacy, but almost no one does that. So, the fact is that we’re now being surveilled 24/7, generally speaking, with no awareness that we’re even being surveilled. Maybe some people are aware that when they do searches on Google the search history is preserved forever … But it goes so far beyond that because now we’re being surveilled through personal assistants, so that when we speak, we’re being [surveilled]. It goes even beyond that, because a few years ago Google bought the Nest company, which makes a smart thermostat. After they bought the company, they put microphones into the smart thermostats, and the latest versions of the smart thermostats have microphones and cameras. Google has been issued patents in recent years, which give them, basically, ownership rights over ways of analyzing sounds that are picked up by microphones in people’s homes. They can hook you up with dentists, they can hook you up with sex therapists, with mental health services, relationship coaches, et cetera. So, there’s that. Location tracking has also gotten completely out of hand. We’ve learned in recent months that even when you disable location tracking … on your mobile phone, you’re still being tracked.”
This is one of the reasons I strongly recommend that you use a VPN on your cellphone and computer, as this will prevent virtually anyone from tracking and targeting you. There are many out there but I am using the one Epstein recommends, Nord VPN, which is only about $3 per month and you can use it on up to six devices. In my view, this is a must if you seek to preserve your privacy.
How Google Tracks You Even When You’re Offline
You can learn a lot about a person by tracking their movements and whereabouts. Most of us are very naïve about these things. As explained by Epstein, location tracking technology has become incredibly sophisticated and aggressive.
Android cellphones, for example, which are a Google-owned operating system, can track you even when you’re not connected to the internet, whether you have geo tracking enabled or not.
“It just gets creepier and creepier,” Epstein says. “Let’s say you pull out your SIM card. Let’s say you disconnect from your mobile service provider, so you’re absolutely isolated. You’re not connected to the internet. Guess what? Your phone is still tracking everything you do on that phone and it’s still tracking your location.”
As soon as you reconnect to the internet, all that information stored in your phone is sent to Google. So, even though you may think you’ve just spent the day incognito, the moment you reconnect, every step you’ve made is shared (provided you had your phone with you).
In terms of online tracking, it’s also important to realize that Google is tracking your movements online even if you’re not using their products, because most websites use Google Analytics, which tracks everything you do on that website. And, you have no way of knowing whether a website uses Google Analytics or not.
Steps to Protect Your Online Privacy
To protect your privacy, Epstein recommends taking the following steps, seven of which are outlined in “Seven Simple Steps Toward Online Privacy.” The last one, Fitbit, is a more recent concern.


wakingtimes--2020-01-28--Vaccine for the China virus—the planet is the guinea pig for a vast experiment

The US National Institutes of Health ( NIH ) is launching a rush program to develop a vaccine against the China coronavirus .
The goal ?
Have a vaccine ready for human testing in an unprecedented 90 days .
NIH is partnering with a US vaccine company , Moderna , Inc .
The vaccine is a new type called RNA .
According to Reuters ( “ With Wuhan virus genetic code in hand , scientists begin work on a vaccine , ” Jan 24 , 2020 ) , “ [ these are ] vaccines based on ribonucleic acid ( RNA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for making proteins.
” Let ’ s have a look at Moderna ( twitter ) , the company that will be making and testing the new RNA vaccine against the China coronavirus .
Its website states , in a January 23rd press release : “ Moderna Announces Funding Award from CEPI to Accelerate Development of Messenger RNA ( mRNA ) Vaccine Against Novel Coronavirus ” .
Funded by CEPI .
Who is that ?
( twitter ) Its website states : “ CEPI is a innovative global partnership between public , private , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re working together to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.
” Bill Gates .
Doesn ’ t that send your trust and faith rocketing up into the sky ?
And there you have it .
The vaccine that is being tapped by the US government… under its National Institutes of Health…through drug company Moderna…HAS NEVER BEEN USED ON THE PUBLIC BEFORE .
IT IS NOT LICENSED FOR PUBLIC USE .
RNA VACCINES AND THE TECHNOLOGY THEY USE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ THE TYPE OF VACCINE BEING RUSHED INTO EXISTENCE IN 90 DAYS .
What in the world could possibly go wrong ?
One way to find out is to unleash it on millions of people , stand back , and see .
Autoimmune reactions—the human immune system attacks healthy elements and processes of the body itself .
The body goes to war with itself .
I ’ m sure you would volunteer for a test run of the vaccine , right ?
