CIA and FBI Manipulate Wikipedia According to Co-Founder

Wikipedia is the popular "free encyclopedia" on the Internet that anyone can contribute to and edit. We have reported for many years now that Wikipedia is biased, especially when it comes to anything that challenges Big Pharma and their stranglehold over the term "science." Now, co-founder Larry Sanger has confirmed what we all knew for years, that powerful forces are involved in controlling the content of Wikipedia, and that the FBI and CIA, among others, including the corporate media, have hired people to control this content.

The Water Fluoridation Disinformation War

In the satirical black comedy film Dr. Strangelove there is the iconic scene when the rogue general Jack D Ripper, played by Sterling Hayden, tells Peter Sellers character, “Ever hear of the fluoridation of water? Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we ever had to face?” From that day until now, the entire pharmaceutical industry, public health officials and the mainstream media have assumed that fluoride is absolutely safe, and anyone who dares to criticize water fluoridation and its dental use is a loon or conspiracy theorist who threatens national health. Yet, as with so many medical and health challenges we face, the dominant consensus is wrong. The large body of evidence to support anti-fluoridation advocacy is substantial and continues to grow. In fact, throughout the US and other nations, concerned citizens, consumer activists and whistleblowers are putting pressure on state and local governments and public utilities to cease and desist in spiking our drinking water with fluoride.

Naturopathy: Wikipedia’s Assault on Natural Medicine

Americans are increasingly turning to Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) systems for their healthcare needs. This trend has been underway for several decades. This has been perceived as competition by the medical establishment. Wikipedia's co-founder Jimmy Wales claims to hold high standards of objectivity and balance in the content of the online encyclopedia and the integrity of his volunteer army of editors. Indeed this is largely true for non-controversial content where economic, political, social factors hold no consequence. Yet, when it comes to the composition and editing of CAM systems and natural healthcare, in our opinion Wikipeida is an arsenal of misinformation and lies; we believe it has become a malignant growth to serve the ideological and financial purposes of select individuals and groups Wales has shown favor towards.  A group of individuals and organizations, collectively known as Skeptics, who assert they represent “science-based medicine” now portend to be the final arbiters of what is and is not sound medical practice. However, it is our opinion the Skeptics are grossly biased, widely uneducated about CAM, and are both anti-science and anti-health. Skeptics consistently refuse to accept the enormous volume of published CAM research because it is contrary to skepticism's regressive understanding about medicine and limited to a pharmacological model. Throughout our history, from the Salem witch trials to McCarthyism and Red-baiting and now censorship by the current surveillance state, we have always had small groups of individuals who are intolerant of any reality other than their own. Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia Skeptics are simply the latest incarnation of this dogmatic prejudice that is further eroding the nation's quality of health.

Big Pharma’s Attack Against Ayurveda Medicine with its 3000 Year History and 450,000 Doctors Practicing Today

Alongside Traditional Chinese Medicine, Indian Ayurveda is one of the world's oldest medical systems still widely accepted and practiced today. It has managed to thrive and flourish for at least three millennia and has built up an enormous body of diagnostic methods and treatments for a wide variety of mild to life-threatening illnesses and diseases. Evidence-based medicine has yet to fully explore its riches. Unlike modern conventional medicine that dominates our healthcare, Ayurveda is a "whole" medical system that goes beyond standard disease management, but also incorporates sophisticated ways to sustain health, prevent physical disorders as well as balance the body and mind to promote wellness.  Approximately 500 million Indians rely upon Ayurveda for their healthcare. In 1971, the Indian government established standards for Ayurveda education while recognizing the invaluable contributions this ancient medical system has made to prevent and treat a wide variety of diseases. According to statistics recorded by the Association of Ayurvedic Physicians in India, the nation's largest Ayurveda organization, India is now home to about 250 Ayurvedia colleges and teaching institutions and graduate approximately 12,000 doctors annually. The Association is affiliated with the medical school at Hindu Benares University in Varanasi, often regarded as India's equivalent to Oxford. It is estimated that across the country, there are nearly 450,000 registered Ayurvedic practitioners.  Western pharmaceutical-based medicine and their media propagandists such as Wikipedia, however, refers to Ayurveda as "fringe medicine and science" and "conspiracy theories."

