Hello everyone and welcome to Prophecy Files. We're standing here today on Capitol Hill and getting ready to meet with our congressional leaders concerning the Israel aid package here with Christians United for Israel and 250 others that have joined us on the Capitol to be able to Talk to our legislators and let them know how important it is to get the aid to Israel as soon as possible How important that it is and historic standing here right now because of all the taking place in the Middle East and Certainly with the epicenter of Israel and we've been talking to you about it over the past several weeks The important thing is to know this in the United States of America and especially for prophetic significance That those that bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel be cursed It's important for all of us to pray for our national leaders and the Bible tells us very clearly And I would hope and pray that we could see a revival take place in our land that revival Starts with this if my people which are called by my name will humble themselves and seek my face Turn from their wicked ways the Bible said that he would hear From heaven and he would forgive our sin and heal our land and God knows we need that as we're walking around Washington, DC Right now and standing in front of the Capitol It is important that we have a revival and so I want to just encourage you to pray for the peace of Jerusalem Pray that favor will take place even this coming Friday They're going to be voting on this Israel aid package And it's so very important that it passes to get the needed supplies to Israel pray for the peace of Jerusalem Pray for Israel and pray for our leaders here in Washington, DC That we can see the need to return back to God in this very critical hour Thank you so much for joining me for prophecy files today from Washington, DC Remember Jesus Christ is coming soon


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebrakes.com coming at you with 2020 Panini Donneress Elite Football half-case, random team, break number three from jaspyscasebrakes.com with a little bit of money that we're giving away as well and the early bird special. Wow. All sorts of things happening there. Now, I think some of you may remember that the second half filled up before the first half, number three. So this is break number three. Number four has already been done if you wanna look up that video as well. Now, the early bird spot, it's the first 20. Right, yeah, first 20 spots sold in this break. Here's the first 20 right there. You are able to get an extra spot. The early bird catches the worm. So let's roll it, let's randomize it. 11 times, name on top, after 11 we'll get it. One, two, three, four. And 11th and final time. After 11 times we've got Dan. There you go, Turk. D, Turk in the chat, after 11 times, you are the early bird that catches the worm. There you are right there. We'll put your name right there. We've got the early bird spot there. Now, let's grab everybody's names and then we'll randomize names and teams and columns A and B. So let's put the names in here. The NFL teams are not there. Come on, Joe. Just so eager to get into this break, forgot to set it up. Boom, there it is. Let's roll it and randomize those lists. Nine times, four and a five. Nine times for names and teams. One, two, three, four. And ninth and final time. After nine we've got Oliver, down to SKS. Nine times for the teams. One, two, and ninth and final time. After nine times we've got the Arizona Football Cardinals all the way down to the Shy Town Bears. Shy City Bears. All right, so Oliver with the Cardinals, Kurt with the Saints, Mike with my Raiders, Sam with the Titans, Andy with the Chargers, Colin with the Jags, Anthony P with the Patriots. Wes with the Steelers, Barry with the Niners, Colin with the Chiefs, Rich with the Ravens, Jim with the Lions, Anthony with the Eagles. Rich with the Packers, Dan with the Giants, Rick with the Buccaneers, Scott V with the Cowboys, SKS with the Jets. Mark with the Panthers, Gabe with the Broncos, Jarell with the Redskins, with the Washington Football Team, Clayton with the Dolphins, Dan with the Early Bird Spot, you have the Los Angeles Rams. Chris with the Seahawks, Mark with the Browns, Anthony with the Vikings, James Lastbot Mojo with the Bengals, nice. Gabe with the Bills, Mike Kirk with the Falcons, Juan with the Texans, Mike with the Colts, and Stephen Surrey with the Chicago Bears. So let's put this all on one screen. We're gonna sort by column B by team. And we're gonna pause the video or allow for a little bit of trading time. And when we come back, we'll see if there's any trades and then the break, stick around. All right, welcome back folks. As you can see on your screen, there was a trade. So Kurt and Mike completed a trade, Falcons for Saints. So Kurt is out of the Saints spot and now in the Falcons spot, we'll put a T there for trade so you know, if you're watching at home, you can follow along and see who draws first blood in the trade. And Mike Kirk, you now have the Saints. Excellent. Got in just before the trade window closed. The window was closing and then they stuck a hand underneath and lifted it back up and they're like, hey, wait. We got a trade. I guess it's one of those automatic windows. Maybe it was like a sliding glass door that opens automatically, like at a grocery store and they stuck their hand right in there. Popped right back open. Got some basketball on the background. It looks like Houston and Portland just started. And here's the final printout right here. And there you go. One of the doors from Star Wars. I feel like those doors could like slice your hand off. I haven't done this in a minute or two. We've got two autographs and one memorabilia card per box on average. I think I'm sure veteran commons won't ship in something like, yeah, no veteran commons ship. Don't let me forget about the money I'm supposed to give away at the end of this too. Once I get to like the last box, if it sounds like I'm about to sign off, like I'm doing my outro thing that I usually do at the end of every video. If I start to say, and that's the last card folks, and thanks everyone for, and be like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Break credit, don't forget that break credit. I think camps just started up in football ladies and gentlemen. They seem to be marching along. Some people are off to now, but I guess, Godel and the NFL are just marching along, huh? No bubble. I feel like bubble, the bubble idea, it seems to be the safest. It looks like NHL and an NBA seem to be all right for the most part, you know? Baseball is just weird. Should there be a football island? That's what Sean Jaspie is saying in the background. Remember how Fight Island wasn't really an island? That was a bummer to me. As a very, very extremely casual fight fan, I got got by this gentleman who runs the UFC. Dana White, right? That's like, call me naive, ladies and gentlemen. I was actually thinking he bought like a tiny Greek island and was building an arena there. No, not on sand. I just thought it would literally be an island. But no, no, no, but like, it's not really an island though, right? Like it's a man-made island. Right, that's what I'm saying. I want it like, I have nothing against Dubai, but I just thought it would be in Greece. I was planning Mediterranean vacations is what I was, yeah, I don't know, that's all I was hoping for. Yeah, Ted and I would go back to the old country. He would go to Greece. Ted's Greek. All right, there's Tom Brady, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Rick T. And we've got Drew Lough. We've got Devonte Parker to $3.99.  That's Larry Fitzgerald to $88.  We got Austin Eckler, dual threats. Austin Eckler, $32.75 for the Bolts. And you got Cameron Dantzler to $7.99. And Bryce Hall to $9.99, that is. NFL should just buy an island of Hawaii. Build a handful of stadiums in there. Everyone just plays there. Jalen Hertz is your pen pals autograph. Black Ink for the Eagles. Anthony Pickett with the Fly Eagles Fly. Did he have an island? I didn't realize it. Yeah, I'm sure they can get that island pretty cheap. He's not using it anymore for nefarious means. Let's turn that island, let's turn that island of sorrow into an island of good. There's Gardner Minchee to $85. He's off the COVID list now. There's AJ Eponessa. And we've got this guy right here, Anthony McFarlane Jr. These elite company cards, we're gonna randomize to these to one, two, three, or four. So if, for example, three gets randomized to the top, they'll all go to this position right there. Let's set that at the end there. NFL has the money, too. Swagger, dual relic, Rob Gronkowski. I heard on the old sports talk radio that Gronkowski, or maybe it was NFL Live on the NFL Network, that Gronkowski's looking good. He's looking slim, he's looking light on his feet. That's still Patriots edition. That'll go to Anthony P. Well, we'll see. There's Cameron Dantzler to $3.99. I like these playing cards, cards into those. It's also Jeroboro. Bangles, James Teal, Lastbod Mojo. And we've got Impact Impressions Autograph, Rashad Breeland, 84 out of 149. That is for Kansas City, Colin, with the Chiefs. There's Lynn Bowden, Jr. from our Raiders, $7.99. And there's four out of 10 at Tyler Johnson for the Bucks. Does Lynn Bowden get 799 all-purpose yards this year? Over or under? I was gonna say 82 catches. I think we're gonna be under on 82 catches. But 799 all-purpose yards? Over maybe, right? Oh, C-chef under? All-purpose? I'm talking all-purpose. Rushing, receiving, and special teams. I don't know, it might take him till mid-seas. Yeah, there are a lot of mouths to feed there. But I don't know, one or two 80, 90, 100-yard plays, he's got that capability. He'd be kind of a quarter of the way there. John Gruden is apparently, this is relevant also if you are interested in fancy football. He intends to use, and I don't know if this is just like, this is just John Gruden just being, just doing smoke and mirrors to throw people off the scent, but allegedly he wants to use Josh Jacobs a lot next year. You know, he wants to ride Josh Jacobs.  He's playing with a bad shoulder blade or something like that, injury, last handful of games, but Gruden is, Gruden believes he should have won the Rookie of the Year, Offensive Rookie of the Year. So he wants to, he wants to, I don't know, I guess show people the media they were wrong or something like that. Now this could just be misdirection, but take that for what it's worth. But I know the last year Raiders did play much better when Josh Jacobs was setting up the pass basically. Xbox. Good luck everybody. Here we go. There's Lin Bowden Jr. again. Over 99 yards though, right? Might get that in one game. There's James Morgan to 799. Different for some reason. There's a little teal in the background, but it's not. All right. And we've got throwback threads. Marcus Allen, old Raider right there, 51 out of 299. We'll go to Vegas. That'll be for Mike, the last Vegas Raiders. Mark Andrews to 399. Three out of 10. We've got a die cut right here, Justin Herbert.  