You would certainly offer up your child for a grand experiment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re a doctor reading this , you ’ ll definitely inject the vaccine into unsuspecting patients , won ’ t you ?
Conscience is such an annoyance , isn ’ t it ?
Don ’ t you want to have the whole world as your guinea pig ?
Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections , THE MATRIX REVEALED , EXIT FROM THE MATRIX , and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX , Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California .
He maintains a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power .
Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize , he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years , writing articles on politics , medicine , and health for CBS Healthwatch , LA Weekly , Spin Magazine , Stern , and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe .
Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics , health , logic , and creative power to audiences around the world .
You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook .
Follow Waking Times on Twitter .

Vaccine for the China virus—the planet is the guinea pig for a vast experiment
Jon Rappoport, Guest
Waking Times
The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) is launching a rush program to develop a vaccine against the China coronavirus.
The goal? Have a vaccine ready for human testing in an unprecedented 90 days.
NIH is partnering with a US vaccine company, Moderna, Inc.
The vaccine is a new type called RNA. According to Reuters (“With Wuhan virus genetic code in hand, scientists begin work on a vaccine,” Jan 24, 2020), “[these are] vaccines based on ribonucleic acid (RNA)—a chemical messenger that contains instructions for making proteins.”
The PHG Foundation/University of Cambridge explains further: “Unlike a normal vaccine, RNA vaccines work by introducing an mRNA sequence (the molecule which tells cells what to build) which is coded for a disease specific antigen [virus]; once produced within the body, the antigen [virus] is recognised by the immune system, preparing it to fight the real thing.”
Let’s have a look at Moderna (twitter), the company that will be making and testing the new RNA vaccine against the China coronavirus. Its website states, in a January 23rd press release: “Moderna Announces Funding Award from CEPI to Accelerate Development of Messenger RNA (mRNA) Vaccine Against Novel Coronavirus”.
Funded by CEPI. Who is that? (twitter) Its website states: “CEPI is a innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations. We’re working together to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.”
A more relevant quote: “CEPI was founded in Davos by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, and the World Economic Forum.”
Bill Gates. Doesn’t that send your trust and faith rocketing up into the sky?
There is more. Going back to the Moderna Inc. website — at the bottom of the press release referenced above, we find a VERY interesting statement, in a section titled, “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements”: “…there has never been a commercial product utilizing mRNA technology approved for use…”
And there you have it. The vaccine that is being tapped by the US government… under its National Institutes of Health…through drug company Moderna…HAS NEVER BEEN USED ON THE PUBLIC BEFORE. IT IS NOT LICENSED FOR PUBLIC USE.
RNA VACCINES AND THE TECHNOLOGY THEY USE ARE ENTIRELY EXPERIMENTAL.
AND THIS IS THE TYPE OF VACCINE BEING RUSHED INTO EXISTENCE IN 90 DAYS.
What in the world could possibly go wrong?
One way to find out is to unleash it on millions of people, stand back, and see.
The PHG Foundation at the University of Cambridge gives us a substantial clue: “… better understanding of [RNA] vaccine adverse effects is needed – these can include inflammation or autoimmune reactions.”
Autoimmune reactions—the human immune system attacks healthy elements and processes of the body itself. The body goes to war with itself.
I’m sure you would volunteer for a test run of the vaccine, right? You would certainly offer up your child for a grand experiment, wouldn’t you?
And if you’re a doctor reading this, you’ll definitely inject the vaccine into unsuspecting patients, won’t you? Conscience is such an annoyance, isn’t it?
ISN’T IT?
Don’t you want to have the whole world as your guinea pig?
About the Author
Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


wakingtimes--2020-01-28--New Jersey Defeats Mandatory Vaccine Bill

Everywhere we look , we find signs of out-of-control Big Pharma influence on medical policies and public health laws .
This shouldn ’ t come as a surprise , considering drug ads account for the vast majority of most media outlets ’ advertising revenues .
As a result , the media are no longer providing us with fair and balanced reporting on the prevention and treatment of disease , and this certainly includes the subject of drugs and vaccines .
As reported by Periscope News Group editor-in-chief , Christina Morales : “ Prescription medications are a multi-BILLION-dollar industry that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tons of money , but also the network television stations … Did you know that pharmaceutical advertising has soared 62 percent since 2012 and is projected to cost $ 610 billion by 2021 ?
