Wiki gone wonki.

Dr. Weeks’ Comment: Censorship is never so vile as when it is hidden. I recall, as a teenager, traveling behind what was then the iron curtain and staying with spiritually oriented people in Hungary, Czechoslovakia and East Germany. It was sobering for me to see what life with less freedom is. I was there over Easter and the secrecy with which my Christian friends had to worship was bewildering.  I commented at one point about their lack of freedom and their response haunts me to this day almost 50 years later. “We are freer than you, Brad, because we know we are being held captive and that everything we read is censured, whereas you are oblivious to these factors in your life in America. You consider “freedom” to be the ability to travel from place A to place B,  or to by a certain item. Freedom requires free thought. Without being free in your thinking and ability to create your individual goals, you are just a mobile puppet.” 

Today we Google everything despite knowing how complicit Google is with NSA.  And in case of a dispute, we check with Snopes despite knowing its bias and that this is a husband and wife operation.  And we trust Wikipedia (see below) to teach us about items despite not knowing who are these Gatekeepers to the internet’s knowledge. A survey the foundation conducted last year determined that the average age of a Wikipedia editor is 26.8 years, and that 87% of them are men. Hmmm….    So here we are in 2015 arguably the population with the greatest potential for knowledge in world history and yet we get our information from the most narrow source in history. Even in the Dark Ages or during the Spanish Inquisition, people sources of ideas were far more broad and uncensured. 

I re-publish the article below because as a pioneer in holistic and alternative medicine, a medical doctor whose main goal is to  help people be healthy (i.e. drug free!)  I am saddened by Wikipedia’s describing all alternative practitioners as irresponsible quacks.  In their post of “alternative medicine” Wikipedia editors state at the outset: “Alternative medicine is any practice that is put forward as having the healing effects of medicine, but is not founded on evidence gathered using the scientific method.”   Their page on Integrative Medicine is little better:  “Integrative medicine… combines alternative medicine with evidence-based medicine.” 

The concern, as detailed below is that “…Wikipedia is on a misinformation campaign against alternative health and the healing arts. The public needs to know it. Natural health deserves fair representation…”



Unbiased: Help support a writer as he exposes the truth about Wikipedia’s censorship of alternative medicine

(NaturalNews) Arriving at a “neutral point of view” is what the editors and top dogs at the free online “fauxpedia” website Wikipedia claim they one day hope to achieve. But the popular information website’s extensive track record of ignoring, denying and even blatantly lying about the scientific merits of natural and “alternative” medicine proves, quite obviously, that Wikipedia‘s stated editorial policy is nothing but empty rhetoric posing as sound intention.
And sadly, many people still don’t realize the true nature of Wikipedia‘s endless assault on natural health, which is the subject of a new book project by published author, columnist and podcast host Mike Bundrant. Burdened by the fact that the web’s sixth most popular site continues to deceive the public about the science behind alternative medicine, the dangers of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the healing power of naturopathy and more, Bundrant has set out to right the wrongs of this highly misleading web resource.But he needs your help. Taking on the fat cats isn’t easy, and like every other major endeavor in today’s world it requires substantial financial backing. In order to write and publish what will become one of the most comprehensive, science-based exposes on Wikipedia‘s active censorship of everything with which it disagrees, Bundrant is hoping to raise $67,100 by May 6, 2015. You can help make this important work a reality by clicking here and contributing to KickStarter.“Wikipedia is on a misinformation campaign against alternative health and the healing arts,” says Bundrant. “The public needs to know it. Natural health deserves fair representation. We’re going to set the record straight. We need your help and invite you to get involved in the process.

As a matter of policy, Wikipedia actively denies the existence of science with which it disagrees

Wikipedia‘s entry for “Alternative Medicine,” for instance, claims as fact that anything associated with alternative medicine is essentially quackery. This same entry, which millions of people will likely visit with the belief that it contains undeniable truth, openly admits that Wikipedia promotes conventional medicine, declaring anything alternative to not have any basis whatsoever in the scientific method.

The Wikipedia page for “Genetically modified food controversies” is similarly duplicitous. According to the Wikipedia gods, GMO food is completely safe and no different from “conventional food” in terms of its safety risk to humans. Wikipedia also contends that “no reports of ill effects have been documented in the human population from genetically modified food.”

This last statement is patently false — there’s plenty of published research suggesting human health effects associated with GMO consumption. Even the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) agrees, noting that “serious health risks” are associated with GMO food, including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes to major organs and the gastrointestinal system.

“The only published human feeding experiment revealed that the genetic material inserted into GM soy transfers into bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function,” explains the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT). “This means that long after we stop eating GM foods, we may still have their GM proteins produced continuously inside us.”

Help support Unbiased and expose Wikipedia‘s stranglehold on the free flow of information

Clearly, Wikipedia has chosen to ignore this disturbing fact and a whole cohort of other scientific evidence suggesting harm from GMOs. But this is the problem with Wikipedia — the site censors, removes or denies the existence of scientific evidence that contradicts the status quo. And this is the reason why Bundrant is writing his book.

“This book will be rigorously researched, written and prepared for publication over the course of nine months,” says Bundrant. “Information will be obtained through academic inquiry into peer-reviewed scientific literature. Unbiased will be independently published and promoted widely, with significant help from leaders in natural health.”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *