The post Myrtus Communis appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Wednesday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

US environment agency let Bayer pick regulations for destructive weedkiller, documents show Internal Environmental Protection Agency documents obtained through ongoing litigation show that the agency consulted directly with Bayer while developing restrictions for dicamba, a controversial herbicide known for drifting away from treated fields and damaging neighboring crops and vegetation. According to the records reviewed by The Guardian, EPA officials presented Bayer with multiple regulatory options addressing dicamba’s volatility and runoff and specifically asked the company which mitigation measures it preferred. One May 2025 presentation offered two approaches for applications during high temperatures: one would have prohibited dicamba use above 85 degrees Fahrenheit, while another would permit applications at temperatures as high as 95 degrees provided treatment occurred on no more than 50% of a farmer’s untreated dicamba-tolerant soybean and cotton acreage. Bayer selected the second option, which critics considered less restrictive, and the EPA subsequently incorporated that approach into its regulatory decision. The records also show discussions concerning runoff protections, with the agency asking Bayer for its preferences before moving forward. The EPA ultimately reapproved over-the-top dicamba use on genetically engineered soybeans and cotton in February 2026 after earlier registrations had twice been overturned by federal courts over procedural and environmental concerns. EPA maintains that its new restrictions, including application limits, buffer zones and measures intended to reduce drift, allow farmers to use dicamba while protecting people and the environment. Bayer similarly argues that consultation between pesticide manufacturers and regulators is a normal part of the registration process and that the resulting restrictions are supported by scientific evaluation. Environmental and farm advocates interviewed for the article contend that the documents demonstrate excessive industry influence because the company financially benefiting from dicamba sales was effectively invited to choose among regulatory alternatives intended to control risks created by its product. Dicamba has generated years of complaints from farmers reporting damage to non-resistant soybeans, vegetables, fruit trees and other vegetation after the chemical moved beyond targeted fields. The article also discusses research examining potential human-health risks associated with dicamba, including reported associations with certain cancers, although observational associations do not by themselves establish that dicamba caused individual cancer cases. The newly released documents therefore raise a broader regulatory question beyond dicamba itself: how much input pesticide manufacturers should have when the EPA determines the restrictions governing their own products, and whether consultation intended to make regulations workable can cross into allowing regulated companies excessive influence over federal safety requirements.

Special Guest: Tia Severino

You may not control what happens to you. But you still have a say in what happens next.

What if peace didn’t depend on other people behaving the way you want them to? What if freedom didn’t require your past to change—or someone else to finally give you permission to move forward?

In No Hostages: A Guide to Personal Freedom, Tia Severino shares the principles that helped her move from a life spent running—from pain, consequences, other people, and herself—to a life rooted in peace, purpose, faith, and personal freedom.

Drawing from hard-earned experience, faith, humor, and practical wisdom, Tia explores how the stories we tell ourselves shape our lives—and what can happen when we stop trying to control everything around us and start tending to what is actually ours.

Inside, you’ll explore how to:

• Separate what you can control from what you can’t
• Recognize the stories and beliefs keeping you stuck
• Practice the sacred pause between what happens and what you do next
• Focus on solutions instead of living inside the problem
• Build a life rooted in principles rather than circumstances
• Change the conversation happening inside your own mind
• Clean up your side of the street without taking responsibility for everyone else’s
• Live life on life’s terms without surrendering your peace

This isn’t a promise that life will cooperate. People will disappoint you. The past will remain the past. Storms will come.

You cannot control the wind. But you can strengthen your roots.

The door is open. You have the keys.

3 of 4 Adults Would Get a Dementia Vaccine Nearly three-quarters of Americans age 50 and older say they would likely or definitely receive a hypothetical vaccine that could substantially reduce their risk of developing dementia, according to new research from the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics published in JAMA Network Open. Researchers surveyed 1,529 adults age 50 and older about whether they would accept a low-cost, multi-dose vaccine that reduced dementia risk by 50% among people considered at high risk. No vaccine is currently approved specifically to prevent dementia, so the survey measured willingness to receive a hypothetical future product rather than acceptance of an existing dementia vaccine. Interest generally increased with age. About 31% of respondents in their 50s said they definitely would receive the vaccine, compared with 35% of adults age 70 and older. Researchers also found differences by sex and race. Women were more likely than men to express hesitancy, 23% versus 19%, and were less likely to say they definitely would receive the vaccine, 29% compared with 39% of men. Black respondents had the highest measured hesitancy at 26% and were less likely than white respondents to say they definitely would receive it, 20% versus 36%. The study comes amid growing research examining whether existing vaccines might influence dementia risk. Observational studies have associated shingles vaccination with lower rates of dementia, with some research estimating reductions around 15% to 20%, while other studies have reported associations involving influenza, RSV, pneumococcal, hepatitis and DTP vaccination. Those findings do not establish that vaccines directly prevent dementia because observational studies can be affected by differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, including health behaviors and healthcare access. Separate 2026 studies of the recombinant shingles vaccine have continued to report lower dementia rates among vaccinated populations, but researchers acknowledge potential residual confounding and the need for stronger causal evidence. The new USC study therefore does not demonstrate that a dementia vaccine works or that one currently exists. Its primary finding concerns public willingness: if an effective preventive dementia vaccine were developed, a substantial majority of middle-aged and older Americans surveyed indicated that they would consider receiving it, although meaningful demographic differences in willingness remain.

Welcome back to another “Homeopathic Hits” episode on The Robert Scott Bell Show!

Today’s Homeopathic Hit is Myrtus communis, commonly known as Myrtle.

Boericke highlights this remedy for chest pains often found in consumptive states, incipient phthisis, bronchitis, cystitis, pyelitis, and stimulation of the mucous membranes. The leaves contain Myrtol, described as an active antiseptic.

Download the  Information Sheet

Hour 2

Special Guest: Dr. Sage Wolfe

Dr. Sage Wolfe is a Certified Wolfe Non-Surgical Therapist with 14 years of experience and the primary author of the Wolfe Non-Surgical manual. He holds doctorates in both Indigenous Medicine and Natural Medicine, bringing together extensive study, practical experience, and a deep understanding of the human body.

As a former professional gymnast, Dr. Wolfe has firsthand knowledge of the body’s remarkable ability to recover, as well as the physical limitations and challenges that can accompany injury, performance, and healing. This experience has helped shape his approach to health and Wolfe Non-Surgical Therapy.

Dr. Wolfe has taught students and practitioners around the world, working with people from a wide variety of backgrounds, including housewives, teenagers, retirees, massage therapists, nurses, chiropractors, medical doctors, and oncologists.

Known for his energy and expansive knowledge of health, healing, and psychology, Dr. Wolfe brings both practical insight and passion to his teaching. Through Wolfe Non-Surgical Therapy Certification, his goal is to give students knowledge and skills that can serve as a doorway to greater success on both a personal and professional level.

Special Guest: Sofia Karstens and Danielle Lasher

Spirit of 1776 is preparing to hold what it describes as a major whistleblower disclosure on election integrity on October 5, 2026, in Washington, D.C. The organization says the event will feature firsthand testimony and documented evidence presented publicly and on the record by the individuals who possess it, while stressing that this is not a rally and that the substance of the disclosure will not be released in advance. The event is scheduled for 3:00 PM, with the exact venue being provided only after press credentials are approved, and Spirit of 1776 says independent and alternative media will be given front-row access. On today’s show, we’ll take a closer look at what has been announced, what remains unknown, and why this upcoming disclosure could draw significant attention once the testimony and evidence are presented publicly.

Sofia Karstens

Sofia Karstens is an activist in California who worked closely with publisher Tony Lyons and Robert F. Kennedy Jr on several projects including Kennedy’s best selling book: The Real Anthony Fauci. She collaborates with several organizations in the legal, legislative, medical science, and literary spaces and she is co-founder of Free Now Foundation, a non-profit preserving medical freedom and children’s health. She was the creator and host of the Patriot Network news show 4th Branch, taking the show from its inception through 45 episodes. She was the founder and treasurer of the Common Sense SuperPAC which supported Robert Kennedy’s bid for President, and is founder and current treasurer of the Decentralize America PAC, supporting common sense candidates in both state and federal elections who focus on winding back corporate capture and corruption at all levels of government. She is also founder of Decentralize America non profit (501c4) working on legislative and judicial initiatives in California to lay strategic infrastructure for the course correct n the state.