… The average American watches 16 hours of pharmaceutical commercials each year which is more time than they spend with their primary physician .
One-third of these people ask their doctors about a drug advertisement and most request a prescription .
Clearly this type of advertising in generating a huge response from the public , but it also is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about : if these companies are paying television networks billions of dollars to advertise their drugs , would their news stations risk losing big money accounts by reporting negative information about the company ?
Public figure and activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. once shared that , ‘ I ate breakfast last week with the president of a network news division and he told me that during non-election years , 70 % of the advertising revenues for his news division come from pharmaceutical ads … He also told me that he would fire a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guest who lost him a pharmaceutical account.
’ “ Drug Industry Is the Hidden Hand Behind Vaccine Laws During the 2019 U.S. legislative session , 22 bills were introduced in 17 states proposing to eliminate vaccine exemptions .
One of them was New Jersey bill S2171 , which tried to repeal the religious vaccine exemption and require students of all ages to be fully vaccinated or lose their right to a school education .
December 12 , 2019 , a hearing on the bill was held by the New Jersey Senate Health Committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 4 ) of sending it to the floor .
However , while the bill was widely expected to breeze through the Senate , it came to a screeching halt due to the massive uprising of concerned citizens who publicly protested against it .
As reported by The New York Times January 13 , 2020 : Vaccine Science Is Far From Settled Is the science on vaccine safety really settled ?
Far from it .
There ’ s a broad base of scientific studies questioning both the safety and effectiveness of vaccines .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims with the national Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ( VICP ) also speaks to the fact that there ’ s a problem , as does the scientific evidence showing industry-funded vaccine studies are riddled with bias .
What ’ s more , the more we learn about infectious diseases and how vaccines work , the more we realize just how little we actually know , and how many of our assumptions are seriously flawed .
One of the primary reasons we ’ re not getting objective reporting on these issues from the media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations make the bulk of their money from the drug industry ( i.e.
, drug ads ) .
They simply can not afford to bite the hand that feeds them , and so they become complicit in the cover-up by default .
In its original form , S2171 eliminated the religious vaccine exemption for children attending daycare and schools in New Jersey , established a state-run review board to approve all medical exemptions , and required students of all ages enrolled in daycare , primary school and higher education , both public and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to be fully vaccinated .
As reported by Children ’ s Health Defense legal counsel , Mary Holland , “ under the terms of the law , a 60-year old taking a cooking class at a community college could be required to prove vaccination status before enrollment .
This could include even online courses at any institution of higher education in New Jersey.
” As such , it was the broadest vaccine exemption elimination bill introduced so far , which is why its defeat on January 13 , 2020 , was such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was the participation of thousands of people who showed up for the hearings at the state capitol that allowed for this victory .
Without that overwhelming pressure , there ’ s no doubt in my mind the bill would have passed .
In an effort to push the legislation through , amendments were made so that the religious vaccine exemption would be available in private schools but not public schools .
However , as reported by The New York Times , this only raised new concerns .
Many argued the amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their children attending expensive private schools , while denying the same right to children whose parents can not afford to pay for private school .
As reported by News24 in the video above , New Jersey Senate president Stephen Sweeney — who remains adamant the bill eventually will become law – effectively “ bought ” votes to try to pass S2171 by offering Senators who were planning to vote “ no ” on the bill financial support in future elections through the General Majority super PAC funds in exchange for their “ yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s deep connections to the drug industry , which appear to be part and parcel of why he ’ s such a determined advocate for mandatory vaccinations and the removal of exemptions .
Fortunately , not even these highly questionable last-ditch efforts were enough to pass the bill .
Informed Consent Is the Bedrock of Medical Ethics A January 17 , 2020 , Health Impact News post reviews the scientifically referenced testimony submitted by Dr. Meryl Nass before the Massachusetts legislature , which is also considering legislation that will eliminate the religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nass stated pointed out that : “ There is no crisis ( no epidemic of deaths or disabilities ) from infectious diseases caused by lack of vaccinations , either in Massachusetts or the United States … The elephant in the auditorium today is Pharma profits … The pharmaceutical industry has undertaken a very ambitious campaign to legislate away vaccine exemptions in the United States and Canada .
France , Italy and Germany have rescinded vaccine exemptions too , suggesting the campaign is worldwide … This is an industry that has thrived by taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in advance that their products killed … Pharma ’ s latest risky strategy is trying to rid the world of vaccine exemptions , to prevent vaccine opt-outs before a new crop of vaccines with inadequate safety and efficacy testing — and for which they will have no liability once placed on the childhood schedule — are approved … It has been claimed that vaccines are , by nature , extremely safe .