Wikipedia is Ruled by Skeptics with Biased Agendas: Wrong on 90% of Medical Advice

You may think Wikipedia — originally funded with revenue from soft-core pornography — is the best thing since Cliff Notes, with quick and easy access to all the facts and news you ever needed to know. Some believe Wikipedia is even better than Encyclopedia Britannica; indeed, Wikipedia’s founders intended it to be a replacement for it. But is Wikipedia really a trustworthy source? Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Interestingly enough, while Wikipedia has become the world's most powerful thought leader — controlling a vast amount of internet information and being used to determine the credibility of experts across most fields — Wikipedia itself warns it is NOT a reliable source. It states: “Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time. This means that any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong. Biographies of living persons, subjects that happen to be in the news, and politically or culturally contentious topics are especially vulnerable to these issues. Edits on Wikipedia that are in error may eventually be fixed. However, because Wikipedia is a volunteer run project, it cannot monitor every contribution all of the time. There are many errors that remain unnoticed for days, weeks, months, or even years. Therefore, Wikipedia should not be considered a definitive source in and of itself.” Despite this blatant admission of unreliability, Wikipedia is the go-to site for Google quality raters to assess the expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness of an author or website. There’s also evidence showing Wikipedia is edited by people with a very specific agenda, and anyone who tries to clarify or clear up inaccuracies on the site is simply blocked.

Google and Wikipedia Team Together To Suppress Alternative Health Information

Ask anyone on the street prior to 1990 what the term "search engine" meant, and you would probably get a shrug of the shoulders and a guess, like searching for an automobile replacement engine or something. Today, people use the Internet to search for information about 6 billion times a day, easily accessing far more data than all of today's mainstream news outlets put together. And while in the early days of the Internet one had many choices of tools to use to search for data, today the name "Google" is synonymous with "search engine", and is even used as a verb: "Go Google it." Over 90% of all Internet searches are controlled by Google today. If Google was simply a software program that searched through all the massive amounts of data in blazing fast speed to produce the results that YOU wanted, this would not be such a big issue. It would just mean they are able to deliver results faster and more comprehensively than other search engines, leading more people to prefer using them over other search engines. And that's probably the way it was in the beginning. But today, Google has decided to be the Police of the Internet, and they have decided that they know better what data you should be viewing than you do. And they have apparently teamed together with another source of online data, Wikipedia, which poses as a neutral source for information, but is anything but "neutral." Together, these two Internet giants are doing everything they can to serve big corporate interests, particularly when it comes to alternative health. Dr. Joseph Mercola, founder of Mercola.com, one of the longest running websites on the Internet publishing life-saving information on natural treatments, and exposing corruption in the medical industry, just recently lost 99% of his search engine traffic because Google and Wikipedia apparently do not believe the public has a right to use their search tools to find the kind of information he publishes.

Wikipedia Censors Facts About Cholesterol and Other Natural Health Research that Oppose Big Pharma Doctrine

It has been well documented in recent weeks how many social media platforms have begun censoring anything that challenges Big Pharma's doctrine on medicine or health. Pinterest, for example, has begun deleting anything that questions vaccines, and Facebook uses the shady "Snopes" website to try and refute anything that challenges Big Pharma. Google, which owns YouTube, now posts links to Wikipedia articles on certain videos they deem to be "conspiracy" fake news, especially when it comes to anything challenging Big Pharma. Wikipedia recently deleted its entry on Dr. Malclom Kendrick, the Scottish doctor we have featured many times here at Health Impact News as he challenges the cholesterol theory of heart disease.

Will Google Restrict Search Results for Natural Health?

For years, Wikipedia has been a prime source of misinformation (or perhaps disinformation) about natural health. Now we worry about what Google is up to. The company is working on a new ranking system based on “truthfulness.” A site with more “incorrect” facts would rank lower than a site that is deemed more credible or trustworthy.