That's for the Bolts. That's gonna go to Andy de Souza with the Chargers. When does he start? Week one or after. Points will randomize this to one person in the break as one lot. Donovan Peoples-Jones to 799 and Dak Prescott. Doesn't that look a little different? See a number on it. Some sort of variation or super short print or something like that. Anyway, it looks especial. Rick Teess' case hit. Mike and Rick. It's like, that's why it looked different. There you go, thanks guys. Dallas Cowboys, Scott V with the case hit. Dak Prescott, James Lynch to 399. We'll save one of these Tom Brady's here too. Spellbound Derek Henry, bit of a dent down there to 25. That's usually as a result of a machine that pushes cards and sometimes it catches. Titan, sorry, Sam Rail. Full throttle, Mink of his Patrick to 349. Into the numbered card pile. And we've got Anthony McFarlane, Jr. 105 to 199 for the Steelers. That'll go to Wes Thomas in Pittsburgh.  So Patrick thinks Herbert will start in week three, he was saying earlier, and he thinks Joe Burrow will start week four. I think Joe Burrow starts week one, doesn't he? I mean, are they really gonna start Ryan Finley week one? I don't know who else is there, to 399 James Morgan. D-Mon says, please start Ryan Finley. Why, why? Have you taken a strong position on Ryan Finley's? Would that be hashtag good for the hobby? Been holding some of his cards, there it is. So D-Mon, what's your ideal situation? If Ryan Finley starts and just goes off for the first three or four weeks of the season, right? Leading to a unfortunate quarterback injury, which leads to Ryan Finley being traded to that particular team, and then continuing to go off the rest of the season, and now D-Mon's sitting on an amazing Ryan Finley collection. Ooh, there it is, what a story. But like, what if, I don't know, that team could use a Ryan Finley after an injury. What are teams with weak backup quarterbacks? D-Mon doesn't even need him to go off, he just wants him to be middle of the pack just to get some value out of there. Straw, what's going on? I feel like Borough starts week one, though. Although, I don't know, maybe due to the pandemic and the fact that working out and meetings and getting together with receivers and maybe it's harder transition for rookies this year. So, yeah, maybe Borough doesn't start until a little bit later. Maybe they let him marinate a little bit more. That's true, D-Mon. I mean, it could be an open competition. Maybe Ryan Finley did just get ripped and work on his game. Has anybody looked up at our Finley on Instagram? Is there any pictures of him just like, just destroying workouts? Or is Antonio Gibson to 3.99? Yeah, Clayton's asking, when does Tua start? And there's Brandon Ayuk, nice. Penpal's autograph, Blue Ink, for the Niners, Barry Roberts. Yeah, I feel like they're just gonna let Tua sit for as long as possible. Well, it's almost like a red shirt season for Tua, right? I mean, he claims he's healthy, but why risk it? You know, you still have Fitzpatrick, I think there? I mean, dolphins aren't really gunning for a playoff spot anyway. So I would sit Tua, get him a hundred percent, get a good draft pick, and just keep adding to that team. Patrick Goodwin thinks Tua starts week three. Mike and Austin was with me. I don't think he starts this season. Libescushinault Jr. to 7.99. Kurt thinks Tua starts week six when that Fitzpatrick, when Fitzmagic turns into Fitzpatrick, basically. It was Michael Thomas to 3.49, H. And we got primary colors, Nick Chubb. They have four first round picks next year. Yeah, I think they just, I think they just will just ride with Fitzpatrick and see what happens, and they'll probably secretly, front office secretly hopes that they just go like, we'll just win three games or something like that. Derwin James to 3.99.  There's C.D. Lamb, autograph, nice. Turn of the Century Auto 30 out of 99 for the boys. That's gonna go to Scott. J.K. Dobbins to 7.99. Joe Reed to 4.99. I think this will be a big year for Sam Darnold. What are we gonna see from Sam Darnold this year? Adam Thielen, Russell Wilson to 3.99. That's a die cut right there, that's 95. Christian McCaffrey to 99. Jalen Johnson to 99. Three more boxes to go, halfway through this half case break. We have a handful of one box breaks coming up after this, ladies and gentlemen. We've got, where's my schedule here? I forgot to post it. We're wrapping up this elite.  And then we'll do a box of Prism MBA choice, pick a team five, then we'll do a box of obsidian soccer, then we'll do a mosaic cello pack, number 315. And then we'll go through some more orders and we'll see what else we can get into. Remember, pack 316 plus a handful of spots straight up, sells out, that MBA mixer on jaspyscasebreaks.com. Straw is saying schools in Ohio, post-owner canceled football season. Like high schools, I hope the collegiate footballs can still be played. Yeah, I have no idea what's gonna happen there. I mean, I think a lot of conferences are trying to play games within conference and limiting it to that, but then that still doesn't answer the question of when those games are gonna be played. Good luck, everybody. And it looks like Alex is saying that Prism hobby box to help sell out the MLB mixer is almost sold out too. I think we need to do a couple more of those after that, but it's still good that we're knocking out those filler breaks. We got Kirk Cousins, primary colors relic for the Vikings, Anthony P. 9 to 99. And we've got Jake from State Farm, 8 out of 49. Buffalo! Gabe Plunker with the Buffalo Bills. Isn't that try to trade, couldn't trade Mojo? Gets the Georgia quarterback. Another Joe Burrow right here. I'm sure these all add up for the Bengals, James Teal, Aaron Donald. Not sure what's gonna happen to the Ramses here. There's Phillip Rivers for the Blue Horses. Man, that looks weird, doesn't it? 12 out of 49, doesn't look right. Goes to Mike G. and the Colts. We'll see how much Phillip Rivers has left in the tank. There's Eno Benjamin to 7.99. Michael Pittman, Jr. to 3.99. Levion Bell to 99. And K.J. Hamler. For my rivals, the Broncos, that's gonna go to Gabe Plunker, Denver. It's the Black Ink Pen Pals autograph. Star status, Aaron Jones. You know, Bryce, that's a great point. Bryce is like, sadly, half the QBs will be retiring in like the next four to six years, including this guy right here, Tom Brady. This, the next year or two, and I heard this on the radio too, as I was driving here to work. This is for Rick T. and the Buccaneers. It's kind of like this like no country for old men sort of situation. It's just like these old quarterbacks, that are aging old quarterbacks that are kind of captured their last hurrah or two before their skills will significantly decline just inevitably due to time. Tom Brady is still chasing some last late career glory. Green Bay just drafted Aaron Rodgers' replacement ostensibly. There's gotta be some other older quarterbacks who are Drew Brees, last year or two for Drew Brees, right? What does Hila have left in the tank? There's a lot of these guys. Ben Rothsberger, you know, trying to at least, I'm sure he's hoping, hey, can I still put together a couple, you know, two or three healthy seasons before I hang them up? Philip Rivers in Indianapolis, you know? So I'm trying to think what else. Now, those are the main quarterbacks that kind of jump out to me. Quarterbacks getting older, maybe trying to regain, get that chip chase, you know? Try to get a championship one last time. We've got a no country for old men sort of situation here. How's Matt Ryan? Not as old as like Brady Brees and Philip Rivers, I think, and Rodgers. I think he's still kinda young? Maybe not, I don't know. Actually, that's a good question, vanilla gorilla. Deshaun Watson, field vision autograph, nice. Juan with the Texans, nice. 11 out of 25, let's see how Deshaun Watson does with Bill O'Brien. I don't know what Bill O'Brien's doing with that team, but there it is. Joe, welcome back. Vanilla Gris, Stafford will be retiring. That's vanilla gorilla's favorite quarterback, loves him. Welcome back, Joe. That hasn't sold out yet, still have time. Patrick saying, Patrick Goodwin thinks Brady will retire in two years after winning two more Super Bowls this year and next year. That's a hot take. There's Leveon Bell to 24 die cut. I don't know, this guy might have something to say about that. Full throttle, Saquon Barkley. Tommy Stevens to 7.99. Cole McDonald to 3.99. Grant Dell Pitt. I feel like that Buck's defense needs to be a little more championship caliber. There's T Higgins, Penn Powell's autograph for the Bengals, James Teal. James T with T Higgins. Straup Hengel will put a million dollars. He won't win both upcoming Super Bowls. Richard Sherman to 3.99. Jacob Eason to 7.99. To 3.49, we've got Amari Cooper, star status. I'm sorry, DJ Shark and Swagger. Juju Smith Schuster, dual relic for the Steelers. That's gonna be for Wes. There's Dalton Kane to 3.99. And Last Box. Clayton saying, Brady might not even make the playoffs. NFC South, it's pretty tough. Yeah, Saints are still there. And the NFC South, Drew Brees' last stand. They've got a pretty good team. I mean, Falcons, they weren't too far removed from the Super Bowl. I feel like they got Snakebit a little bit with that Super Bowl, and they just hadn't looked right for the last couple of years or so, but they could easily put it all together. Vanilla Grilla, do I think Derek Carr needs to at least win a playoff game? Or else what? That's like the alternative. Austin says Brown's all the way. Listen, Brown's a great on paper. That coaching last year, Freddie Kitchen just wasn't up for it. Yeah, too much time in the kitchen. If, I don't know, if they can get that team together and get that Brown scheme to click, that could be a really dangerous team. Before Gruden looks to replace Derek Carr? No, I don't think playoff win is a requirement. Raiders need to be a playoff team first. I don't think, I don't think, I think there's still a year or two away from that before we can expect them to be like, hey, you guys are gonna win nine or 10 games and try to get into the playoffs, you know what I mean? They still have a ways to go, but I think the next two years are gonna be important for Derek Carr. I think, I think wins may not necessarily be the autograph. Nice, Chase Young Auto, 42 out of 49 for the Washington football team. Jarell Taylor, nice one in the last box. But yeah, I think Derek Carr does need to show that he could be that player. You know, he needs to improve as a quarterback. Decision making, aggressiveness, he's gotta show that, you know? So I think it's less of quantity, like quantifiable numbers. And I think it's gonna be more, in my opinion, I think it's gonna be more like, what can, what kind of improvements are you making with this squad and all these new weapons that you have now? Listen, guys like Henry Ruggs and Lin Bout and Junior and Brian Edwards, a lot of past catching weapons for Derek Carr, they're still rookies though. In a pandemic, they're not getting the full, like treatment, right? Camps and mini camps and all that sort of stuff, rookie camps. So they might take a little bit longer to really, we still got this guy, to really develop.  