Yet vaccines are usually injected , bypassing all the body ’ s natural barriers .
Even minute contamination or inadequate microbial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have caused many autoimmune disorders , from Guillain-Barre syndrome to narcolepsy … Vaccines appear safe because the immediate side effects are usually mild and temporary .
Serious vaccine side effects often take weeks or months to surface , and by then it is difficult to know what caused them .
Only when vaccinated individuals have rates of illness at least 10 times higher than the unvaccinated , is the side effect likely to be linked to the vaccine .
A 2009 European swine flu vaccine ( GSK ’ s Pandemrix ) caused over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in adolescents .
This vaccine was linked to narcolepsy because 15 times the usual number of narcolepsy cases suddenly appeared in clinics .
Countries that bought the swine flu vaccines … were required to waive manufacturer liability as a condition of purchase … It should be apparent , but isn ’ t : Government waivers of vaccine liability discourage manufacturers from ensuring that the vaccines they sell are as safe and effective as possible .
The removal of vaccine exemptions , combined with liability waivers for vaccine side effects and recently loosened standards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toxic mix.
” Nass goes on to cite statistics showing why the claim that draconian laws are required to control the “ crisis ” of vaccine-preventable diseases is false .
She also points out that : Doctors Are Selling Out to the Drug Industry Too Media corporations and politicians aren ’ t the only ones beholden to the drug industry .
In 2013 , ProPublica exposed how drug companies bribe hundreds of thousands of American doctors to prescribe expensive and often dangerous drugs .
One way in which drug companies enlist medical professionals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them lucrative speaking engagements , in which they promote the company ’ s drugs .
While presented as “ educational , ” these expert lectures are nothing but thinly veiled sales pitches .
Despite rising concern over these kinds of conflicts of interest , ProPublica ’ s latest Dollars for Doctors report reveals the trend has only grown and gotten worse over the years .
In its October 2019 report , ProPublica writes : In a 2015 Family Practice Management article , Dr. Jamie Loehr shared with other family physicians how giving every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regardless of age , can provide a “ strong , healthy boost to the bottom line ” of their medical practice .
“ Minimizing costs and maximizing reimbursement can make immunizations profitable , ” Loehr writes .
He then goes on to explain where and how to get the needed vaccines for the lowest price , and how to properly code for the service in order to maximize insurance reimbursements .
Ironically — considering the vast majority of doctors do not disclose the full range of potential side effects of a given vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the code for vaccine counseling for patients under 18 , as combined vaccines such as the MMR and DTaP allow the doctor to bill for three and four counseling components respectively .
For the MMR , they can bill for informing you about the risks and benefits of the measles , mumps and rubella vaccines ( i.e.
, three counseling components ) and for the DTaP , they can bill for informing you about diphtheria , tetanus , pertussis , and polio ( i.e.
, four counseling components ) .
Some of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inserts and adverse events for which victims have received compensation from the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ( VICP ) are listed in my previous article , “ How Much Do You Really Know About Vaccine Safety ?
” I suggest reading through those lists and comparing them to what your child ’ s pediatrician or your doctor have told you about vaccine side effects .
Many doctors are not providing parents with the Vaccine Information Statement ( VIS ) required under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to be given to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rarely are more serious side effects mentioned before a vaccine is given .
Parents can always ask doctors for a copy of the actual manufacturer vaccine product insert , which accompanies vials of vaccines shipped to doctors ’ offices , and is required by FDA regulations to list known and reported side effects .
Doctors have a longstanding history of being revered as experts , whose morals and integrity are above reproach , and whose knowledge should not be questioned .
This is why doctors were featured in cigarette ads in the 1930s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of smoking became firmly established .
It is also why doctors like Dr. Paul Offit , Dr. Peter Hotez and Dr. Richard Pan are now pervasively featured in articles insisting that everyone should be legally required to purchase and use all vaccines recommended by the federal Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) and medical trade associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics ( AAP ) and American Medical Association ( AMA ) .
Offit , Hotez and Pan are hardly the only vaccine experts in the U.S. , let alone the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are routinely brought forth as the voices of medical consensus on vaccine safety .