Danielle Lasher

Danielle Lasher is a researcher, author, advocate, and longtime voice in women’s health, birth education, and medical freedom. With a psychology degree from Penn State emphasizing research and statistics, she has spent more than two decades translating complex health information for broad audiences, contributing to more than 50 publications and building online communities focused on pregnancy, natural birth, menstrual health, and informed decision-making. She co-launched Informed Choice Maryland, co-founded the Maryland chapter of the Parental Rights Foundation, and helped found Spirit of 1776 with Dr. Robert Malone and others. Danielle also served as National Advance Operations Manager for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign in 2023 and 2024, overseeing events nationwide, and in 2025 co-launched the U.S. Council on Domestic Relations to support state-level parental rights efforts. A mother of six, Danielle combines research, writing, personal experience, and advocacy to help individuals and families better understand the information behind important health and policy decisions.

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post EPA-Bayer Dicamba Scandal, Tia Severino, No Hostages: A Guide to Personal Freedom, Dementia Vaccine, Myrtus Communis, Dr. Sage Wolfe Non-Surgical Healing, Sofia Karstens & Danielle Lasher, Election Whistleblower and MORE! appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

The post Myosotis Symphytifolia appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Tuesday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

BREAKING: Massive MAHA Coalition Representing 63 Million Followers Sends Open Letter to Trump and RFK Jr. Demanding REMOVAL of the mRNA Platform A coalition of 168 physicians, scientists, researchers, lawmakers, activists and public figures has sent an open letter to President Donald Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. demanding substantially stronger federal action against mRNA vaccine technology and warning that members of the MAHA and health-freedom movements could withdraw political support if their demands are not addressed. The effort was coordinated by physician Mary Talley Bowden, and signatories include Peter McCullough, Louisiana Deputy Surgeon General Sean Troxclair, Rep. Thomas Massie, former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson, Robert Malone, Aseem Malhotra, Bret Weinstein and others. The organizers say the signatories collectively reach more than 63 million social-media followers. The letter contains six principal demands: removal of mRNA and what it describes as gene-therapy-derived technologies from vaccines; termination of the COVID-19 PREP Act emergency declaration; a recommendation that Congress repeal the PREP Act itself; prohibition of direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising; revision of HHS policies the signatories believe financially encourage coercive medical practices; and elimination of conflicts of interest at the CDC, FDA, NIH and NIAID. The letter criticizes the administration for continuing to permit COVID mRNA vaccination, providing federal contracts connected with future mRNA products and approving an mRNA influenza vaccine that the authors contend has inadequate safety and efficacy evidence. It also challenges federal policies affecting pregnant women and children and argues that existing approaches to shared clinical decision-making weaken parental authority. The signatories make numerous additional claims concerning deaths, injuries, reproductive effects, cancer, myocarditis and vaccine-safety surveillance. Those assertions represent the coalition’s interpretation of the evidence and are not independently established simply by their inclusion in the letter. The political component is unusually explicit: the signatories argue that the health-freedom constituency was important to the Trump-Kennedy political coalition and state that continued inaction could cause supporters to back alternative candidates in state races, the midterms and 2028. The article therefore documents a significant internal policy dispute within the broader MAHA and health-freedom coalition. Rather than praising incremental changes to federal vaccine policy, the group is demanding removal of the mRNA vaccine platform and major changes to liability protections, pharmaceutical advertising, healthcare incentives and federal health-agency governance, while directly tying those demands to future political support.

Trump signs executive orders directing federal review of beef policies President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on September 4 aimed at reshaping federal policies affecting cattle producers, meat processors and the beef market, with provisions addressing competition among processors, interstate meat sales, country-of-origin labeling, livestock predators and regulatory burdens. The first order directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture to increase staffing and investigative resources for enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act, including investigations of alleged unfair or deceptive practices, price manipulation and conduct that restrains commerce. USDA must coordinate with the Justice Department on potential antitrust enforcement and provide a report within 60 days describing current enforcement efforts, resource requirements and plans for the coming year. The administration also wants to expand opportunities for ranchers to sell meat without relying as heavily on the nation’s largest processors. USDA is directed to make it easier for states to participate in federal and cooperative meat-inspection programs, provide technical assistance and training to small and very small processors, modernize inspection procedures and review reporting requirements that do not contribute to food safety. The order additionally calls for a guaranteed-loan program for small and regional beef processors through the Strengthening Processing for U.S. Ranchers Program. A second executive order requires federal agencies to review regulations, guidance and policies affecting ranchers and return recommendations within 90 days. One major component is country-of-origin labeling. USDA and the U.S. Trade Representative must examine whether existing law provides authority for mandatory beef-origin labeling and analyze its economic consequences. Depending on the findings, USDA could pursue regulations under existing authority or recommend legislation to Congress. Mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef and pork was repealed in 2015 after World Trade Organization decisions exposed the United States to retaliatory tariffs from Canada and Mexico. The order also requires the Interior Department to examine whether gray wolves and Mexican wolves have satisfied recovery criteria that could justify changing their status under the Endangered Species Act, while USDA and Interior consider changes to compensation programs for livestock killed by predators. The measures come shortly after Trump temporarily increased the tariff-rate quota for imported lean beef trimmings by 300,000 metric tons, more than 660 million pounds. American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall praised efforts to expand processing competition but opposed the additional beef imports, arguing that recent cattle-price declines could interfere with rebuilding the U.S. cattle herd. Overall, the orders initiate reviews, investigations and administrative actions rather than immediately rewriting every federal beef policy, meaning several of their most consequential provisions will depend on subsequent agency findings and rulemaking.

Special Guest: Liz Reitzig

Liz spent 10 years working in PR and marketing for a small firm in Washington DC. She brings her knowledge on branding, marketing, social media, and engagement to her consulting work for small farms and food-based businesses. As an activist, writer, spokesperson, and the mother of five healthy children, Liz has spent well over a decade working on the politics of food access in support of small farmers and those who wish to obtain food directly from them. Her work on several key cases and her proactive approach to policy and activism have helped shape national and state level food and farming policies. She finds it vitally important that we stay engaged politically to preserve our food freedom. In 2007 Liz founded Grassfed On The Hill, a local buying club for GMO-free and fresh farm foods, serving the greater Washington DC metro area. Her work pioneering buying clubs in the region created a niche for consumers seeking direct farm fresh foods and gave Liz a unique perspective into the habits and needs of consumers as well as the challenges facing local producers. She writes at NourishingLiberty.com where she covers everything from food politics, permaculture, gardening, and recipes to special moments in parenting. Liz earned an English and Literature degree from the University of Maryland. In 2017 she fulfilled a decade-long dream and became certified in Permaculture Design. She founded the Real Food Consumer Coalition (RFCC), a non-profit dedicated to advocacy and lobbying, on behalf of small farmers and the consumers who depend on them. She has been featured on The Food Network, NPR, Wall Street Journal, and the John Stossel Show. She has been subject matter in national newspapers and has been featured in the much acclaimed documentary Farmageddon.

Welcome back to another “Homeopathic Hits” episode on The Robert Scott Bell Show!

Today’s Homeopathic Hit is Myosotis symphytifolia, commonly known as Forget-me-not.

Boericke highlights this remedy for chronic bronchitis, phthisical states, night-sweats, and respiratory complaints marked by profuse muco-purulent expectoration, gagging, vomiting during cough, and pain in the lower left lung.

Download the  Information Sheet

Hour 2

Government by Consent of the Governed – Later On George Ford Smith argues that the American government’s claim to derive its authority from the “consent of the governed” differs substantially from ordinary understandings of consent because government frequently acts first and obtains public acceptance afterward, if at all. Writing from the Mises Institute’s libertarian perspective, Smith uses war, monetary policy and the growth of the national-security state to develop his argument that Americans have gradually accepted government powers they never individually or explicitly authorized. He cites the Gulf of Tonkin episode and subsequent escalation of the Vietnam War as an example of government action based on misleading information, then discusses the Trump administration’s 2026 military action against Iran as another example of what he views as public opinion being conditioned before major government action. Smith also revisits World War II, relying heavily on Garet Garrett’s interpretation of Franklin Roosevelt’s pre-Pearl Harbor policies. These historical interpretations, particularly Smith’s characterizations of presidential motives and military events, reflect the author’s libertarian analysis rather than uncontested historical conclusions. Smith then turns to monetary policy, arguing that Roosevelt’s 1933 departure from the domestic gold standard and subsequent development of the fiat-dollar system occurred without meaningful public consent. He notes that the dollar has lost roughly 96% of its purchasing power as measured by the Consumer Price Index since that era and contrasts the 1933 and contemporary gold prices to illustrate currency depreciation. The article then challenges James Madison’s famous argument in Federalist No. 51 that government is necessary because people are not angels. Drawing on historian Robert Higgs, Smith argues that Madison effectively assumed the legitimacy of coercive government without resolving the deeper philosophical question of when one group may legitimately compel another. Smith concludes that Americans have become financially and institutionally dependent on government programs, making fundamental reform increasingly difficult. His central argument is philosophical rather than empirical: modern government operates primarily through coercion and generalized political acceptance rather than explicit individual consent, and restoring a system based more heavily on voluntary exchange would require reconsidering assumptions about taxation, war, monetary policy and the legitimate scope of government.