So, but now it's like kind of, it's kind of a put up or shut up year or two for Derek Carr, I think, another Tom Brady. So they just need to be able to show progress, I think is really important. A.J. Dillon, but Derek Carr has it all now.  A quarterback guru, some people will argue, A.J. Dillon for the Packers, nice one for Rich Schmidt. He's got offensive weapons, he's got a running game, consistency with the offensive coordinators. So he just has to, he just has to put it all together now. Bryce, what about the Lions? I don't mind the Lions. Vanilla Grilla hates Matthew Stafford. Matthew Stafford must have kicked his dog at some point, some point in the past. But, I actually, I just don't like a, I'm not a big fan of Matt Patricia. I don't think he's the guy, you know? I'm just not, not sold on him. But I think they've got some interesting pieces on that team. Josh Allen, Buffalo, Craftsman Relic. Maybe the Raiders, if there were fans in the stands, I would maybe argue that there could be some home field advantage, you know, for the Raiders. And if like Vegas was, I mean, it's open, but if Vegas was just like popping, like pre-pandemic popping, like I could see teams going into flying into Vegas and getting in a little trouble, maybe being a little dehydrated, if you know what I mean, for the next game, right? So, but no, I think this year, that might not be it. Next year though, next year, oh, thanks Clayton. Am I doing, how much am I giving away here? $5, $50 break credit goes. Here's how I'm gonna do it, if you don't mind. I'm just gonna take everybody's names. One through five will get 50 bucks each. Sixth name will get the 600 points, which is actually not a bad consolation prize. And then that's position one, two, three, four for those cards right there. All right, so let's get some blank lists set up here before I flip screens. All right, so let's flip back to the main list right here. So that's everybody right there for the shot at the break credit and the points. And then we've got positions one, two, three, four for those elite, what do they call them, elite connection? Elite company cards right there. Let's roll it, same dice roll, randomize it three and a five, eight times for both lists. This one first, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and eighth and final time. It's gonna be position two. So it's gonna be all the cards, the teams on that position right there. We'll get those. Let's flip back here, eight times for the people for the break credit, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and eighth and final time. So seven down to 32, thanks for getting in. Number six, Anthony, you're gonna get 600 points going your way and then 50, 50, 50, 50 and 50. Mike, Chris, Rick, Anthony, and Dan, $50 break credit each going your way. We're gonna email that to you if you don't see it. It's gonna come as a gift card code too, I think some sort of code. But if you don't see it, check your spam folders and congrats again. And thanks everyone for getting into 2020, Panini, Donners, Elite Football, random team break number three from jaskyscasebreaks.com. Thank you very much and I'll see you next time. Bye-bye.


My first encounter with EMF was probably 7 or 8 years ago now. I was sleeping next to my router, literally 2-3 feet away from my head was the router, and I had insomnia, but I couldn't figure out what it was. Me being the open-minded thinker I was, I started googling, can routers cause insomnia? And then I discovered EMF radiation. At the time, I didn't really think much of it. I moved the router away from my bed, and I started sleeping better. So that thought of EMF kind of eclipsed my mind after I started sleeping fine again. It wasn't really worrying me. So I'm going to go over what EMFs do in the body, the levels of various EMF devices through the house, but for the most part this is going to be a starting point and then you guys can do further research on your own. So, ion channels and membranes that transport calcium in the body rely on voltage and they're over-activated as a consequence of energy provided by EMFs. This particular paper that I'm going to quote specifies some potential issues with this, but these channels do a lot in the body. So over-activation of these can cause a lot of problems depending on the EMF exposure. And on Wikipedia what a voltage-gated calcium channel is, is the activation of particular voltage-gated calcium channels allow calcium to rush into the cells, which depending on the cell type results in activation of calcium-sensitive potassium channels, muscular contraction, excitation of neurons, up-regulation of gene expression, or release of hormones or neurotransmitters. So this can be anything from sleep disturbance to stress hormones, headaches, insomnia, sperm abnormality, calcium metabolism in heart cells can be altered and this is at fairly low levels. So before we go over what levels occur in household devices, we have to understand units. And I have two devices here today. This device measures EMF in microwatts per meter squared. This device measures EMF in milliwatts per meter squared. The only thing you really have to know is that this is 1000 times what this is. So if this measures 1000, this will measure 1. To go over microwatts first, the smaller measurement, levels as low as 50 can cause sleep disturbances from chronic exposure, 60 to 100 increase stress hormones, higher adrenaline levels as we go from 30 to 200, headache, irritation, concentration, behavior problems, fatigue, headaches, sleeping problems. So we have generally overlapping problems with sleep, memory, concentration, stress hormones at these what I would consider relatively low levels of EMF exposure. Now this is anywhere from 50 to 400 to 500 microwatts per meter squared. Once we get higher from 10,000 up, we see cancer rates get influenced, memory function, motor skills, there's retarded learning in children, nervous and immune system problems. And then 50,000 plus microwatts, we see DNA damage. Now we're going to move on to milliwatts, but 125 milliwatts is 125,000 microwatts. So keep in mind 125 milliwatts causes calcium efflux in cells, stress response in cells. At 200 milliwatts, serum cortisol can lower up to 25% in just a matter of hours, 282, three radicals in rat cells, 375 affected the immune system, 450 lower testosterone and mice.  At 1,000, there are changes in immune system function, a 24% drop in testosterone after six hours and leakage of the blood brain barrier. At 5,000, there are changes in intercellular calcium in intestinal cells and a 25% drop in testosterone and insulin. Most household devices don't come anywhere near these levels besides a microwave when it's running. So what we're going to do is go to various devices throughout the house, show how distance affects the EMF radiation and then you guys can correlate the numbers to things you might be concerned about. And of course, we should start with a cell phone, right? So I have my cell phone in my pocket on airplane mode. It's going a little wacky because I'm near the microwave, but that's fine. So let's move over here away from the microwave. The other problem is I have a landline phone right here that's going to cause some signals too, so. So starting with EMF levels of cell phones, I'm using the milliwatt meter because the microwatt doesn't go high enough. Microwatts only goes up to 2,000 and this measures way over that. So a cell phone, when it's not on airplane mode, pulses pretty high every 10 to 15 seconds. So it pulses up to 2 milliwatts when it's not in use every 10 seconds or so. And when it is in a phone call, it goes up much higher. But if we have the phone just a few feet away from us, it dissipates greatly. This is the thing about EMF. When it's right next to you, the levels are very high, but as you step even a few feet away from it, the signal dissipates greatly. Things like aluminum foil, even just one sheet of it, can almost completely block EMF signals. So the thing with cell phones is that we can put them on airplane mode, we can turn them off, we can talk on speakerphone, keep them fairly far away from our head. But there are definitely other devices around our house we want to be mindful of. So here is a landline phone. This is my microwatts meter and right now it's measuring around 1,000 microwatts per meter squared. Now it just went up to 1,700 and when I get within 2 feet of this, the meter doesn't go high enough. So since this is 1,000 times this smaller meter, when this measures 1,000, this is going to measure around 1, but when we get too close, this zeroes out because it doesn't go high enough. It only goes up to 2,000 microwatts. So if the measurement is above 2,000 microwatts per meter squared, we have to use this. When we're right up next to the landline phone, this pulses up to, and this is touching it, this is 65 milliwatts per meter squared. So pretty high levels. Now I'm curious what the levels would be if you were on a phone call. So the level goes up to 3 milliwatts per meter squared. It's going higher, around 3. The base of this phone stand is around 60 milliwatts, and then when you're on the actual phone itself is around 3 milliwatts, which is the equivalent to either 60,000 microwatts or 3,000 microwatts. So definitely something to be mindful of if you can avoid having one of these in your house by all means, or if you are using the phone, try to keep it on speaker phone as far away from your head as possible. So let's take a look at the microwave. The microwaves are probably the worst device you could actually have in your house in regards to EMF. Now, I don't use the microwave, but my family does. Even when the microwave is off, we have around 300 microwatts per meter squared. Now I'm not going to bother with that meter because it is way too low when I turn this thing on. So right now we are measuring around 0.25 milliwatts per meter squared, which is correct as we were measuring around 250 on the microwatts. Well, when we turn this on, this is going to go haywire, 1,500 microwatts per meter squared. Nothing in this house, 1,700. So very, very high levels. Like if you slept next to a microwave for six hours, your testosterone would drop by 25%. It's pretty insane, but that's right up next to the microwave. Let's actually see