This , despite the fact that Offit is a vaccine developer who has been caught making false statements and has significant conflicts of interest with the vaccine industry , including owning vaccine patents , and Pan , in his role as California Senator , has received significant amounts of money from corporations marketing vaccines .
Between 2013 and 2014 , Pan received more than $ 95,000 from drug companies and their trade groups .
In February 2015 , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Californian personal belief vaccine , which included religious and conscience or philosophical beliefs .
Coincidence ?
Another vaccine developer and mandatory vaccination proponent with industry ties is Professor Peter Hotez .
He also has financial ties The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation , which is has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into global vaccination programs .
The fact that New Jersey managed to thwart the latest attack on medical freedom is an encouraging sign .
Never underestimate the power of the people !
The key is numbers — you have to actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of time to communicate your concerns about a bill you oppose ( or support ) and showing up at public hearings and on days when votes are taken in your state Capitol .
Thousands of individuals gathered in hallways and outside the Capitol building in Trenton to protest of S2171 on multiple occasions , and it was undoubtedly the sheer size of the opposition that greatly helped to defeat the bill .
The fight is not over though .
Senator Weinberg has promised to reintroduce the bill in some altered form , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occasion yet again when it does .
Stay up to date on vaccine-related bills that are moving in your state this year , including bills proposing to take away ( or expand ) your right to obtain a vaccine exemption for yourself or your child .
Register to become a user of the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal operated by the National Vaccine Information Center and access bill analyses and talking points to educate your legislators .
Maine Could Become the First State to Overturn Bad Vaccine Law In related news , Maine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law that eliminated non-medical vaccine exemptions in 2019 and urgently needs your support .
The veto referendum to overturn the bill ( LD798 ) which was enacted into law in 2019 will be on a March 3 , 2020 ballot .
The new law revokes religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions and prevents access to work and education for those who have not received every state mandated vaccine .
Maine is the first state to put government vaccine mandates and repeal of exemptions to a popular vote through a veto referendum included on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ precedent for other states to follow , they need your support now .
Smaller states are easier to win because there are fewer people to educate on the issue at hand , which means less money is required for advertising .
Maine has an advertising saturation point of about $ 3 million , meaning if you spend $ 3 million , you will reach a majority of residents and further advertising will not make a significant difference .
The “ Yes on 1 Reject Big Pharma ” campaign needs to raise at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days to stand a chance against the pharmaceutical industry ’ s deep pockets .
You can make a difference by making a donation to this campaign below ( and , if you are a registered voter in Maine , by making sure to cast a vote on Mar .
3 , 2020 to restore vaccine exemptions in the state ) .
One of the Most Powerful Videos I ’ ve Ever Seen The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence .
There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues .
If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve .
Please take a few minutes to watch this video .
Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions With all the uncertainty surrounding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination .
It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws .
The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community .
National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact .
It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies , medical trade associations and public health officials , who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws .
Signing up for NVIC ’ s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate , easy access to your own state legislators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can make your voice heard .
You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical , useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community .
Also , when national vaccine issues come up , you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips .
So , please , as your first step , sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal .

New Jersey Defeats Mandatory Vaccine Bill
Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times
Everywhere we look, we find signs of out-of-control Big Pharma influence on medical policies and public health laws. This shouldn’t come as a surprise, considering drug ads account for the vast majority of most media outlets’ advertising revenues.
As a result, the media are no longer providing us with fair and balanced reporting on the prevention and treatment of disease, and this certainly includes the subject of drugs and vaccines. As reported by Periscope News Group editor-in-chief, Christina Morales:
“Prescription medications are a multi-BILLION-dollar industry that’s making not only the pharmaceutical companies tons of money, but also the network television stations … Did you know that pharmaceutical advertising has soared 62 percent since 2012 and is projected to cost $610 billion by 2021? … The average American watches 16 hours of pharmaceutical commercials each year which is more time than they spend with their primary physician. One-third of these people ask their doctors about a drug advertisement and most request a prescription. Clearly this type of advertising in generating a huge response from the public, but it also is having an impact that consumers rarely think about: if these companies are paying television networks billions of dollars to advertise their drugs, would their news stations risk losing big money accounts by reporting negative information about the company? Public figure and activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. once shared that, ‘I ate breakfast last week with the president of a network news division and he told me that during non-election years, 70% of the advertising revenues for his news division come from pharmaceutical ads … He also told me that he would fire a host who brought onto his station a guest who lost him a pharmaceutical account.’“
Drug Industry Is the Hidden Hand Behind Vaccine Laws
During the 2019 U.S. legislative session, 22 bills were introduced in 17 states proposing to eliminate vaccine exemptions. One of them was New Jersey bill S2171, which tried to repeal the religious vaccine exemption and require students of all ages to be fully vaccinated or lose their right to a school education.