CDC Working on Parameters for Counting Measles Deaths as Cases Rise The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is developing a standardized definition for determining when a death should officially be classified as caused by measles, amid a disagreement between federal officials and Pennsylvania authorities over several deaths involving people who had measles. As of September 18, the CDC reported 3,471 confirmed U.S. measles cases and 301 hospitalizations during 2026 but listed zero measles deaths for the year. The agency said it had not received death records identifying measles as the underlying cause and is working with the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists to establish standardized parameters so states and counties classify measles deaths consistently. Pennsylvania, however, reported four “measles-associated” deaths as of September 16. The cases include an infant whose coroner said died from measles, an adult whose death was attributed to measles complications, and another infant who tested positive for measles but whose coroner reportedly concluded the infection was not responsible for the death. The disagreement became political when Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro alleged that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. personally directed the CDC not to include the Pennsylvania deaths in federal statistics. Kennedy denied that characterization and said the CDC was applying a national standard rather than allowing individual jurisdictions or political officials to determine federal mortality classifications. Kennedy said deaths would be counted when National Center for Health Statistics records identify measles as the underlying cause. CDC Director Dr. Erica Schwartz similarly emphasized the importance of distinguishing between someone dying while infected with a disease and dying because of that disease, comparing the issue with disputes over COVID-19 mortality classification. The CDC reported three measles deaths in 2025, involving two children in Texas and one person in New Mexico, whose state authorities attributed the deaths to measles, although Kennedy has emphasized that those individuals had underlying medical conditions. The immediate issue is therefore not whether the Pennsylvania patients had measles, but what criteria should be required before measles is recorded as the underlying cause of death in national statistics. The CDC’s proposed standardized definition is intended to make that determination more consistent across jurisdictions.

FDA Warned COVID Vaccine Safety Tool Was Broken, Then Silenced Doctor Who Told Them, Report Finds Federal health officials were warned in early 2021 that a statistical method being used to identify potential COVID-19 vaccine safety problems could miss important signals, according to a BMJ investigation summarized by StudyFinds and based on internal government correspondence obtained through public-records requests and Senate investigators. The controversy centers on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, and two statistical approaches intended to detect unusual patterns among adverse-event reports. FDA medical officer Ana Szarfman and statistician William DuMouchel identified a potential “masking” problem because Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines accounted for more than 90% of approximately 1.1 million VAERS reports received during the rollout. If two similar vaccines generated elevated reports of the same condition, comparing one against a database dominated by the other could make the condition appear less unusual and prevent the algorithm from generating a signal. Szarfman and DuMouchel advocated an alternative statistical approach they believed better addressed the problem. Internal correspondence cited in the investigation shows that FDA associate director Craig Zinderman asked Szarfman in May 2021 to stop producing and distributing her COVID vaccine data-mining analyses, explaining that other monitoring systems were following potential problems and that changing methodology could create confusion. Former FDA vaccine regulator Peter Marks later complained internally that Szarfman continued conducting analyses after being told to stop. The issue became more consequential when the CDC eventually conducted a different proportional-reporting analysis. According to records examined by The BMJ, 13 consecutive weekly reports between May and July 2022 generated signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Bell’s palsy and tinnitus, while the FDA’s method did not flag those conditions during the same period. Myocarditis following mRNA vaccination, particularly among adolescent and young adult males, was subsequently recognized as a rare adverse event. Importantly, a VAERS safety signal does not demonstrate that a vaccine caused a reported condition or establish its incidence. It indicates a reporting pattern requiring further investigation. The investigation’s central finding therefore concerns the effectiveness and handling of the federal surveillance system rather than establishing that every reported event was vaccine-caused.

Pfizer Gave $500,000 to Groups That Lobbied to End Religious Exemption in Massachusetts Pfizer’s publicly disclosed 2024 funding records show that the company provided a combined $500,000 to two nonprofit organizations that later joined an effort supporting Massachusetts legislation to eliminate the religious exemption from school vaccination requirements, although the available disclosures do not establish that Pfizer provided the money specifically to lobby for that legislation. Pfizer reported providing $400,000 to the American Society for Meningitis Prevention for “Policy Efforts for comprehensive Meningococcal Meningitis Vaccination” and another $100,000 to the March of Dimes Foundation for a “Vaccine Policy Campaign Maternal Immunization.” More than a year later, both organizations appeared among approximately two dozen signatories to a June 1 letter supporting Massachusetts House Bill 2554. The legislation would eliminate the state’s nonmedical religious exemption for required school vaccinations, leaving medical exemptions, while also expanding vaccination-data collection and reporting. Representatives of both organizations signed the legislative letter. Children’s Health Defense emphasizes the financial relationship because Pfizer manufactures vaccines and therefore has a commercial interest in vaccination policy. However, Pfizer’s disclosed descriptions of the two grants concern broader meningococcal and maternal-vaccination initiatives rather than H.2554 specifically, and the article reports no evidence showing that the $500,000 was earmarked for the Massachusetts lobbying effort. Supporters of H.2554, including the Massachusetts Medical Society, argue that eliminating nonmedical exemptions can increase vaccination rates and reduce the likelihood of outbreaks in schools, pointing to states including California, Connecticut, Maine and New York that have eliminated religious exemptions. Opponents argue that the proposal infringes religious freedom and parental authority and could force families who object to vaccination on religious grounds to remove their children from conventional schools. The article quotes several medical-freedom advocates who contend that pharmaceutical funding of organizations involved in vaccine-policy advocacy creates a conflict of interest and should receive greater public disclosure. Neither funded organization responded to The Defender’s requests for comment, according to the article, and Pfizer also did not respond. The documented facts establish a financial relationship between Pfizer and the two organizations followed by those organizations’ support for the Massachusetts legislation, but they do not by themselves demonstrate that Pfizer directed or purchased their positions on the religious-exemption bill.

Talking It Out Helps People Spot Fake News, Study Finds Discussing questionable news stories with other people may improve people’s ability to recognize false information more effectively than simply thinking about the same material alone, according to an experiment involving 111 college students published in PLOS ONE. Researchers organized participants, whose average age was approximately 21, into groups of three and presented them with four news stories, two categorized as genuine and two as false. Participants initially rated each story individually on a scale ranging from likely false to likely true. They then considered some stories independently by writing out their reasoning, while discussing others with their group over Microsoft Teams for up to six minutes. Participants subsequently rated the stories again. Accuracy in identifying the false stories improved following group discussion, whereas individual reflection produced no meaningful improvement. Accuracy for genuine stories changed relatively little under either condition. Researchers also found evidence of a carryover effect: participants who first discussed one false story with other people subsequently became better at evaluating a different false story on their own. When participants’ discussion partners had initially been more accurate, about 73% improved following the conversation. When partners were initially less accurate, only about 36% of participants moved toward the incorrect assessment, suggesting that in this experiment accurate judgments exerted a stronger influence than inaccurate ones. Researchers investigated whether the effect could simply reflect social pressure, familiarity between participants, fear of judgment, enjoyment of group interaction or greater effort, but those factors did not adequately explain the improvement. Even among four groups in which every participant initially believed a false story, five of the 12 participants changed their assessment to false after discussing it. The researchers caution against applying the results too broadly. The experiment included only four news stories, all participants were college students, approximately 79% were female, participants encountered stories repeatedly, and the exploratory study was not preregistered. The findings therefore do not demonstrate that group discussion will reliably defeat misinformation in the general population or on social media. They do suggest that collaborative reasoning can expose people to arguments or perspectives they may not generate independently and that this process may improve subsequent evaluation of questionable information.