how it dissipates as we step away from the microwave. So although we have incredibly high levels next to the microwave at 1,500, if we step about 10 feet away from the microwave, it's pulsing between 250 and 500 milliwatts per meter squared. So still very high levels of EMF, especially compared to other things in the house, but it's far less than standing right next to the microwave, that's for certain. But you don't want to use a microwave in general, let alone be standing next to one. I'm going to go up to my parents' room right now because the microwave is actually behind the wall of their headboard. And there's some EMF coming through the wall where the microwave is. So we're going to measure it with the microwave off and then we're going to turn the microwave on and see what the levels are. Right next to my father's end table, we measure around .05 milliwatts per meter squared, which is the equivalent of about 50 microwatts. But I'm going to go down stairs, I'm going to turn on the microwave and then we're going to come back up and take it again. So I turned the microwave on and the levels are actually pretty high in here. They're going up to 150 milliwatts per meter squared, up to 200. So microwave, definitely no go, incredibly high levels of EMF. Definitely the most dangerous device, although exposure is short term. My mother literally would microwave her food five or six times at once at dinner. So maybe that's why her brain is half missing. So here I have a digital meter. Now there's analog meters, there's digital meters, and there's smart meters. Analog meters emit much higher levels of EMF than digital meters, but digital meters still emit some EMF. The old school analog meters don't emit anything at all. The reason I have it wrapped in aluminum foil is to divert the signal and this is very effective. Normally I would have done a better job with some aluminum mesh, made it look nicer, but this meter is going to be replaced tomorrow actually. So the problem with detecting EMF levels from these meters is that they only give off a signal every 30 seconds or so, so if you come to this meter and you're trying to test the EMF levels and nothing's coming up, you have to wait a little while. On this meter it was too high. This is measuring in microwatts, it only goes up to 2000 microwatts. This meter measured at 12, which means that it's around 12,000 microwatts or 12 milliwatts per meter squared. So we're going to just test the meter one more time. So we've got another reading, it's 52 milliwatts per meter squared or 50,000 microwatts per meter squared, much higher than the previous reading. We just got another reading of 38 and now we just got a reading of 45. So pretty high levels of EMF, you know 40-50,000 microwatts would definitely cause issues for most people, definitely disturb sleep with a pulsating pattern. So I just got a pulse of 1800 microwatts or 1.8 milliwatts per meter squared. So the aluminum foil is clearly doing an excellent job of lowering the signal even a few inches away. But as we saw when we went inside the aluminum foil, the signal was still incredibly high. Although I've blocked almost the entirety of the EMF being emitted by using the aluminum foil to diverge the signal, the problem is the back of the smart meter still emits some EMF wavelengths. Now, you guys can see I have some aluminum mesh stapled and taped to the wall here as well as where the wires go into the back of the meter. So if we try to test for pulsing over here, it's going to be very low because I have the screen up now. So we are still getting some, you know, some levels of EMF pulsing here. By no means are they incredibly high, but the reason this mesh screen is here is because there's a bedroom right above the garage where I'm standing. Okay, so we're going to go upstairs to the bedroom and we're going to see what the EMF is pulsing like up there. So before I shielded the meter, the level of pulsing of the EMF was certainly high enough to cause sleep irregularities, heart palpitations, brain fog, memory loss, all of the symptoms that people suffer from EMF over exposure because it was pulsating at a very high amount at pretty consistent frequencies every 30 seconds. Now, once I shielded it, the levels are still pulsing, but they're a fraction of what they were. I would say they're 1 to 5% of what the levels were. And when the guy comes to change the meter tomorrow, I am very curious to see if this new meter is going to pulse out anything. And if it doesn't, how my sleep is going to be affected over the next few weeks. Alright guys, so the Conrad guy came today, installed the new meter. It actually looks exactly the same as the other one. But this one allegedly does not emit a signal. So I did just get a pulse from this. But the level was 25 microwatts per meter square. And before that it was well over 2,000. Okay, so now let's test it from like 5 feet away. The levels are abysmally low compared to the other meter that we had. Literally maybe 0.1% of what they were. So I've been testing this new meter for the past hour or so and it seems like it caps out around 30 microwatts per meter squared. These levels are actually a fraction of what was pulsating in my bedroom. My bedroom was pulsing up to 90 microwatts per meter squared, sometimes 100 microwatts per meter squared. So it's definitely safe to say this has drastically reduced the emission. So I'm assuming when I go upstairs to the bedroom that the levels aren't going to really measure at all. So I've been testing levels upstairs where my sister sleeps and there is no pulsing and the levels are pretty much as low as they can get. It's funny I actually had my cell phone on me earlier and I forgot to turn it on airplane mode. So I was like where are these signals coming from and I forgot I had my cell phone in my pocket. Okay, now we are in one of the bedrooms where the router is. Standing right next to the router, the router is covered in aluminum foil and I am getting levels of around from 1 to 5 milliwatts per meter squared. But if I take this foil off, if I take the foil off, we go from 2 milliwatts to a 100, oh wow. So it was around 2 milliwatts, now we are pulsing up to 150. Right next to the router we are at 150, yes we are pulsing between 150 and 100 which is pretty high. I mean it's not anywhere near what the microwave was but pretty high levels of EMF. Now if we get about 5 feet away from the router, it dissipates very quickly. So for most people being about 10 feet away from your router is perfectly safe. But the interesting thing is that putting just a little bit of aluminum foil on the outside completely blocks the signal whatsoever. The only issue with covering your router in aluminum foil is that it also dissipates the Wi-Fi signal fairly significantly. So that is certainly something to keep in mind when covering it. Now it reduces it by over 90% and if we cover this a little better with maybe another layer or two of foil it would be even more. So we were at 160 milliwatts and with the router covered in foil and the door closed we're at like 0.1. So it's really interesting considering how easily you can block the EMF and how easily you can avoid it. And on the other hand how high it can be and how common devices that people use so much are an issue. So what should we really do about EMF? I think reducing exposure in the bedroom is reducing exposure in the bedroom. I'm not sure if that's the first time I've ever said that but you know reducing exposure where you're sleeping and throughout most of the day is important. In regards to everything we've went over I think the cell phone is the biggest concern. People might want to be more mindful and just not keep it next to them when they sleep and maybe keep it on airplane mode for parts of the day where you don't need to use it. Obviously things like microwaves should be avoided. No one should be using a microwave to cook food let alone stand next to it and fry their brain. The landline phone can be avoided. The router you know you could relocate it throughout your house, you could cover it with foil, you can make a shield. The smart meter is something you can shield, you can get rid of, you can get an old school digital meter back. There's many precautions you can take but one of the big issues in the future might be 5G. So when they come out with these 5G towers that are going to start blasting people with very very high levels of EMF. This is I think where EMF is going to actually unfold and we're going to see very very clear signs that we should not be exposed to this to this form of radiation. Right now there are isolated issues and isolated issues are caused by fairly unusual circumstance. Maybe people keeping cell phones next to their heads all day, people being next to cell towers, someone sleeping next to their router, people zapping themselves with microwaves all day. Maybe being next to a landline phone for long periods of time. There are several instances now where people might have issues with EMF but when they come out with the 5G towers and I actually disabled 5G on my router the 5G EMF signal I don't know what it is but it is much stronger and there needs to be more towers so you know that's definitely going to be a concern I'm sure there's some testing that people are doing and they really are going to start frying people. This can lead to a plethora of problems and we see what happens in you know in high amounts it literally breaks down your cells it influences cell differentiation and gene expression the two most important parts in the body. So I'm a very objective person I like to be aware of things and I was very skeptical coming into the EMF thing and my brother will swear up and down that there is no proof that EMFs do anything that they're harmful or anything but you know you guys can do your own research on that I will provide some links and resources in the description. Big shout out to Matt EMF Minimalist. He sent me these meters to do this stuff he helped me out with a lot of things but if you guys want to check out his channel I will put that in the comments down below. Outside of that if you guys would like to support the channel please subscribe and share the video if you guys want to go on my Amazon shop there's a bunch of stuff on there from the things I use in my day-to-day life to some supplements I'm on Instagram I am on Twitter. If you guys would like to reach out to me for one-on-one consultations you can shoot me an email Frank A. Tefano at gmail.com or reach out to me through the contact form on my website if you have any questions on EMFs I am by no means an expert there are plenty of resources out there there's a new documentary I think that came out recently I'll try to put that in the description if I remember what it is but there's plenty of EMF videos that you can watch on YouTube that go far more in-depth than what I did here.