December 12, 2019, a hearing on the bill was held by the New Jersey Senate Health Committee, which voted in favor (6 to 4) of sending it to the floor. However, while the bill was widely expected to breeze through the Senate, it came to a screeching halt due to the massive uprising of concerned citizens who publicly protested against it. As reported by The New York Times January 13, 2020:
“It began as one of the nation’s broadest proposed bans on religious exemptions to childhood vaccines. But after weeks of sustained and boisterous protests … as well as a last-minute effort to amend the proposed bill to win the support of key lawmakers, the effort collapsed on Monday in the New Jersey State Senate … Senator Loretta Weinberg, a Democrat and a sponsor of the legislation, said that the Senate would immediately reintroduce a new version of the bill and begin the process anew. This time, she said, the Legislature might hold public hearings with doctors and scientists to debunk opponents’ concerns. ‘The science is settled on this,’ Ms. Weinberg said.”
Vaccine Science Is Far From Settled
Is the science on vaccine safety really settled? Far from it. There’s a broad base of scientific studies questioning both the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. The growing number of people filing vaccine-injury claims with the national Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) also speaks to the fact that there’s a problem, as does the scientific evidence showing industry-funded vaccine studies are riddled with bias.
What’s more, the more we learn about infectious diseases and how vaccines work, the more we realize just how little we actually know, and how many of our assumptions are seriously flawed.
One of the primary reasons we’re not getting objective reporting on these issues from the media is, again, because most news organizations make the bulk of their money from the drug industry (i.e., drug ads). They simply cannot afford to bite the hand that feeds them, and so they become complicit in the cover-up by default.
New Jersey Bill S2171 Is Defeated
In its original form, S2171 eliminated the religious vaccine exemption for children attending daycare and schools in New Jersey, established a state-run review board to approve all medical exemptions, and required students of all ages enrolled in daycare, primary school and higher education, both public and private, including higher education online classes, to be fully vaccinated.
As reported by Children’s Health Defense legal counsel, Mary Holland, “under the terms of the law, a 60-year old taking a cooking class at a community college could be required to prove vaccination status before enrollment. This could include even online courses at any institution of higher education in New Jersey.”
As such, it was the broadest vaccine exemption elimination bill introduced so far, which is why its defeat on January 13, 2020, was such a major victory. Make no mistake, it was the participation of thousands of people who showed up for the hearings at the state capitol that allowed for this victory. Without that overwhelming pressure, there’s no doubt in my mind the bill would have passed.
In an effort to push the legislation through, amendments were made so that the religious vaccine exemption would be available in private schools but not public schools. However, as reported by The New York Times, this only raised new concerns. Many argued the amendment gave wealthy families the ability to exempt their children attending expensive private schools, while denying the same right to children whose parents cannot afford to pay for private school.
As reported by News24 in the video above, New Jersey Senate president Stephen Sweeney — who remains adamant the bill eventually will become law – effectively “bought” votes to try to pass S2171 by offering Senators who were planning to vote “no” on the bill financial support in future elections through the General Majority super PAC funds in exchange for their “yes” vote.
News24 also highlights Sweeney’s deep connections to the drug industry, which appear to be part and parcel of why he’s such a determined advocate for mandatory vaccinations and the removal of exemptions. Fortunately, not even these highly questionable last-ditch efforts were enough to pass the bill.