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post MAHA Coalition Demands, Liz Reitzig, Nourishing Liberty, Trump Beef Policy, Food Freedom, Myosotis Symphytifolia, Government by Consent of the Governed, CDC Measles Death Criteria, Vaccine Safety Scandal, Fake News Detection, Pfizer Attacks Religion and MORE! appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

The post Muriaticum Acidum appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Monday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

If We Want a New Medical Paradigm, We Must Support the Practitioners Brave Enough to Build It Stephanie Locricchio argues that changing the medical system requires more than criticizing conventional healthcare practices or educating doctors about alternative approaches. Patients and families must also financially and practically support practitioners who are willing to establish independent practices and challenge prevailing medical norms. Writing after attending the Medical Academy of Pediatrics & Special Needs conference, Locricchio describes meeting physicians and other practitioners who said they were learning approaches to children’s chronic health problems that they had not encountered during their conventional medical training. She focuses particularly on a conversation with a practitioner employed by a medical practice that did not accept unvaccinated patients. Locricchio questioned how the practitioner reconciled that policy with informed consent and with information she was encountering at the conference. The practitioner explained that because the practice had no unvaccinated patients, many families simply followed the recommended vaccination schedule without raising questions. Locricchio uses the exchange to illustrate what she sees as a larger conflict between practitioners who begin questioning conventional approaches and the institutional systems in which they work. She also recounts her own family’s medical experiences, including what she describes as secondary infertility following an influenza vaccination during pregnancy and her son’s history of ear, nose and throat problems, ADHD, PANS and food allergies. These experiences led her family to leave their previous pediatrician and seek a physician focused on identifying underlying causes rather than primarily treating symptoms. Her account of a connection between vaccination and her infertility is presented as her personal experience and belief rather than evidence establishing causation. The practitioner Locricchio met at the conference said she had considered establishing her own practice but was afraid to do so, which prompted Locricchio to examine another obstacle: families may encourage doctors to leave conventional systems while simultaneously expecting those independent practitioners to accept insurance. She argues that insurance arrangements and other features of conventional healthcare can restrict the type of practice some physicians want to build. Her central message is that organizations such as MAPS can educate practitioners and expose them to different clinical perspectives, but education alone will not create a new healthcare model. Patients and parents who want greater emphasis on informed consent, individualized treatment and investigating underlying contributors to chronic illness must actively seek out and support practitioners attempting to operate that way. The article is primarily a personal commentary and call for community action rather than a scientific evaluation comparing conventional and alternative medical models. Locricchio concludes that meaningful change requires cooperation between practitioners willing to question established practices and families willing to sustain the independent healthcare models those practitioners create.

Special Guests: Steven Abramowicz

Steven M. Abramowicz is the CEO and Editor of Heartland Journal and Heartland Publishing, where he has transformed a hometown print newspaper into a national platform for the voices mainstream media refuses to amplify. A 33-year Wall Street veteran, Steve made an unlikely pivot from managing millions to giving a microphone to the silenced—and he hasn’t looked back.

Born in the wine country of Napa, California and educated at the University of Southern California, Steve began his career in finance, building a successful wealth management practice. But everything changed when he witnessed corporate media’s coordination firsthand and, later, when his daughter’s swim league policies forced a reckoning. In 2022, he took the helm of Heartland Journal (formerly Mill Creek View) following the passing of its founder, Fred Fillbrook, and began rebuilding it for the digital age.

Steve’s debut book, ***Songs About the Heartland: A Journey from Wall Street to Main Street*** (Heartland Publishing, 2025), captures the extraordinary stories from over 500 podcast episodes. The book reads like a backstage pass to conversations Hollywood doesn’t want you to hear—featuring candid interviews with Kevin Sorbo, Dean Cain, Kirk Cameron, John Schneider, Riley Gaines, and dozens more who risked careers to speak their truth.

Check out the book’s companion song he co-wrote with hit maker Porter Martin.

Part memoir, part manifesto, the book traces Steve’s own unlikely arc: from witnessing River Phoenix’s death outside the Viper Room in 1993 (which drove him away from Hollywood into finance) to returning decades later as a podcaster amplifying the very voices the industry tried to silence.

Available on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more, the Heartland Journal Podcast reaches over 1.2 million monthly listeners across all 50 states. The show features doctors who questioned the narrative, scientists who lost everything, actors blacklisted by Hollywood, FBI whistleblowers, trafficking rescuers, and everyday Americans fighting for faith, family, and freedom.

Steve lives in Tennessee with his wife Kara and their two children. A born-again Christian, his mission is simple: speak truth without fear and remind Americans that one voice—amplified with conviction—can still make a difference.

Welcome back to another “Homeopathic Hits” episode on The Robert Scott Bell Show!

Today’s Homeopathic Hit is Muriaticum acidum, Muriatic Acid.

Boericke highlights this remedy for low fever states with high temperature, great prostration, septic decomposition of fluids, haemorrhages, involuntary stool while urinating, and marked involvement of the mouth and anus.

Download the  Information Sheet

Hour 2

RFK Jr. takes step toward electromagnetic radiation rules Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is moving the federal government toward a renewed examination of potential health effects from electromagnetic fields, radiofrequency radiation and wireless technologies, including cellphones and Wi-Fi. HHS issued a request for public input as part of the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again agenda, seeking information that could be used to update federal guidance and potentially inform future warnings or regulatory decisions. The Washington Examiner characterizes Kennedy’s concerns about electromagnetic radiation as outside the scientific mainstream, while Kennedy and advocates for stricter wireless-safety standards argue that existing federal exposure limits have not adequately incorporated newer research or changes in how extensively people use wireless devices. The initiative is particularly significant because current federal radiofrequency exposure standards largely focus on preventing harmful heating of human tissue, while an ongoing scientific debate concerns whether long-term exposure below those thresholds can produce other biological effects. Kennedy has previously expressed concern about wireless radiation and has supported calls for additional research into possible relationships with neurological, reproductive and other health effects. The article notes that HHS’s action does not itself establish new exposure limits or prove that everyday wireless exposure causes disease. Instead, it begins a federal information-gathering process that could influence subsequent policy. The Federal Communications Commission historically has had primary responsibility for regulating radiofrequency exposure from communications equipment, while agencies including the FDA have evaluated health evidence. The renewed HHS review therefore could eventually affect how multiple federal agencies approach wireless safety. The broader policy question is whether existing standards remain adequate for today’s levels and patterns of exposure or whether federal guidance should account for research investigating possible effects at exposure levels below those known to cause tissue heating. Kennedy’s move gives that question greater federal attention, but any eventual regulatory changes would require additional scientific assessment and administrative action.

Pennsylvania asks for CDC help on measles outbreak, demands agency recognize measles deaths Pennsylvania requested emergency assistance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as its measles outbreak expanded beyond 700 confirmed cases across 37 counties, but state officials tied that request to a dispute with federal health officials over four deaths Pennsylvania classifies as measles-associated. Pennsylvania Health Secretary Debra Bogen initiated a request for a CDC Epi-Aid, which can bring federal epidemiologists and other specialists into a state for short-term outbreak assistance. In a letter reviewed by Reuters, Bogen said Pennsylvania would withdraw the request if the CDC did not transparently recognize and communicate information about the four deaths. The dispute involves Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy has questioned whether deaths reported during recent measles outbreaks were actually caused by measles or resulted from other medical conditions and instructed the CDC not to include the Pennsylvania fatalities in its national count. Pennsylvania officials maintain that the deaths are appropriately classified as measles-associated. The distinction between “caused by measles” and “measles-associated” is important because patients can have underlying conditions while an infection contributes to deterioration or death. HHS spokesperson Grace Davis Jamison responded that CDC assistance and the federal method for tabulating deaths are separate matters and accused Pennsylvania of conditioning public-health assistance on a political dispute. Pennsylvania had previously declined additional CDC personnel because state officials believed they could manage the outbreak, but infections subsequently accelerated. When the first two deaths were announced on August 25, Pennsylvania had 393 cases in 28 counties. By mid-September, the outbreak had exceeded 700 cases, and one newly reported fatality occurred in Mifflin County, more than 100 miles from the original Lancaster County epicenter. State-administered MMR vaccinations also slowed from more than 3,500 doses during August to roughly 1,100 during the first half of September. The controversy therefore combines two separate issues: controlling a rapidly expanding outbreak and resolving disagreement between state and federal officials over how deaths associated with the outbreak should be classified and reported.

Trump says he will demand some childhood vaccines be split into five shots President Donald Trump said on September 18 that his administration would push pharmaceutical manufacturers to separate some combination childhood vaccines into as many as five individual injections administered over a longer period, presenting the proposal as a way to reduce what he believes are risks associated with giving multiple vaccine components together. Trump suggested spacing the shots approximately six months apart and connected the proposal to his administration’s broader effort to revise the childhood immunization schedule. He did not specify exactly which combination vaccines would be divided into five products, how the proposed schedule would operate clinically or what scientific evidence supported the specific five-shot approach. Trump also linked the proposal to autism, but large epidemiological studies and reviews have not established that routine childhood vaccination causes autism. The announcement follows an August executive order directing federal agencies to restructure childhood vaccine recommendations and encouraging the use of separate measles, mumps and rubella vaccines rather than the combined MMR vaccine. A major practical obstacle is that individual measles, mumps and rubella vaccines are not currently licensed and available in the United States, meaning manufacturers would have to develop or reintroduce products and obtain regulatory authorization before such a policy could be broadly implemented. The administration’s changing vaccine policy also reflects priorities advanced by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has advocated reconsideration of the number, timing and combination of vaccines recommended for children. Supporters of separating vaccines argue that parents should have more control over which vaccines their children receive and when, while mainstream medical organizations generally support combination vaccines because they reduce the number of medical visits and injections needed to achieve immunization. Trump’s statement represents a policy objective rather than an immediately operational requirement. Implementing it would involve regulatory, manufacturing and clinical questions, including whether appropriate single-component vaccines are available, how revised schedules would affect the timing of immunity and what evidence would be required to support changes to existing recommendations.