All right. Welcome, everyone, to today's Google Webmaster Central Office Hours Hangouts. My name is John Mueller. I'm a Webmaster Trends Analyst here at Google in Switzerland and part of what we do are these Webmaster Hangouts, where publishers, webmasters, can join in and ask any search webmaster-related questions that they might have. Bunch of questions were submitted already. But if you're kind of new to these Hangouts and want to get the first questions in, feel free to jump on in and ask now. OK. Well, I was going to allow the new guy to ask, since he seemed to want to, but since nobody else does, if I'm just real quick. I just wanted to check and see. Last week, we had the discussion about the sites outranking our site with content that they stole from us. I sent a couple of examples on Google+, and just wanted to find out if you had gotten a chance to take a quick look at that. I don't have anything specific that I can get back to you on that, but I did pass that on to the team to kind of check out and see if there's anything they need to do that. I appreciate it. Thank you. All right. Otherwise, I'll jump in with the questions that were submitted already. And if anything comes up in between, feel free to jump on in. If you're watching this now, feel free to jump in and join the Hangout in person as well if you'd like. Sometimes there are a bit of technical problems with joining in, so you might just need to refresh that Google Plus link and double check which one's listed there. All right. If you have an affiliate website along with other affiliates, you all show the store address details of the company, branches which you're affiliated with, then does Google get confused with regards to ranking you for things in that particular location, given that a number of websites companies show the same address? Or can Google tell the difference and rank the sites on their merits individually? I'm not completely sure what kind of affiliate website you'd have there where you'd list kind of the original source of the product. So if you have some examples around that, feel free to drop them in the thread and we can take a look at that. Or perhaps this is something that's worth starting a thread in the help forum about to get feedback from other people as well. So I'm not really quite sure what the kind of setup there would be. Does Panda run once a month? And if you improve a section on your website, then how long before Panda score for that section will change, start to see positive or negative benefits from it. So these algorithms tend to run regularly. We don't have a fixed timeframe where we say it runs every Monday or every first Tuesday of the month, but rather this is something that's continuously updated as we re-crawl and re-index the web. So there is no fixed time when it just runs or when you would see a step change in the way that we evaluate the quality of your website overall. And these are things that for a large part also depend on your website in general. So when we re-crawl your website, we have to take a look at all of the individual pages and collect all of the signals across the website. And that's something that doesn't happen from one day to the next. That can take quite a bit of time. How long does it take for schema markup to show up and how can I tell if it's marked up incorrectly even though the testing tool doesn't tell you it's wrong? So this kind of goes into the previous question as well in the sense that crawling and indexing takes a bit of time and some pages get crawled and re-indexed within days. Others take weeks, some pages even take months. So if you make significant changes across your website overall, then that's something that takes a different amount of time depending on which page is where. And in general, this is something that happens on a kind of a step-by-step basis in the sense that when we see the markup on one page, we'll process that and reuse that. We won't wait for the markup to be visible on all of the other pages of your website. So you don't have to wait for that last page to be re-processed. This is something that usually happens fairly gradually. And if you look at the graphs in Search Console, you'll see that there's often kind of a steep climb in the beginning and then it flattens out and kind of catches up a little bit slower. And that's our normal crawling and indexing. With regards to how you can tell if it's marked up correctly or not. So for structured data, we have essentially the three steps that you need to take care of. On the one hand, it has to be technically correct. So it has to pass the testing tool, which sounds like you've done that. On other hand, it has to be correct from a policy point of view. So you have to use the right markup in the right places. For example, if you have a car that you're selling, then you wouldn't mark that up with the recipe markup. These are kind of things where testing tool might say it's okay, but if you look at that manually or if you kind of try to look at that logically, then that doesn't make sense. That's the wrong markup in the wrong place. And the third one, which is the most tricky, I guess, is that the site itself has to be seen as something that is considered to be reasonably high quality so that we can trust the markup that you have on the site. So that's something, essentially, those are the three steps that we look for. One thing you can do to test for that kind of middle ground with regards to whether or not your site is high quality or not is to do a search query for your site to look at the pages that were indexed. And if the site query shows rich snippets in the search results, but the normal searches don't show it, then usually that's a sign that from a quality point of view, we don't quite trust your site perfectly yet. John, can I ask a question about Search Console? Sure. So there was the data issue on August 14th and 15th. Was that at all related to the delay in the Search Console being backed like six, seven days at one point, or it was unrelated to that? I think that's unrelated. So I'm not quite sure which one you're referring to. So but I don't think we kind of called out that delay. And I think one of the other questions is like, do you plan on keeping this delay forever? And that's not the case. That was really something that was just broken on our side. And that took a bit of time to kind of get all of the pipelines back into working order again and catch up with the data. So usually what happens is the data gets stuck at some point, and then it gradually kind of backfills again. And you'll see kind of the normal latency that is always there. Will that ever be less than two days, or it's even with the new beta? Not with the new beta. It's something we've been looking into to kind of see what we can do to make that a little bit faster. But it's always a bit tricky because there are so many things that have to be done before the data is actually visible in Search Console. So that's, I don't know. It's possible that we can get some sources of data a little bit faster. But across the board, we probably at least have a one day delay in there to make sure that we can process all of the data on time. OK, does Google take into account how a page or website performs in different browsers for Panda or rankings, et cetera? As far as I know, we don't do anything specific in that regard. So it's not that we say, oh, we'll look at this page in Firefox or Internet Explorer and Chrome and look at them individually. Essentially, our algorithms look at the page the way that they're rendered for Googlebot. And that's kind of what we use as a basis. The one thing that's kind of separate from this is, of course, the mobile side in that we do look at the desktop view and the mobile view separately. But we don't look into different browser types to see what different browser types would see. On our branch finder, the internal links to the relevant store information is behind dropdowns, depending on what region they exist in. Should we also be having the branch finder page, which shows all branches visible as opposed to hidden behind dropdowns to get maximum SEO value? You don't need to do that. So if those links are on those pages and they're just behind a tab that's kind of loaded by default but not visible by default, that's perfectly fine. We can use that for crawling just the same. With regards to main navigation, are some types better than others? Or does it really not matter as long as it's usable? As far as I've seen, it doesn't matter. So looking back at the number of sites I've looked at from the help forums to larger sites that have come to us, I don't think I've ever run across an issue where the normal site navigation has caused any kind of SEO problems. Kind of outside of the general issue of you have a terrible URL structure and we can't crawl you without finding five bazillion URLs. But that's kind of like the normal navigation structure if you have it, kind of a mega menu style, or you have dropdowns, those kind of things. That's really more up to you and more on that ability than specifically. I read that content silos are a good way of getting content to rank. What do you think about that technique? I'm not particularly sure what you mean with content silos. I assume this is something like creating niche sites or something general, generally like that where you create small websites that are focused on one specific topic. From my point of view, that's usually something we recommend against just because it's a lot easier for you to maintain things on one website where things are interconnected on one website. And it's a lot easier for you to build up that almost brand awareness, I guess, with regards to your one website compared to having all of these other different individual websites that are connected to your main website but not really on your main website. So for the most part, I'd recommend trying to focus on a smaller number of websites and keeping everything together and tying everything together in a reasonable way so that when users find your content, they can easily move along that path to actually converting into whatever you want them to do. If you want them to buy something or sign up for something, make that as easy as possible so that when they go back to your content, they know what to find and what to do. If you wanted a page to rank for a particular phrase or keywords, can you give us some useful tips to get that page to rank? That's just kind of a very broad question. I don't really have like one simple trick to make your website rank number one. There are lots of things that you can watch out for. So I don't really have anything insightful I can add there without going off on a monologue for hours. I know that content behind tabs is deemed less important, but does that also apply to links behind tabs? We talked about that briefly before. So links behind tabs are perfectly fine. We've been implementing schema markup on our e-commerce site for product categories. I think this question kind of goes into like a general theme of which structure data markup should we use for our specific type of product that we're providing, product of service. What I would do in a case like this, if you're unsure which markup to use, I would go to the webmaster help form and get feedback from other people. So in general, when we look at a website that has structured data on it, our algorithms are not going to kind of like be nitpicky and say, oh, you say this is a thing, but actually this is a service and you have the markup wrong in that regard. It's more a matter of, oh, you're using the completely wrong type of markup for something. For example, like I mentioned, you're using recipe markup and you're trying to sell tractors. There's no way these two could be misunderstood and they're very different. They have very different types of required fields. So that's the type of thing we're watching out for. These kind of more subtle differences where it's like, it's not really a thing I'm offering a service. Those are the things where I would on the one hand get feedback from other people to make sure that you're kind of in this discussion-worthy zone and on the other hand, I wouldn't worry too much about this. That's something where even when we look at that manually, we're not going to be nitpicking, say, oh, you use, you called it this, but it's actually like a subtype of this, which is this. So that's kind of what I deem for there. Why does Google rank keywords in singular and plural forms differently? That's a great question. That comes up every now and then. One thing from our side kind of more general there is that we don't have algorithms that are trying to linguistically analyze the queries that get sent in, but rather we try to look at those words just as words and try to figure out where does this kind of fit in with all of