Informed Consent Is the Bedrock of Medical Ethics
A January 17, 2020, Health Impact News post reviews the scientifically referenced testimony submitted by Dr. Meryl Nass before the Massachusetts legislature, which is also considering legislation that will eliminate the religious vaccine exemption. In her testimony, Nass stated pointed out that:
“There is no crisis (no epidemic of deaths or disabilities) from infectious diseases caused by lack of vaccinations, either in Massachusetts or the United States … The elephant in the auditorium today is Pharma profits … The pharmaceutical industry has undertaken a very ambitious campaign to legislate away vaccine exemptions in the United States and Canada. France, Italy and Germany have rescinded vaccine exemptions too, suggesting the campaign is worldwide … This is an industry that has thrived by taking big risks — even when manufacturers knew in advance that their products killed … Pharma’s latest risky strategy is trying to rid the world of vaccine exemptions, to prevent vaccine opt-outs before a new crop of vaccines with inadequate safety and efficacy testing — and for which they will have no liability once placed on the childhood schedule — are approved … It has been claimed that vaccines are, by nature, extremely safe. Yet vaccines are usually injected, bypassing all the body’s natural barriers. Even minute contamination or inadequate microbial inactivation can maim or kill … Vaccines have caused many autoimmune disorders, from Guillain-Barre syndrome to narcolepsy … Vaccines appear safe because the immediate side effects are usually mild and temporary. Serious vaccine side effects often take weeks or months to surface, and by then it is difficult to know what caused them. Only when vaccinated individuals have rates of illness at least 10 times higher than the unvaccinated, is the side effect likely to be linked to the vaccine. A 2009 European swine flu vaccine (GSK’s Pandemrix) caused over 1,300 cases of severe narcolepsy, mostly in adolescents. This vaccine was linked to narcolepsy because 15 times the usual number of narcolepsy cases suddenly appeared in clinics. Countries that bought the swine flu vaccines … were required to waive manufacturer liability as a condition of purchase … It should be apparent, but isn’t: Government waivers of vaccine liability discourage manufacturers from ensuring that the vaccines they sell are as safe and effective as possible. The removal of vaccine exemptions, combined with liability waivers for vaccine side effects and recently loosened standards for licensing vaccines, create a highly toxic mix.”
Nass goes on to cite statistics showing why the claim that draconian laws are required to control the “crisis” of vaccine-preventable diseases is false. She also points out that:
“The bedrock expectation of medical ethics is that patients must give informed consent13 for all medical procedures, including vaccines. Informed consent means that patients must be informed about the procedure, have the right to refuse, and may not be coerced to accept it. Isn’t withholding an education an extreme form of coercion? Without any discussion of its moral or ethical dimensions by media, medical societies or government officials, the requirement for informed consent for medical procedures, including vaccinations, vanishes in the blink of an eye when patients are not allowed the right to refuse.”
Doctors Are Selling Out to the Drug Industry Too
Media corporations and politicians aren’t the only ones beholden to the drug industry. In 2013, ProPublica exposed how drug companies bribe hundreds of thousands of American doctors to prescribe expensive and often dangerous drugs.
One way in which drug companies enlist medical professionals to push their wares is to offer them lucrative speaking engagements, in which they promote the company’s drugs. While presented as “educational,” these expert lectures are nothing but thinly veiled sales pitches.
Despite rising concern over these kinds of conflicts of interest, ProPublica’s latest Dollars for Doctors report reveals the trend has only grown and gotten worse over the years. In its October 2019 report, ProPublica writes:
“Back in 2013, ProPublica detailed what seemed a stunning development in the pharmaceutical industry’s drive to win the prescription pads of the nation’s doctors: In just four years, one doctor had earned $1 million giving promotional talks and consulting for drug companies; 21 others had made more than $500,000. Six years later — despite often damning scrutiny from prosecutors and academics — such high earnings have become commonplace. More than 2,500 physicians have received at least half a million dollars apiece from drugmakers and medical device companies in the past five years alone. More than 700 of those doctors received at least $1 million … There has been almost no change in how much the industry is spending. Each year from 2014 to 2018, drug and medical device companies spent between $2.1 billion and $2.2 billion paying doctors for speaking and consulting, as well as on meals, travel and gifts for them … Roughly the same number of doctors — more than 600,000 — received payments in any given year … For context, there are about 1.1 million doctors in the United States.”
Vaccines Give a ‘Healthy Boost’ to Doctors’ Bottom Line
In a 2015 Family Practice Management article, Dr. Jamie Loehr shared with other family physicians how giving every CDC recommended vaccine to all patients, regardless of age, can provide a “strong, healthy boost to the bottom line” of their medical practice.
“Minimizing costs and maximizing reimbursement can make immunizations profitable,” Loehr writes. He then goes on to explain where and how to get the needed vaccines for the lowest price, and how to properly code for the service in order to maximize insurance reimbursements.
Ironically — considering the vast majority of doctors do not disclose the full range of potential side effects of a given vaccine — one of the biggest money-makers is the code for vaccine counseling for patients under 18, as combined vaccines such as the MMR and DTaP allow the doctor to bill for three and four counseling components respectively.
