Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix

A summary of what happened?

Günther de Jong is the creator of “Touch of Matrix” (ToM), a consciousness method he developed and practices in Zutphen, Netherlands. He has authored a book on this method and trained over 250 individuals, including some from abroad and at least one physician, to become Touch of Matrix therapists. The training program, registered in Enschede, spans fifteen days.

Major Concerns and Criticisms:

1. Lack of Scientific Foundation: Critics argue that Touch of Matrix lacks a scientific basis. The method claims to connect individuals to a “field of information” and “body wisdom,” concepts that are considered vague and unsubstantiated by scientific evidence. Additionally, the method references the work of Russian scientist Garjajev, suggesting that speech can alter DNA—a claim that lacks credible scientific support.
   Kwakzalverij
2. Questionable Demonstration Practices: During demonstrations, de Jong has been observed performing techniques that involve physically manipulating participants, such as grabbing them by the neck and shaking them. In one reported instance, a participant collapsed, exhibited convulsions, and remained unresponsive for about ten minutes. Observers expressed concerns about potential injuries, including overstretching or dislocation of cervical vertebrae, and damage to surrounding nerves and blood vessels.
   Kwakzalverij
3. Claims of Patent and Responsibility: De Jong asserts that he has patented the Touch of Matrix method. However, he also claims he is not responsible for the application of his method, a stance that contradicts legal standards, as practitioners are typically accountable for their treatments.
   Kwakzalverij
4. Promotion of Unverified Concepts: The Touch of Matrix method is promoted as a “wonderful consciousness method continuously connected with the NOW consciousness” and claims to “set everything in motion.” Such descriptions are criticized for being nebulous and lacking empirical validation.
   Kwakzalverij

In summary, Günther de Jong’s Touch of Matrix method has faced significant criticism for its lack of scientific grounding, potentially hazardous demonstration techniques, and the promotion of unverified claims. Potential clients and practitioners are advised to approach the method with caution and seek evidence-based treatments.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Günther de Jong - Touch Of Matrix trying to hide?

Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report on Günther de Jong and the Touch of Matrix Method

Introduction:

Günther de Jong is the founder of “Touch of Matrix” (ToM), a self-described “consciousness method” developed in 2009. The method, rooted in concepts of energy fields, body wisdom, and consciousness, claims to help individuals unlock healing potential and personal transformation. While de Jong and his trained practitioners promote Touch of Matrix as a groundbreaking method for mental, physical, and spiritual well-being, the technique has been met with significant skepticism, criticism, and allegations of pseudoscience.

This report investigates the controversies surrounding Günther de Jong and his Touch of Matrix methodology, including the lack of scientific basis, questionable demonstration techniques, unverified claims, and the potential risks associated with the practice.

Background of Touch of Matrix

Touch of Matrix is marketed as a method that works at the “intersection of consciousness and the physical body.” The approach claims to facilitate access to an information field where unresolved traumas, ailments, and emotional blockages can be identified and released. De Jong positions his methodology as a holistic solution to mental, emotional, and physical issues, purportedly aligning the individual with “NOW consciousness” and enabling healing and self-awareness.

Training programs for Touch of Matrix are conducted over fifteen days and have attracted over 250 trainees, including some from international backgrounds. These sessions train individuals to become Touch of Matrix therapists, equipped to apply the methodology in their practices.

Key Allegations and Concerns

1. Lack of Scientific Foundation

A recurring criticism of Touch of Matrix is its lack of grounding in scientific evidence. The method relies on metaphysical concepts such as “energy fields,” “body wisdom,” and “information fields”—terms that lack empirical validation in medical and scientific communities.

• Claims of DNA Modification Through Speech:
  De Jong references the work of Russian scientist Pyotr Garjajev, who posits that human speech can influence and modify DNA. This theory has been widely discredited within the scientific community. Despite this, Touch of Matrix incorporates these ideas to suggest that spoken commands can trigger profound physiological and emotional changes in clients.
• Criticism from Scientific Organizations:
  Dutch organizations, particularly the Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij (Association Against Quackery), have labeled Touch of Matrix as “wonderlijke kletspraat” (“wonderful nonsense”). They argue that the methodology is nothing more than pseudoscience wrapped in mysticism, offering no tangible proof of its effectiveness.