Medical Procedure Without Consent Is ‘Assault’: CHD Science, Legal Departments Respond to HHS Request for Comment Children’s Health Defense leaders submitted comments to the Department of Health and Human Services responding to an August 2026 request for public input on how the federal government categorizes vaccine recommendations, how shared clinical decision-making should operate and what changes might rebuild public confidence in federal vaccine policy. CHD scientists Brian Hooker and Karl Jablonowski argue that informed consent and shared decision-making should apply to every vaccination decision rather than functioning as a distinct recommendation category. Their position is that a “routine” federal recommendation should communicate the government’s public-health judgment without implying that individual discussion, parental permission or patient consent is unnecessary. They also call for greater disclosure of the scientific evidence underlying recommendations, including clinical-trial and post-marketing surveillance information, uncertainties, conflicts of interest and adverse-event data. Their comments argue that public trust should result from institutional transparency rather than being treated primarily as a communications objective. CHD General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg separately focused on parental authority, religious freedom, bodily integrity and state school-vaccination requirements. She welcomed an August 10 executive order emphasizing parental choice but argued that legal protections should extend further, particularly for families seeking religious exemptions from school vaccination requirements. CHD Advocacy Director Michael Kane similarly supported stronger federal protection of parental choice and religious exemptions. CEO Mary Holland argued that federal agencies should acknowledge variation in individual vaccine risks and benefits rather than relying on broad assurances, while attributing rising childhood chronic illness in part to vaccination. That causal interpretation is CHD’s position and remains disputed within the scientific and medical literature. The article therefore functions primarily as a compilation of CHD’s policy and legal arguments submitted to HHS rather than an independent scientific analysis of vaccine safety. Its central recommendation is that federal vaccine policy should distinguish government recommendations from individual consent, make the underlying evidence more publicly inspectable and give parents and patients greater authority over vaccination decisions.

Question of The Day!

I have a tonsillar mass or inflammatory process of the left tonsil. I had swollen lymph nodes of the left side of neck as well as the back of neck. I discovered the lymph nodes back in August 2025 and the tonsil mass a few months after. A few weeks back the lymph nodes returned to normal except there are a few on the back of my neck that are still mildly enlarged. I had been seeing an ENT and did get one CT of the neck. Today the ENT cleared me but never gave me steps to try to get rid of the mass which is a little smaller than a quarter. What do you recommend to try and resolve this issue and what could have caused this in the first place. – Patrick

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post The New Medical Paradigm, Steven Abramowicz, Songs About the Heartland: A Journey from Wall Street to Main Street, Muriatic Acidum, RFK Jr. Targets EMF, Pennsylvania Measles Political Theater, Trump Splits Vaccines, Informed Consent Rights, Lymph Node Concerns, and MORE! appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Sunday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

This week on the Sunday Conversation, I’m once again reaching over to our new Saturday Conversations on PTL to share an episode that I believe deserves to be heard by our regular Robert Scott Bell Show audience. From time to time, we’re going to bring these PTL conversations here so those of you who haven’t yet joined us on Saturdays can hear what we’ve been doing. The PTL program gives me an opportunity to explore the intersection of health, healing, faith, personal responsibility and our relationship with God in a slightly different way, and this week’s conversation revolves around a deceptively simple question: Do you believe you’re worthy of healing?

That’s a question I’ve had to confront in my own life. I grew up immersed in the pharmaceutical model. My father was a pharmaceutical representative, my uncle was a medical doctor, and as a chronically ill kid I learned to look toward drugs, doctors and procedures whenever something went wrong. My parents loved me and did the best they knew to do, but none of us understood the role that nutrition, environmental exposures and other lifestyle factors might be playing in my health. Eventually, after years of suffering, my prayers for another way led me toward homeopathy, natural medicine, better nutrition and a completely different understanding of what healing could mean.

But asking for help and being willing to receive it are two different things. Sometimes we pray for an answer and then reject the answer because it doesn’t arrive in the packaging we expected. Maybe the person who shows up isn’t the kind of doctor we recognize. Maybe the recommendation sounds strange. Maybe it involves changing habits we don’t want to change. In my case, it meant hearing words like “homeopathy” and “organic” at a time when those ideas were nowhere near as familiar as they are today. I could have dismissed them because they didn’t fit the medical worldview I’d inherited. Instead, something told me to keep listening.

That leads to the deeper issue of identity. When you’ve lived with an illness or diagnosis long enough, is it possible to begin seeing it as part of who you are? “I have allergies.” “I have arthritis.” “I have this disease.” Eventually the diagnosis can become intertwined with our expectations for the future. I’m not suggesting that illness is imaginary or that someone can simply think away a serious disease. I’m asking whether our beliefs about what is possible can sometimes become another limitation. If healing were possible, would we recognize the opportunity? Would we believe ourselves worthy of pursuing it?

One of the most important lessons of my own recovery came from the homeopathic doctor who became my mentor. After a couple of years of changing my diet, cleaning up my lifestyle, using homeopathic remedies and doing the work he had taught me to do, I thanked him for healing me. His response was immediate: “I didn’t heal you. You healed yourself.” At first that sounded almost harsh. But he wanted me to understand that a healer can teach, guide and provide tools. He couldn’t make my choices for me. I had to apply what I’d learned. That realization permanently changed my understanding of what the word “doctor” should mean: not someone we surrender our health to, but ideally a teacher who helps us become more capable participants in our own healing.

Then comes one of the biggest barriers many of us encounter: “I can’t afford it.” I remember being 24 years old and being told I needed to start eating organic food. This was 1990. Organic food wasn’t sitting in every supermarket, and when I could find it, the price difference could be intimidating. I didn’t have much money, but I remembered what I’d been praying for. If this was part of the answer I’d been asking God to reveal, was I going to reject it solely because I couldn’t immediately see how the numbers would work?

I took that leap of faith and discovered something surprising. As I shifted my priorities, cooked more of my own food and spent less money elsewhere, the economics began looking very different. That’s why I challenge the assumption that investing in health is automatically unaffordable. It doesn’t mean every product, practitioner or therapy is worth the money, and it certainly doesn’t mean financial limitations aren’t real. It means we should examine our priorities before automatically deciding that something beneficial is impossible. As my friend Joel Salatin likes to put it, if you think good food is expensive, consider what chronic disease can cost.

That doesn’t mean we simply pray and wait for everything to be done for us either. I absolutely believe in prayer, providence and miracles. But I also believe we’re responsible for acting on what we learn. If I pray for healing and then receive guidance to change the food I’m eating, clean up my environment or abandon habits that are hurting me, I still have a role to play. Faith and personal responsibility don’t have to compete with each other. Sometimes taking responsibility is precisely how we respond to the answer we’ve been given.

I also spend some time introducing the PTL audience more deeply to homeopathy and the story of Samuel Hahnemann, the German physician who developed the system more than two centuries ago. His dissatisfaction with the often harsh medical practices of his era eventually led to the principle commonly summarized as “like cures like” and to the preparation methods that became central to homeopathy. Whether this is completely new to you or something you’ve used for years, my reason for discussing it is the same reason I talk about these subjects every day: I want people to know that there are ideas and approaches outside the conventional medical model so they can investigate them and make informed decisions for themselves.

Ultimately, though, this episode isn’t simply about homeopathy or organic food. It’s about belief, agency and worthiness. What do you believe about your body? What do you believe about your diagnosis? What do you believe about aging? What possibilities have you rejected because someone told you they were impossible? And perhaps most importantly, when you ask God for guidance, are you willing to remain open enough to recognize an answer that doesn’t look anything like the one you expected?

I don’t believe we’re here merely to survive, manage symptoms and slowly surrender our ability to participate in life. I want to remain strong enough to serve, love, teach, learn, laugh, work, worship and be present for the people God has placed in my life. That’s why this journey has never been only about getting rid of symptoms. It’s about becoming capable of fulfilling whatever mission and purpose we’ve been given.