the words that we know. So our algorithms are not going to say, oh, keywords is related to keyword, except that it has an S, so it has to be a page that has multiple keywords on it. It's more a matter of our algorithm saying, oh, I've seen keyword and keywords used kind of interchangeably in the past. Therefore, maybe there's something like synonyms. Maybe I can kind of treat these the same. And that's where you might see some things kind of folded together, where we say the plural is kind of the same as a singular. We should treat them in the same way or in a similar way. And sometimes you'll see things kind of split apart where we don't really have recognized this connection between the plural and the singular form. So that's something where there's nobody manually behind our algorithms kind of going through all of the queries that are submitted and saying, oh, this word matches this one and this one matches this one, but rather it's something that our algorithms try to learn by themselves over time. I'd like to know if there's any negative impact on site performance when using tracking pixels. So on site performance, that's something you can obviously test using the various speed testing tools out there. You can use Chrome. Chrome has some really fancy speed tools built in. The Lighthouse tests that are built in there. There's webpage test.org, which does fancy waterfall diagram. So lots of tools are out there that help you to kind of double check to see how your site performance is affected from tracking pixels. Sometimes, depending on the way that they're implemented, they can slow things down. Sometimes they're implemented in a way where they're kind of lazy loaded in the end and they don't really cause any issues with regards to the page actually loading or the visible content loading. So that's kind of something you can double check on your side. With regards to SEO from our side, that's pretty much irrelevant. So sometimes these do slow the pages down a little bit, but we generally differentiate when it comes to speed between pages that are reasonably okay with loading and pages that are really, really slow with loading. And I don't think I've ever seen a case where one tracking pixel moves aside from kind of being in this reasonable range to being completely unreasonable. So usually it's a matter of, I don't know, a couple hundred milliseconds at most where users, of course, if you're blocking the visibility of your content, they might notice and react to that, but from the search side, we're not going to worry too much about that. Our schema markup shows no errors, but we don't see it in search results. We kind of talked about this before. So those three things, I kind of watch out for that. We're moving to HTTPS for one of our major sites, which sits on www and has an m.subdomain. We've bought the SSL certificates for these versions and we're wondering whether we need to buy a certificate for the root domain. So example.com, for example. Is that necessary? Will that cause issues? Is it better to have just in case? So this is something you can probably double check in your server logs to see where people are going at the moment on the HTTP version of your site. Whoops, okay. If nobody's going to the root of your site at the moment, then chances are they're not going to go to the root of your site when you've moved to HTTPS. Personally, I suspect that it probably makes sense to just have that covered. And depending on how you have things set up, you can probably get the certificate for free and setting it up when you're already setting up the other hosts is probably pretty trivial. So from my point of view, I would just get that fixed completely. So you don't have to worry about the details there. User agent, asterix, and then a command and robots text is that also applicable to the adspot, Google, or do we have to mention that separately? I don't know for sure. I believe it needs to be called out separately, but you can double check our documentation. That should be listed there. Suddenly Webmaster Tools traffic for HTTPS was redirected to HTTP, even though my site is configured to do the reverse. What might be happening there? I don't know what might be happening there. So I probably post in the Webmaster Help Forum about that, mention your site so that someone can take a look. Maybe there's something that you're kind of missing there. Does Google Assistant use data from mobile or from the desktop version of Google or is it a new mix of both? So Google Assistant, I believe you mean kind of the featured snippets when we call those out with voice queries. They're taken from the normal search results. So at the moment, the normal search results are based on the desktop version of the pages. Over time, we'll move to the mobile index and we'll use the mobile version. Let's see. Do you know more about the future of the Google AMP project? So it's just AMP project. It's not Google specific. We added AMP to two pages of our site. The product pages are not doing any better. Can you tell us the future? I can't tell you the future, but... So that's an easy question to answer. With regards to AMP, the thing to keep in mind is it doesn't affect your rankings. It's not that your site is going to rank number one just by using AMP or just by using HTTPS. So it does make things a lot faster. But it doesn't significantly change your rankings in that sense. So if you add AMP to one of your websites and it was ranking on page 10, then chances are it's still going to rank on page 10 in the search results. It's not going to jump up to the first page. So that's kind of one thing to keep in mind with regards to expectations. Obviously, if users go to your AMP page and it's significantly faster and they can browse your site and read things about the content that you're providing in a way that's a lot easier for them to consume, then chances are they'll respond to that. And though, I don't know, do more on your website. So that's kind of the indirect effect there. The AMP does have a roadmap in general, obviously. Also, anything new with the mobile index timelines or anything, progress, any more clarity you guys have out there? I don't have any big updates there at the moment. So the team is currently still doing various types of evaluation to kind of double check the classifiers that we have to make sure we can recognize when a site is ready for mobile first indexing. And that's something that's taking a bit of time. But in general, things are looking pretty good and not as kind of crazy as I first suspected. So hopefully it'll be kind of a smooth transition for most sites. Bit of an open-ended question. What if the homepage of a site suddenly drops off all rankings apart from brand search? Is it likely some change in the algorithm has driven this? I don't know. There can be lots of things that kind of affect the rankings of a site. I think you're kind of digging into the right type of details already. So you're looking at the homepage, you're separating out kind of the branded, non-branded queries, and all of that gives you a little bit more insight into what might be happening. So instead of just taking the aggregate count of the search impressions or search clicks that you're getting drilling down into specific details makes a lot of sense. And makes it a little bit easier to figure out what might be happening. If you see across the board for especially non-branded queries, kind of this drop in rankings, then that's often a sign that our algorithm is just not as happy with your site as they used to be. So that's something where you might want to kind of take a step back and think about like, what could you be doing to significantly take your site up to the next level from a quality point of view? Hey John, somewhat related to that, on our site our core content doesn't really change over time because of what it's about. So what we have done over the past few years is we added like a blog section that should try to bring some current events and fresh content into the site. It's gotten to the point where we have way more blog articles than we do core content. And was wondering is it possible that if the algorithm doesn't particularly like our blog articles as much that it could affect our ranking and quality score on the core content? Theoretically that's possible. I mean, it's kind of like we look at your website overall and if there's this big chunk of content here or this big chunk kind of important wise of your content there that looks really iffy then that kind of reflects across the overall picture of your website. But I don't know in your case if it's really a situation that your blog is really terrible and you have guests that would be at the same time. I wouldn't necessarily say it's terrible. I mean, I would say that some of the articles probably don't meet the same quality standard as our core content. In that case, I mean, would you recommend going back through articles that we posted and if there's ones that we don't necessarily think are great articles that we just take them away and delete them? I think that's always an option. Yeah, that's something that I've seen sites do that across the board, not specifically for blogs but kind of for content in general where they would regularly go through all of their content and see, well, this content doesn't get any clicks or like everyone who goes there kind of runs off screaming then maybe that's something where you can collect some metrics and say, well, everything that's below this threshold will make a decision whether or not to significantly improve it or just get rid of it. And that's something we do all the time as well. So in the help center in particular I've seen our tech writers go through the content and say, well, five people last month looked at this page what do we want to do about it? It's like not worth keeping this page anymore. It's kind of like, well, you have it documented but maybe it's not that important after all maybe we need to do something about this. So that's kind of the thing where I kind of across the board recommend taking this critical view of your site and saying, well, this is still relevant content. This is not so relevant content. So that's interesting because I think Lyle is basically saying that he has a lot more content on his blog, on his website than the core content on the website. And I think that's the case for most sites even Google probably has a lot more blog posts than they have FAQ pages or whatever about Google search works. And I guess Lyle's question was more about does having a thousand blog posts and only 10 core content pages have some type of weird impact on how Google understands the core content versus maybe the blog stuff. I think Google's probably good at understanding what's blog posts, even if it's in the same domain than what the core content is. But I don't know if there's something with algorithm that identifies this being blog posts and this being core content. Really tricky because you can't look at the raw numbers. You can't say like a thousand blog posts versus a hundred core content pages because we look at the website overall and we recognize that the core content is like at least a hundred times more important than the blog posts. So just looking at the number of pages doesn't really skew our view of the importance of the content. So that's kind of a tricky part there where it's like you might have a ton of blog posts on there but if we can still recognize that your core content is actually something different then that's not going to cause any problems. That's going to kind of bring you some visitors for the content you're writing about in the blog but the bulk of your visitors are probably still going to go to your core content and we should be able to figure that out. Could it possibly cause any issues of confusion if in a lot of the blog articles we link to the core content? Could that possibly? Okay. Okay, thank you very much. Right. Let's see what else is lined up here. I'm facing problems getting new pages indexed. Let's see, pages are linked, pages are fetched. What else could I check? Could it be related to the crawl budget? This sounds like something you'd probably want to post in the Webmaster Help Forum with a specific example URL so that people can double check. On the one hand from a technical point of view if everything is really set up properly. On the other hand, if there might be some quality issues or other issues that are worth looking into. One thing that we sometimes see is that sites have removed themselves from search completely and if you're not getting any pages at all, after all of these things that you're trying out there then I would double check the removals tool in Search Console just to make sure that there's no kind of pending removal requests there. So sometimes we've seen people remove maybe the HTTP version of their website in Search Console in the hope that they can get everything refreshed. And that's not what the removal tool is for.  