For the MMR, they can bill for informing you about the risks and benefits of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines (i.e., three counseling components) and for the DTaP, they can bill for informing you about diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and polio (i.e., four counseling components).
Some of the potential side effects actually listed on vaccine inserts and adverse events for which victims have received compensation from the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) are listed in my previous article, “How Much Do You Really Know About Vaccine Safety?”
I suggest reading through those lists and comparing them to what your child’s pediatrician or your doctor have told you about vaccine side effects. Many doctors are not providing parents with the Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) required under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to be given to parents before children are vaccinated, and rarely are more serious side effects mentioned before a vaccine is given.
Parents can always ask doctors for a copy of the actual manufacturer vaccine product insert, which accompanies vials of vaccines shipped to doctors’ offices, and is required by FDA regulations to list known and reported side effects.
Conflicts of Interest Rule the Roost
Doctors have a longstanding history of being revered as experts, whose morals and integrity are above reproach, and whose knowledge should not be questioned. This is why doctors were featured in cigarette ads in the 1930s and ’40s, before the dangers of smoking became firmly established.
It is also why doctors like Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. Peter Hotez and Dr. Richard Pan are now pervasively featured in articles insisting that everyone should be legally required to purchase and use all vaccines recommended by the federal Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and medical trade associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and American Medical Association (AMA).
Offit, Hotez and Pan are hardly the only vaccine experts in the U.S., let alone the world, yet the views of these two are routinely brought forth as the voices of medical consensus on vaccine safety.
This, despite the fact that Offit is a vaccine developer who has been caught making false statements and has significant conflicts of interest with the vaccine industry, including owning vaccine patents, and Pan, in his role as California Senator, has received significant amounts of money from corporations marketing vaccines.
Between 2013 and 2014, Pan received more than $95,000 from drug companies and their trade groups. In February 2015, he introduced bill SB277, which repealed the Californian personal belief vaccine, which included religious and conscience or philosophical beliefs. Coincidence?
Another vaccine developer and mandatory vaccination proponent with industry ties is Professor Peter Hotez. He also has financial ties The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into global vaccination programs.
Resistance Is Never Futile
The fact that New Jersey managed to thwart the latest attack on medical freedom is an encouraging sign. Never underestimate the power of the people! The key is numbers — you have to actually take action by contacting your legislators ahead of time to communicate your concerns about a bill you oppose (or support) and showing up at public hearings and on days when votes are taken in your state Capitol.
Thousands of individuals gathered in hallways and outside the Capitol building in Trenton to protest of S2171 on multiple occasions, and it was undoubtedly the sheer size of the opposition that greatly helped to defeat the bill.
The fight is not over though. Senator Weinberg has promised to reintroduce the bill in some altered form, and hopefully, residents will rise to the occasion yet again when it does.
Stay up to date on vaccine-related bills that are moving in your state this year, including bills proposing to take away (or expand) your right to obtain a vaccine exemption for yourself or your child. Register to become a user of the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal operated by the National Vaccine Information Center and access bill analyses and talking points to educate your legislators.
Maine Could Become the First State to Overturn Bad Vaccine Law
In related news, Maine is fighting to repeal a new vaccine law that eliminated non-medical vaccine exemptions in 2019 and urgently needs your support. The veto referendum to overturn the bill (LD798) which was enacted into law in 2019 will be on a March 3, 2020 ballot.
The new law revokes religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions and prevents access to work and education for those who have not received every state mandated vaccine.
Maine is the first state to put government vaccine mandates and repeal of exemptions to a popular vote through a veto referendum included on a ballot. To succeed and set the precedent for other states to follow, they need your support now.
Smaller states are easier to win because there are fewer people to educate on the issue at hand, which means less money is required for advertising. Maine has an advertising saturation point of about $3 million, meaning if you spend $3 million, you will reach a majority of residents and further advertising will not make a significant difference.
The “Yes on 1 Reject Big Pharma” campaign needs to raise at least $1 million within the next 30 days to stand a chance against the pharmaceutical industry’s deep pockets. You can make a difference by making a donation to this campaign below (and, if you are a registered voter in Maine, by making sure to cast a vote on Mar. 3, 2020 to restore vaccine exemptions in the state).
One of the Most Powerful Videos I’ve Ever Seen
The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.
There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.
http://youtu.be/xEcYQydhY9E
Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions
With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community.
Think Globally, Act Locally
National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.
It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.
Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.
Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.