So as we continue periodically sharing these PTL Saturday Conversations with our Sunday Conversation family, that’s the thought I want to leave with you: You can pray for healing, you can seek guidance and you can accept help, but don’t underestimate the role you have in the process. Believe that you’re worthy of pursuing better health, remain open to the answers that come, and then be willing to do the work.

God bless you and remember always: the power to heal is yours.

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post A Sunday Conversation with RSB – Do you believe you’re worthy of healing? appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

The post Momordica Balsamica appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Friday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

New Poll: Americans’ Trust in MMR Vaccine Fades Americans’ confidence in the safety of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine has declined compared with 2020, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll highlighted by Children’s Health Defense. The four-day survey of 1,143 U.S. adults found that 76% considered the MMR vaccine safe for children, down from 84% in a May 2020 Reuters/Ipsos poll, with a margin of error of three percentage points. The decline comes during substantial measles activity in the United States and alongside a gradual reduction in childhood MMR vaccination. CDC figures cited in the article show that 92.4% of kindergarteners received the MMR vaccine during the 2025-26 school year, compared with 92.5% in 2024-25 and 95.2% in 2019-20. The article reports 3,294 U.S. measles cases as of September 10 and four deaths classified as “measles-associated,” while noting that CDC data did not list measles as the underlying cause of those deaths. Children’s Health Defense scientists Brian Hooker and Karl Jablonowski attribute declining confidence partly to increased public attention to reported vaccine injuries, questions about vaccine safety testing and renewed debate about vaccines and autism. The article cites 95,473 adverse-event reports and 500 death reports submitted to VAERS following MMR vaccination as of August 28, although reports to VAERS do not by themselves demonstrate that a vaccine caused a reported event or death. It also revisits the Hannah Poling vaccine-injury case and disputes how measles mortality risks are communicated to the public. The article connects these debates to recent federal vaccine-policy changes under President Donald Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including an executive order calling for fewer diseases to be included in the routine childhood vaccination schedule and eventually replacing the combined MMR vaccine with separate measles, mumps and rubella products when available. Supporters quoted in the article argue that separate products could provide parents greater flexibility in vaccination timing, while the article acknowledges that developing and obtaining FDA approval for new monovalent vaccines could take years. Merck stopped supplying its separate measles vaccine to the U.S. market in 2008, leaving combined MMR products as the primary option. Overall, the article presents the polling decline as evidence of growing public skepticism toward MMR vaccination and places that shift within broader disputes over vaccine safety, risk communication, measles outbreaks and changing federal vaccination policy.

Special Guests: Stuart Tomc and Stefanie Hays

Stuart Tomc

The second half of the program brings my longtime friend Stuart Tomc back to the microphone, and as always, he arrives with another layer of nutritional science that expands our understanding of human health. Our conversation begins with omega-3 testing, but quickly grows into a much broader discussion about inflammation, cardiovascular health, gut integrity, and the remarkable ways different biological systems communicate with one another.

Stuart explains how measuring omega-3 status provides valuable insight into inflammatory balance, but he also introduces exciting new developments involving gut health, specialized metabolites, and the relationship between nutrition and immune regulation. What fascinates me is how these discoveries continue reinforcing a principle we’ve talked about for years: true health is not built by chasing isolated symptoms, but by restoring balance throughout the entire body.

We also revisit the importance of high-quality nutrition, discussing the role of polyphenol-rich olive oil, healthy fats, prebiotic fiber, and the emerging science connecting the gut, brain, cardiovascular system, and immune response. Every new discovery seems to point back to the same truth: the body is brilliantly interconnected, and lasting wellness depends on supporting those connections rather than working against them.

As our conversation unfolds, I am reminded once again why I enjoy conferences like this so much. They create opportunities for respectful dialogue, spirited debate, and genuine learning. Whether discussing prostate health, nutritional biochemistry, or emerging technologies, the atmosphere encourages curiosity instead of certainty and collaboration instead of competition. That is where real progress happens.

If you’d like to explore the omega-3 and gut health testing Stuart discusses, visit https://zinzino.com

Stephanie Hays

As a Certified Metabolic Balance® Coach, I help individuals move beyond one-size-fits-all advice and toward a science-based plan that’s built entirely around you. Whether you’re navigating hormone imbalances, weight struggles, or simply feel out of sync, my approach is deeply personalized, compassionate, and rooted in your body’s unique needs.
I’m here to empower you to take ownership of your health, nourish your body with intention, and thrive — not just physically, but in every area of your life.

Fish oil supplementation reduces the CERT2 risk score in adults with increased cardiometabolic risk: Findings from the MoKaRi trial High-dose supplementation with the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA, when combined with a structured heart-healthy diet, significantly improved a lipid-based cardiovascular risk score in adults already at increased cardiometabolic risk, according to findings from the randomized MoKaRi trial. Researchers focused on the Coronary Event Risk Test 2, or CERT2, which measures specific ceramides and phosphatidylcholines in the blood. These lipid molecules have emerged as predictors of cardiovascular events that can provide information beyond conventional LDL cholesterol measurements. The trial included adults ages 20 to 80 with LDL cholesterol of at least 3.0 mmol/L who were not taking cholesterol-lowering medications. Participants followed personalized cardioprotective meal plans, while one group additionally received 3 grams per day of combined eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid, better known as EPA and DHA. The dietary intervention lasted 20 weeks and was followed by another 20 weeks of observation. Compared with participants following the heart-healthy diet alone, those receiving fish oil experienced significantly greater reductions in their CERT2 scores. At 10 weeks, the difference in score reduction between groups was 2.44 points, and at 20 weeks it remained 2.18 points. Although the effect diminished after the intervention period, a statistically significant 1.63-point difference remained at 40 weeks. Importantly, only the fish-oil group demonstrated favorable changes in the specific ceramide-to-phosphatidylcholine ratios incorporated into CERT2. The researchers conclude that cardiovascular lipidomic risk profiles are modifiable through nutritional intervention and that EPA and DHA supplementation may influence cardiovascular risk markers not captured by LDL cholesterol alone. The study evaluated changes in a cardiovascular risk biomarker rather than actual heart attacks, strokes or cardiovascular deaths, so the findings do not establish that this intervention directly prevents cardiovascular events. CERT2 was also an exploratory endpoint of the trial. The results instead demonstrate that substantial omega-3 supplementation incorporated into a cardioprotective diet produced measurable and persistent improvements in a lipidomic marker associated with cardiovascular risk, supporting further investigation of CERT2 as a tool for monitoring preventive nutritional interventions.

Question of The Day!

I have a tonsillar mass or inflammatory process of the left tonsil. I had swollen lymph nodes of the left side of neck as well as the back of neck. I discovered the lymph nodes back in August 2025 and the tonsil mass a few months after. A few weeks back the lymph nodes returned to normal except there are a few on the back of my neck that are still mildly enlarged. I had been seeing an ENT and did get one CT of the neck. Today the ENT cleared me but never gave me steps to try to get rid of the mass which is a little smaller than a quarter. What do you recommend to try and resolve this issue and what could have caused this in the first place. – Patrick

Hour 2

The COVID-19 trust recession: why the next pandemic will be won – or lost – on public confidence The COVID-19 pandemic produced a significant erosion of public confidence in health institutions, government authorities, scientific experts and public-health messaging, creating what authors Peter J. Pitts and Gregory A. Poland characterize as a “trust recession” that could seriously impair society’s response to the next pandemic. The central argument is that medical technology alone cannot successfully manage a future infectious-disease emergency if large portions of the public no longer trust the institutions recommending vaccines, treatments or behavioral interventions. COVID-19 exposed and intensified weaknesses in risk communication as scientific understanding changed rapidly, public-health recommendations evolved, political leaders became deeply involved in medical messaging and disagreements among scientists were frequently presented to the public as political conflicts. The resulting environment made it increasingly difficult for people to distinguish developing scientific evidence from political advocacy, misinformation and institutional policy. The authors treat trust as a practical public-health resource because willingness to follow recommendations, accept vaccination and cooperate with emergency measures depends heavily on whether people consider the institutions issuing those recommendations credible. Restoring confidence therefore requires more than preparing new vaccines, diagnostics and antiviral drugs. Public-health institutions must communicate uncertainty clearly, explain why recommendations change as evidence develops, acknowledge errors rather than appearing to conceal or minimize them, and avoid overstating what scientific evidence can establish. Transparency is particularly important because inconsistent or excessively confident statements can create lasting damage when later evidence forces authorities to revise their positions. The authors also emphasize the importance of trusted physicians and other healthcare professionals as intermediaries between national institutions and individual patients, since personal clinical relationships can sometimes retain credibility even when confidence in larger healthcare systems declines. The broader lesson is that pandemic preparedness should treat communication, transparency and institutional credibility as essential infrastructure alongside laboratories, surveillance systems, vaccines and medical supplies. Once confidence has been lost, even scientifically sound recommendations can encounter resistance. The next pandemic therefore may be determined not simply by how quickly researchers identify a pathogen or develop medical countermeasures, but by whether public-health leaders have rebuilt enough credibility beforehand that people are willing to believe, evaluate and act upon the information they receive.