And we won't index any new pages until that removal request has kind of expired or been removed. So that might be one thing to look at but I really kind of double check this with other folks in the Webmaster Help forums because sometimes there are some easy things that you might just be overlooking. I'm running a server-side experiment using Google Optimize. I have problem deciding which variation to show when a user has cookie support disabled. My intuition tells me I should always show the original variation but the serving variants randomly cause some issues. So in general, if you're doing A-B testing we recommend showing Googlebot the version that the majority of your users are seeing. If you're really doing 50-50 testing then obviously that's more up to you which one you want to show. What I wouldn't recommend doing is randomly switching that version because that makes it a lot harder for us to actually index your pages properly because every time we look at the page we see a different version of the content and that really makes it hard for us to understand are things significantly changing here on this page all the time or is this basically just two versions that are swapping back and forth? So I try to kind of stick with one version if that's at all possible. How can I check which pictures are actually being indexed on a website? I have 150 to 200 pictures on my website but only 100 are being indexed and I don't know which ones. Good question. I don't often have any quick way to kind of double check what you can do there. So one thing you could do is do a site query in image search. I believe this is a bit tricky because with images you have the landing page URL and you have the image URL itself and I'm not 100% sure which of these URLs a site query would react to. So that's kind of a tricky aspect there in general and in practice as well with regards to image search. So in particular, if you have for example a photography gallery that you're providing on your website and you're linking to the images without any context at all. So the title or the text on the page is just like DSC something and photographed by Canon and these are my settings. Then it's really hard for us to tell what this image is about. Whereas if someone takes this image and embeds it in a blog post or any other kind of webpage with additional content around that image then it's a lot easier for us to say well, this image belongs on this landing page and there's lots of information about this image here. Therefore, we can rank this set of pages with the landing page and the image URL inside for these types of queries. So that might be one thing to kind of watch out for especially if you do have this kind of really basic website for those images. So that's where I'd recommend maybe thinking about what you can do to provide some extra content around those images. Let's see, a company that's reselling templatized real estate listings has included a link to us as a part of a template and now we're getting tens and thousands of links. What can we do there? So in general, we do recognize this situation fairly well and we try to kind of ignore those kinds of links. If you can get that updated so that at least it's a no follow link I think that would be the ideal situation. If you can't get that updated then using the disavow file might be an option if you really don't want to be associated with those links but in practice, I assume this is not going to be a big issue for most kinds of sites. So it's kind of a, I don't know, I'd really, if you really don't want to be associated with this template, I'd really try to push a little bit more with the company that providing this template so that you can actually get this fixed at the source so that you don't have to worry about it too much anymore but probably we're already handling that normally. We understand web pages are manually reviewed with page quality rankings. Can we trigger a new manual review request? And there's lots of details there like our site should be ranking for this particular query. So the reviews that we do from a manual point of view are more with regards to the way our different algorithms are working. So it's not the case that we go and review web pages manually and then use that information for ranking. It's more a case that our engineers come up with different variations of our algorithms or different ideas for new algorithms and then they run those variations past a bunch of testers to test a bunch of URLs, a bunch of search results to see which of these algorithm variations is working the best and providing the most relevant information. So that's kind of where the manual testing comes in. It's definitely not the case that we manually review web pages and use that for ranking like this. So there's no way to kind of have a new manual review because we wouldn't do that in the first case. That kind of makes sense because the internet is gigantic and we don't have enough people to actually look at every web page out there that's I think physically impossible. With regards to the other items mentioned there, we're a fast website. We're first to move to HTTPS and we have HTTP too and we spend a lot of money on ads. We have a lot of structured data on our pages. That really doesn't kind of roll into how we do the bigger ranking. So some of these are ranking factors. For example, HTTPS is a really small ranking factor, but in general, these are things that primarily we think sites should be doing for users in general. So it's not that we would take this and say, okay, you're doing structured data, therefore you will rank higher. From our point of view, we use structured data to try to highlight information in the search results. We don't use that for ranking. So we don't think a site is more relevant just because it has structured data on it, for example. So in practice, what you probably need to do there is kind of take a step back and think about what you could do to significantly improve the quality of your website overall. So that our algorithms, when they come across your website, they not only see that from a technical point of view, you have all of these things checked off, but also from a quality point of view, you're really the website we should be showing number one and way significantly above all of the others that are out there for the queries that you're trying to rank for. And obviously that's not trivial and there's no kind of simple meta tag or manual button that you can click to make that happen. Our site index is dropping from 24 million to 11 million when I do a site colon search. What could that be? So in general, the site colon query is not something I would use for diagnostics at all. So if you're looking at the number of URLs you have indexed, I would always recommend using the site maps count, which is based on the URLs that you actually care about. So for example, if you have a calendar script on your website, we might run into the year 30,000 or something trying out all of those pages and maybe we index all of these empty calendar pages at one point, but if there's no content there, we might as well drop them from our index because they're never going to be shown to users. So those are situations where the index count for a site colon query or even in search console and the index status graph, that might go up really high, but actually the pages with unique content on your site is much smaller. So if that goes really high and it comes back down to kind of a reasonable amount, then that's kind of okay. There's nothing broken on your site and that's something you can catch fairly easily with the site maps where if you submit site maps for URLs you really care about, then you can see of those URLs how many are actually indexed like that. I have a question related to download time which is mentioned in search console. I replaced my website with a single page app and now the average download time is over 2000 milliseconds. Will that cause problems? Probably that's too slow for like a normal website. So probably not from an SEO point of view that you would see any kind of ranking issue there, but maybe I should take a step back. The download time that we show in search console with regards to kind of the crawl stats there, that's based on the download of the HTML page itself. So not the rendered version, so not the version that people see in when they open it in the browser, but the HTML file or the individual URLs that we download from your website. So if you're talking about a single HTML page, for example, that takes two seconds to download, then that's before the browser can even start to render that page and display that to the user, which probably means it's really slow to actually display that to users, especially if you have a lot of embedded content and that's averaging similarly slow. So that's something I would personally try to improve significantly and try to get it back down to that couple of hundred milliseconds mark. From an SEO point of view, again, this doesn't really make a big difference. From a crawling point of view, this can make a difference in the sense that if individual URLs that we try to download take so much time to actually download, then we're probably not going to download a lot of URLs from your website because we are afraid of overloading your server. So if you have a lot of content and the individual pieces are taking a long time to download, then perhaps we won't be able to get all of that content indexed. So from my point of view, I would try to fix this, but I wouldn't see this as something that's like a critical SEO issue that you need to resolve in order to improve your rankings. How can I prevent Google from framing my site like this? There's no way to get out of that frame as a visitor and the title is misleading. So I took a quick look at this. I think it's a Google Newsstand URL. One thing you can do in general with regards to frames is to use X-Frame options. I think it's an HDB header or a meta tag that you can put on your pages. And that, from a technical point of view, prevents browsers from allowing your content from being framed in general. And when we see that with regards to Google indexing, we also respect that. So if another page is just a frame of your content and your content has this X-Frame options header set in a way to not allow framing, then we won't associate that for indexing. With regards to Google Newsstand in general, I don't know what the details are with regards to how content gets in there or how that can be blocked. It might be that that goes through Google News. And if that's the case, then you might want to get in touch with the Google News folks. They have a contact linked in the Help Center for Google News Publishers where you can get in touch with them. I believe you can even do a live chat with someone from the Google News team there. What's the difference in reading Google Analytics and blogger statistics? I don't know. So I don't know exactly what blogger shows there. So I really don't know what the difference between blogger and Google Analytics would be there. My understanding is blogger is somewhat simplified view and analytics of course has all of these gazillions of options that you can follow for more details. Probably the general trends with regards to traffic coming and going are kind of similar. I would assume that you just get more information in Google Analytics because it has all of these detailed options. Let's see. Lots of people trying to join and it's full. I guess that's because it's full. It can happen. What's the plan with regards to search console data? Will it always be seven days behind? No, it should catch up hopefully. At least that's the plan as I know it. Okay.  