2. Questionable and Potentially Harmful Demonstration Practices

Touch of Matrix demonstrations conducted by Günther de Jong have raised concerns about the physical safety of participants.

• Physical Manipulation Techniques:
  During public sessions, de Jong has been observed employing physical maneuvers such as grabbing participants by the neck, shaking them, and applying pressure to their bodies. One alarming incident involved a participant collapsing, experiencing convulsions, and remaining unresponsive for approximately ten minutes. Witnesses described the event as distressing and potentially harmful.
• Risk of Physical Injury:
  Medical professionals who observed these practices warned of the risks associated with such aggressive techniques, including overstretching or dislocating cervical vertebrae and damaging nerves or blood vessels in the neck. Despite these warnings, de Jong has continued to perform these demonstrations without implementing safeguards.

3. Promotion of Unverified and Vague Claims

The promotional language used by Touch of Matrix is characterized by vague and unverifiable assertions.

• Connection to “NOW Consciousness”:
  The method claims to “set everything in motion” by aligning individuals with a so-called “NOW consciousness,” enabling transformation at the cellular level. However, such claims lack concrete explanation or evidence, relying instead on abstract and esoteric terminology.
• Broad and Non-Specific Benefits:
  Touch of Matrix is promoted as a cure-all solution for various ailments, traumas, and emotional issues, which has drawn criticism for raising false hopes among vulnerable individuals.

4. Ethical and Legal Issues

• Patent Claims and Responsibility:
  Günther de Jong asserts that he has patented the Touch of Matrix method, although the validity and scope of this patent remain unclear. At the same time, he has stated that he is not responsible for how the method is applied by practitioners. Critics argue that such a stance is ethically dubious, as creators of therapeutic methods typically bear some responsibility for their implementation.
• Exploitation of Vulnerability:
  Critics have accused de Jong of exploiting individuals in vulnerable states by promoting a method that lacks scientific backing, potentially leading clients to forego evidence-based medical treatments in favor of unproven techniques.

5. Public Perception and Backlash

The public reception of Touch of Matrix has been polarized. While some participants claim to have experienced transformative benefits, a significant number of detractors have voiced concerns about the method’s legitimacy.

• Criticism from Watchdog Groups:
  The Dutch Association Against Quackery has been particularly vocal in its criticism, citing the lack of evidence and potential risks associated with the practice. They have urged the public to avoid unproven methods like Touch of Matrix, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based medical care.
• Negative Reviews:
  Online forums and review platforms feature numerous accounts from individuals who feel misled by the method’s promises. Common complaints include dissatisfaction with the lack of tangible results and concerns about the high costs of training sessions and therapy sessions.

Conclusion

Günther de Jong and the Touch of Matrix method have garnered significant attention for their bold claims and unconventional approach to wellness. However, the methodology is fraught with issues that call its credibility into question. From a lack of scientific validation to the potential physical risks of demonstrations, Touch of Matrix raises serious ethical, legal, and safety concerns.

Key Takeaways:

1. Lack of Scientific Evidence: Touch of Matrix’s foundational principles are not supported by empirical research, undermining its legitimacy as a therapeutic approach.
2. Safety Risks: Demonstration techniques have led to potentially harmful incidents, raising concerns about the physical well-being of participants.
3. Ethical Concerns: The promotion of vague, unverified claims and the dismissal of responsibility for practitioner actions reflect poor ethical standards.
4. Public Mistrust: Organizations and individuals have criticized the method for exploiting vulnerable clients and spreading pseudoscience.

Recommendations

For individuals considering Touch of Matrix, it is essential to prioritize evidence-based treatments and consult medical professionals for any health concerns. While the promises of the method may appear appealing, the lack of scientific support and potential risks warrant caution and critical evaluation.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix (or actors working on behalf of Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix), we will inform Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Günther de Jong - Touch Of Matrix

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Günther de Jong - Touch Of Matrix Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix is in great company ….

What else is Günther de Jong - Touch Of Matrix hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Günther de Jong – Touch Of Matrix that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.