Stop Letting Drug Companies Push Supplements Off the Shelf The Dietary Supplement Innovation Act, H.R. 10336, would narrow federal “drug preclusion” rules that can prevent ingredients from being sold as dietary supplements when pharmaceutical development or investigation occurred first, and the Alliance for Natural Health USA argues the legislation could protect consumer access to natural products while reducing opportunities for pharmaceutical companies to obtain effective monopolies over certain ingredients. Under current law, an ingredient can be excluded from the supplement market if it was approved as a drug or authorized for drug investigation before being marketed as a food or supplement. ANH argues that uncertainty surrounding what qualifies as a “new dietary ingredient,” combined with confidential early pharmaceutical filings, can leave supplement manufacturers unaware that an ingredient they are developing could later be excluded. H.R. 10336 would explicitly protect qualifying ingredients marketed in foods or supplements before October 15, 1994, and would require publicly disclosed Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials before drug preclusion could apply, preventing confidential filings or early research alone from determining market access. The legislation would also create an exception when qualifying drug trials have remained inactive or withdrawn for at least seven consecutive years or when the sponsor publicly abandons development. Certain FDA decisions could be immediately challenged in court, with the government bearing the burden of establishing a violation, and FDA would be required to consider meaningful differences between drug and supplement products, including dosage, composition, administration and safety. ANH General Counsel Jonathan Emord supports the legislation while proposing stronger protections, including reducing the seven-year inactive-research requirement to one year and requiring clear and convincing evidence from FDA. The article cites pyridoxamine, a form of vitamin B6, as an example of an ingredient excluded because of pharmaceutical investigations even though the drug development ultimately failed, potentially leaving consumers without either a supplement or an approved medicine. It also points to previous disputes involving NMN, CBD and NAC. ANH’s central argument is that pharmaceutical investigation should not indefinitely eliminate consumer access to ingredients, particularly when drug development is unsuccessful or when supplement products differ materially from the investigated pharmaceutical product.

Is Human Health Rooted in the Soil? Farming methods and soil conditions can influence the nutritional composition of food, with research suggesting that organic and some regenerative practices can increase concentrations of particular phytochemicals, vitamins and other biologically active compounds while simultaneously improving soil health and reducing dependence on pesticides and herbicides. ANH cites systematic reviews and meta-analyses finding that organic crops can contain higher concentrations of polyphenols, flavonoids, anthocyanins, carotenoids and other secondary plant metabolites, including research reporting approximately 12% higher secondary metabolites overall and about 6% more vitamin C in organic fruits and vegetables. Meta-analyses have also reported higher omega-3 fatty acids in organic milk and meat. Evidence specifically concerning regenerative agriculture is less developed, which the article acknowledges, but emerging studies suggest that practices such as cover cropping, diverse crop rotations and reduced soil disturbance may improve soil organic matter while increasing selected nutrients and phytochemicals. An August 2026 study comparing conventional, organic and Regenerative Organic Certified beets found approximately 53% more polyphenols in fresh organic and regenerative-organic samples than conventional samples, although the study was small, involved only one source representing each farming system and found no consistent advantage in mineral content. Separate research involving Chinese broccoli found that moderately reducing nitrogen increased vitamin C, phenolic compounds and several minerals without reducing yield, while excessive nitrogen produced the lowest phenolic concentrations. The article connects these findings with soil biology, noting that cover crops can increase soil microbial abundance and activity and that long-term organic management has been associated with improved soil structure and greater earthworm populations. It also connects food composition to the human gut microbiome because intestinal microorganisms rely on diverse fibers and polyphenols and produce metabolites that support the intestinal lining and influence immune and inflammatory processes. Agricultural diversification may additionally reduce chemical inputs: one nine-year experiment using more diverse crop rotations reduced herbicide use by 88% while maintaining effective weed control and comparable or better yields and profitability, while a long-term Swiss experiment reported substantially lower pesticide inputs in organically managed plots. ANH argues that improving soil health could therefore influence human health through food quality, microbiome support and reduced chemical exposure, while acknowledging that evidence directly connecting regenerative agriculture with specific human health outcomes remains developing.

Welcome back to another “Homeopathic Hits” episode on The Robert Scott Bell Show!

Today’s Homeopathic Hit is Momordica balsamica, commonly known as Balsam Apple.

Boericke highlights this remedy for griping colic, abdominal rumbling, pain beginning in the back and spreading over the abdomen, flatus accumulation in the splenic flexure, dropsy, and painful, excessive menstrual flow.

Download the  Information Sheet

A Third Of Americans Still Can’t Name The 3 Branches Of Government More than one-third of American adults cannot name all three branches of the federal government, while knowledge of basic First Amendment protections is even weaker, according to the 2026 Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. The nationwide survey of 1,034 adults found that 65% could correctly identify the executive, legislative and judicial branches, leaving 35% unable to name all three. The result represents little meaningful improvement in recent years: 65% answered correctly in 2024 and 70% did so in 2025, although the researchers note methodological differences among the surveys. Knowledge of First Amendment rights showed larger gaps. Freedom of speech was the only protected right identified by a majority, at 73%, down from 79% the previous year. Only 43% named freedom of religion, 31% freedom of assembly, 29% freedom of the press and 12% the right to petition the government. Just 9% could identify all five First Amendment protections, while 24% could not name any. Another 25% incorrectly identified the right to bear arms as a First Amendment protection, although that right is contained in the Second Amendment. Results were stronger on some constitutional questions. Eighty-three percent knew that a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress can override a presidential veto, while 76% correctly answered a question concerning birthright citizenship and 56% understood that constitutional protections extend to immigrants without legal status. However, 18% incorrectly believed a 5-4 Supreme Court decision would be sent to Congress rather than remain controlling law, and only 50% correctly answered a question about the 10th Amendment’s allocation of powers between the federal government and states. The survey was conducted August 6-9, 2026, among U.S. adults age 18 and older and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Annenberg researchers characterize the results as evidence of a persistent civics-knowledge deficit, emphasizing that understanding constitutional structures and rights has practical importance because citizens may have greater difficulty exercising, defending or evaluating rights and governmental authority when they do not understand the protections and institutions established by the Constitution.

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post MMR Trust Fades, Stuart Tomc and Stefanie Hays, Omega 3 Testing, Fish Oil Benefits, Pandemic Trust Recession, Lymph Node Question, Supplement Access Fight, Soil Health Connection, Balsam Apple Remedy, Civics Knowledge Declines and MORE! appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.

Thursday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

Special Guest: Jonathan Emord

For the past 37 years, Jonathan W. Emord has litigated against the federal bureaucracy, winning over and over again. Ron Paul calls Jonathan “an expert in constitutional theory and history” and “an expert litigator with a long string of legal victories over the federal bureaucracy.” George Noory calls him “a Knight in Shining Armor” and “a warrior out to save our rights.” Congressmen Dan Burton and John Doolittle describe him as “an intellectual warrior for the rights and freedoms of people in America.” Jonathan has a unique, detailed knowledge of the federal bureaucracy, the deep state. He knows how to defeat it. Jonathan graduated from the University of Illinois (BA, political science and history, 1982) and DePaul University College of Law (JD, 1985). He served as an attorney in the Federal Communications Commission during the Reagan administration. A leading constitutional law and litigation expert, he is the author of five critically acclaimed books. He has won more cases against the Food and Drug Administration in federal court than any other attorney in American history, earning him the nickname “FDA Dragon Slayer.” He is a columnist for Townhall.com, PJ Media.com, Americangreatness.com, and the U.S.A. Today Magazine. He frequently appears on national radio and television programs. He is married to Sheryl Emord, and they have two children, twins Justice and Angelica. They reside in Clifton