I realize it's sometimes tricky to get into these hangouts. You have to be quick. Update the Google Plus page quickly to get in on time. I do do these regularly. So if you weren't able to get in this time, try again a little bit faster next time. Usually the first, I don't know, five, 10 minutes, there's still a chance to kind of get in. All right. Maybe I can switch to questions from you all. What else is on your mind? Hi, John. Can you hear me? Yes. My question is, is there an issue with migrating a section of a site to another site? I have two sites that have similar content. One of them is a website. One of them is updated every day, site A, let's say. And another one hasn't been updated in years. I would like to redirect kind of like the blog site from site B to site A. So for example, if I have site B.com slash best coffee flavors redirected to site A.com slash vlog slash top 10 coffee flavors. Would Google see that as something as black SEO or repanelize or something weird, you know? No, I think that's perfectly fine. So kind of joining two sites to simplify them into fewer URLs, perfectly fine. Lots of sites do that. One thing I would just kind of keep in mind when you're doing things that aren't pure migrations from one website to another. So moving from one domain to the new domain, when you're joining sites together or when you're splitting a site apart, you can't easily kind of determine what the final effect will be with regards to traffic from search. So when you're combining two URLs, you can't assume that the final URL that you have will be kind of the traffic from this plus the traffic from that will be the traffic of the final URL. It'd be that there's some differences there because we have to reevaluate the site overall. And sometimes that means you have a much stronger site and we can kind of trust that a lot more and significantly improve that. Sometimes it means you're kind of like taking one good piece of content and combining it with something mediocre and then the resulting content is kind of like, yeah, kind of okay, but not perfect. So those are things kind of to keep in mind. You can't easily determine what the final result will be when you do anything more complicated than moving one site from one domain to another domain. And just to clarify, so for example, if site B is still live, like I'm gonna leave five pages live and then just transfer the blog to site A that's still fine, correct? The Google won't see that as something weird. No, I mean, in general, this is something that just naturally happened. It's not that we would have any reason to call that like manipulation. You're moving parts of your site together to make it easier for maintenance, to make it easier for users to kind of follow along in one place, that's perfectly fine. That's totally up to you. Okay, and I'm sorry, one more thing. So for example, if I have two blogs, two articles inside A or on site B, so let's say best foods for migraines and another article about how to naturally mitigate migraines. And I have inside A an article about everything about migraines, can I three or one, those two to all about migraines and be okay even though they're separate sites? I mean, if this is kind of the new version of the content that you're providing, that's up to you, you can do that. Awesome, well, thank you very much, John, I appreciate it. All right, more questions, what else is on your mind? Hi John, you mentioned the search console indexing report early and I've always struggled with what that actually includes. I just recently had a look and one thing I noticed was AMP pages weren't, didn't seem to be included in it. Could you clarify what actually gets included in that indexing report? In the index data report, so let me see. Essentially those are the pages or the URLs that we feel are canonical within your website. So usually those are the HTML pages that we've known from your website. Sometimes they're things like PDFs and other pages that we also include in web search from your website and show those in the search results. Let's see, it's, yeah, it's mostly that. So not, I believe from the AMP pages, they wouldn't be included because they have the rel canonical set to your other site. So if you have, for example, a separate AMP subdomain probably you'll see that the index status is not very high there. As with any page that has a rel canonical on it, it's not guaranteed that we follow the rel canonical. So if you have AMP on a separate subdomain, you'll probably see some amount of pages being indexed but probably not the full amount. So we'd probably focus on the normal web pages there. Similar, if you have an m.domain, then we'd probably index some of those pages just because we've run across them and for some reason we don't follow the rel canonical there or we've just seen them for the first time and we haven't had a chance to follow the rel canonical. So some amount of those pages will be indexed but the bulk of the pages would be indexed under the normal desktop web version of your site. That kind of makes sense. I just got confused because I looked and I was having 500 pages in the report saying they ranked and then only 200 pages indexed. How can you do that? But if you take out AMP pages, I wasn't sure about PDFs. I also got your report anchor links which I would assume don't go on the index. So anything with a hashtag? What's happening there is we're showing in the search analytics report, we're showing the URLs that we show in the search results and the URLs we show in the search results aren't necessarily the ones that we have as a canonical. So often if you do like info query for that URL you'll see the canonical is actually this other URL. So we might have shown it in search because on mobile we know the mobile alternate version and we show that in search but the canonical that we have is actually the desktop page. So it's kind of weird to hear about this five over 200 kind of mismatch, but theoretically that could happen. It makes sense. Is that the same with HREF link then? If you've got one domain with multiple languages you might get five URLs showing up the results but only one in the index. HREF link would generally have all of the pages indexed because that's kind of how HREF link works. It works between the canonical versions of the pages. So we'd have those versions indexed separately. Cool. Cheers. Right. So I have to run. Yeah, Yun. I set up the next hangout. So feel free to pin that one on Friday or add the questions there at least. All right. So thanks a lot and hopefully I'll see some of you all again next time. Yeah. Yun. Hi everyone. Thank you John. Bye.


Good afternoon, good evening. Yes, my name is Tequero Buon, and I'm from the University of Nairobi, Department of Clinical Studies, Faculty of Medicine. So my talk is from theory to practice, developing shared competencies amongst one health practitioners at multiple levels. A lot of what I'm going to talk about has been described by, I think the first two or three presenters. So my work is very easy, and I believe I'm going to take the prize, because I'll take the least amount of time. So that's the outline of my presentation. The first competency is the ability to do something successfully or efficiently. And some of the important attributes is the person has to demonstrate sufficient expertise. It also tools the organization to recruit and select staff more effectively. It also helps in evaluation of performance, identify skills and competency gaps. It also provides for customized training and professional development, helps for planning, and especially for succession, and it also makes change management processes to work more efficiently. So to talk about the competencies and one health. We need to think about one health professional education courses, and it's important to note that the world over. They often have similar cost content, as well as similar expectations for learners, but they often employ multidisciplinary approaches, especially during curriculum development, as has been mentioned by Professor Nangami. This often will involve the inclusion of stakeholders, such as professional and regulatory bodies industry, alumni, and many others. If you look about at this from Amoguniatal in 2018, you can see that we have the technical one health competencies that tend to be similar across various curricula the world over. But what do we do, what do we, what is the thought of various bodies or various professionals on the non technical competencies. I know Edna had mentioned something about in the previous presentation about the social sciences, the gender issues such as project management and communication. This is where we tend to have a lot of different sets in the curricula, and this is where we sometimes do not lay enough emphasis, but it's very important that we do so when we're developing curricula for training different cadres. If you talk about pre-service training, what we have undertaken at the university over the past few years, we've had joint development of curricula, especially for didactic courses. And I know certain undergraduate programs already have one health as a standalone course that is examinable and is also in their transcripts. We also have views of community based education approaches to multidisciplinary groups of students. As you can see there don't to talk about what Carol will come with next, but this is basically some of the things that we do use of simulations. And there's also joint response to one health events, especially disease outbreaks. This is service training. We have short courses seminars, workshops and conferences, and this is just an example of a series of trainings you've been carrying out in collaboration with one health echo and various other partners. And of course, these help in creation of communities of practice, as well as in development of partnerships as well as continuous professional development. We also have post graduates and diploma stroke degree programs. This is the degree program Professor Nangami was talking about, and it was a joint development between the University of Nairobi School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, as well as a more University School of Public Health and our various partners. And it's part of what we envision to have for in service training so people can end up with postgraduate degrees in one health and related courses. So some of the challenges we've seen over the years is in scheduling of joint events. For instance, when you have multiple institutions working together, multiple faculties working together. We all have our timetables and schedule so bringing multidisciplinary students to work together sometimes can be a challenge, because one group is doing exams and other group has done exams and are free for training. So that has always been a challenge. They have also been challenges in funding. This of course is an ongoing course on for it comes to most aspects of training, not just in Kenya, but the world over the silo mentality and team building is something that is not very easy to to some amount it's a very serious problem. But I think it's something that needs to be done. We probably during the discussion how to look at how would we break the silos or do we link the silos. Okay, because this is a very serious problem when it comes to development of one health and training of one health in this country and the region. We also have issues of changing government and institutional policies and priorities. You find that for instance with the diminishing funding, some institutions might want to reduce the number of courses that they offer, especially if the student numbers are low. This definitely affects the training of students and the offering of different courses. And the other problem is sometimes there's expertise that isn't locally available. Luckily, as we'll see later on this issue has been solved for the most part, but the use of digital services we're not able to communicate. And like the pre COVID days where we had to ship people from all over the world. These days we can have trainings online. So some of the recommendations or lessons lunch is that we need to have a way of affecting culture change, because this is what will help different professions to work together, and in the formation of one health teams. We need to in build sustainability in our training programs at all levels, whether it's at primary school secondary school tertiary education we need to build sustainability, because if any program or any activity is not sustainable.  We also need to work as multiple institutions, so that we take advantage of the expertise. If the expertise is not available at the University of Nairobi, but we have it at more university who have been our partners for many years. So it's easy for us to get this expertise and share it and use it to enhance one health training in the country in the region. There's also South to South collaboration. And this is also something that is very possible. We need to as much as possible try to also use the expertise available in the region. And this also makes it more affordable when you want to have face to face training, but of course online training now also helps to enhance this. We also need to have ways of influencing policy on training. And this can only be done by having high quality research sorry for the spelling error so high quality research would help to enhance this. So the dissemination of findings to all relevant stakeholders. So this would help us to influence policy and talk to government talk to the people who hold the money and ask them to assist us in training some of these. So one health competency developments at all levels is key for workforce growth in this dynamic world with emerging threats, as had been mentioned by Professor Jenga Monene. And my last slide is just references, and I say thank you.