How the American revolt against Flock cameras mirrors the Boston Tea Party of 1773 A growing grassroots backlash against automated license plate readers, particularly cameras operated by Flock Safety, is compared with colonial resistance to British surveillance and authority in the years surrounding the Boston Tea Party and American Revolution. Automated license plate readers use cameras and artificial intelligence to photograph passing vehicles and convert identifying information into searchable data. More than 130,000 ALPR cameras are operating on U.S. streets, and more than 5,000 law-enforcement agencies use cameras manufactured by Flock Safety. Flock says the technology helps police identify suspects, make arrests and reduce crime, but critics argue that large networks of cameras create extensive surveillance capabilities affecting ordinary people who are not suspected of crimes. Documented misuse has intensified those concerns, including a Kansas police officer who received probation after using Flock technology to stalk his estranged wife. The article places contemporary opposition within a much older American tradition of resistance to government surveillance. British authorities in colonial Boston relied on informants, customs officials and military personnel to monitor political activists and identify people involved in resistance. Rather than eliminating opposition, those surveillance efforts contributed to increasingly sophisticated counter-surveillance networks among colonists. The article describes the Sons of Liberty, committees of correspondence and organized watchmen as methods colonists used to observe British authorities and communicate warnings. That dynamic culminated in April 1775 when watchmen monitored British troop movements and the famous lantern signals from Boston’s Christ Church warned that troops were crossing the Charles River toward colonial weapons stores. The author sees similarities in today’s decentralized opposition to ALPR systems, as activists organize locally, investigate camera networks and pressure governments to remove or restrict them. Flock CEO Garrett Langley has responded that privacy and safety can be balanced through regulation rather than abandoning the technology, comparing the issue with automobile safety rules and challenging critics’ use of Benjamin Franklin’s famous liberty-versus-safety quotation. The article contrasts that position with Samuel Adams’ writings about colonists uniting around constitutional and natural liberty despite disagreements over tactics, presenting today’s Flock controversy as another example of Americans debating how much surveillance and privacy loss should be accepted in exchange for promised security.

Why Try to Derail Studying the Environmental Causes of Autism? The federal Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee voted on August 27 to adopt a new strategic plan for autism research that places greater emphasis on autistic regression, environmental factors, underlying biology, treatments and support services, while critics of the plan argue that it departs from established scientific consensus and may contain an implicit focus on vaccines. Louis Conte argues that previous federal autism research devoted disproportionate attention to genetics without explaining most autism cases and cites the new plan’s statement that no specific genetic cause can be identified in approximately 75% to 85% of people with autism even using current advanced technologies. The plan calls for defining and studying regression, including cases in which children lose previously acquired developmental abilities, and establishing research timelines examining autism’s biology and frequently reported co-occurring conditions such as seizures, apraxia, mitochondrial dysfunction, gastrointestinal problems, immune dysfunction and chronic inflammation. It also calls for work on treatments, prevention strategies, communication and assistive technologies, caregiver support and the needs of aging autistic adults. Conte portrays this broader research agenda as a significant departure from previous federal priorities and argues that environmental exposures deserve substantially more investigation. He also describes opposition from former IACC members and organizations including the Autism Science Foundation, which has criticized the plan for not reflecting scientific consensus and has advocated continued investment in genetic research. Some critics have expressed concern that the plan could become a vehicle for pursuing vaccine-autism theories, while Conte maintains that vaccines are not the plan’s primary focus and that the broader objective is investigating regression and environmental contributors. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has publicly argued that environmental exposures must be investigated to explain rising autism prevalence, while critics dispute his characterization of autism as a preventable disease and his conclusions about genetics. The newly constituted IACC includes federal representatives and public members appointed by Kennedy, and the strategic plan passed with 26 votes in favor, one opposed and 13 abstentions. Conte ultimately presents the dispute as a struggle over whether federal autism research should continue emphasizing genetic explanations or substantially broaden investigation into environmental exposures, regression, co-occurring medical conditions and potential prevention and treatment strategies.

Why the AI CEOs Really Want to Be Regulated Major artificial-intelligence executives calling for stronger government regulation may be attempting to protect established companies from future competition rather than acting primarily from concern that AI represents an existential threat, according to Connor O’Keeffe’s argument at the Mises Institute. The immediate debate intensified after an Anthropic engineer resigned citing safety concerns and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei subsequently called for slowing AI development. Sam Altman and Elon Musk expressed support for aspects of Amodei’s proposals, while Amodei, Altman, Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg have all advocated forms of AI regulation. O’Keeffe argues that the willingness of industry leaders to request regulation should not automatically be interpreted as evidence that the underlying danger must be extraordinary. Instead, he compares the situation with historical industries in which established businesses supported government intervention after struggling to maintain voluntary cartels. He gives particular attention to nineteenth-century railroads, arguing that major railroad companies eventually supported federal oversight that culminated in the Interstate Commerce Act and Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887 because government-enforced rules could stabilize established businesses and make competition more difficult. O’Keeffe extends the argument to later government interventions involving banking, healthcare, finance and other sectors, characterizing these arrangements as examples of government-supported cartelization. He contends that current AI regulatory proposals share several characteristics that could favor established companies: mandatory safety testing, certification requirements, extensive compliance expenses, government-defined standards and regulatory authority capable of preventing particular models from entering the market. Large AI companies possess financial, technical and legal resources to satisfy costly requirements that smaller competitors and new entrants may lack. O’Keeffe therefore disputes the conventional concept of “regulatory capture,” arguing that government regulation has historically sometimes been sought by established industries from the beginning rather than captured only after regulators were created. His conclusion is explicitly libertarian and interpretive rather than an established finding about the executives’ motives: he argues that their behavior is more consistent with incumbent companies seeking government protection from competition than executives who genuinely believe their products are likely to destroy humanity.

The AI “Threat” is Replacing Covid and “Global Warming”
Calls for government intervention to control advanced artificial intelligence are being presented through a fear-based political framework similar to arguments previously used around COVID-19 and climate change, according to Ryan McMaken’s commentary for the Mises Institute. McMaken focuses primarily on Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei’s proposal for slowing development of frontier AI, which warns about loss of control over increasingly powerful systems, AI-assisted cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and major economic disruption. Sam Altman and Elon Musk have also expressed support for aspects of Amodei’s proposals. McMaken does not attempt to determine scientifically whether the identified AI risks are real or how probable they are; instead, he challenges the political and economic implications of the proposed solutions. Amodei’s approach includes third-party evaluators embedded within frontier AI companies, coordination among companies and governments in democratic countries to establish common safety standards and restrictions on unchecked development, and ultimately international coordination intended to prevent companies or countries from circumventing those restrictions. McMaken interprets these proposals as a mechanism for cartelizing AI under government enforcement, particularly because restrictions would extend to companies unwilling to participate voluntarily. He argues that established companies such as Anthropic and OpenAI could benefit from regulations that impose substantial compliance costs or limitations on smaller companies and open-source competitors. The article gives particular attention to increasingly capable and inexpensive open-source AI models, which McMaken identifies as a growing competitive challenge to proprietary systems. He also argues that framing AI development as an international security competition with China gives major technology companies another route to government support and integration with the national-security establishment. The comparisons with COVID policies and climate agreements are McMaken’s political analogy rather than evidence that AI, infectious disease and climate risks are scientifically equivalent. His central argument is that catastrophic warnings can create public support for expanded government authority and that policymakers should therefore examine the economic incentives of companies requesting regulation, particularly whether proposed safety regimes would reduce competition and strengthen the market position of the companies helping design them.

 GOP Kentucky Rep. Massie launches effort to impeach Hegseth Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie introduced eight articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on September 15, accusing him of high crimes and misdemeanors primarily in connection with U.S. military operations against Iran and alleged violations of congressional war powers. Massie’s first three articles accuse Hegseth of violating different provisions of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, arguing that the administration continued hostilities in Iran without a congressional declaration of war or statutory authorization and continued military operations beyond legally permitted limits. Massie said that engaging in hostilities in Iran for more than 90 days without congressional authorization violated federal law and warranted Hegseth’s removal. Other allegations extend beyond the Iran conflict. One article accuses Hegseth of suppressing constitutionally protected speech by using Defense Department authority to retaliate against or intimidate Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly after Kelly participated in a video reminding military and intelligence personnel that they may refuse illegal orders. Another concerns U.S. actions in Venezuela and the operation that resulted in the capture and extradition of Nicolás Maduro, which Massie alleges lacked constitutional or legal authorization. The impeachment resolution also accuses Hegseth of responsibility for unnecessary civilian casualties and of degrading legal review surrounding military operations. These are allegations contained in Massie’s impeachment resolution and have not been established as findings of wrongdoing. The administration rejects Massie’s characterization. Attorney General Todd Blanche defended Hegseth, saying he was doing a strong job and that the Defense Department does not act independently of legal review, while Pentagon representatives have similarly defended Hegseth’s leadership. The impeachment effort follows repeated congressional disputes over the Iran conflict, including previous votes concerning presidential war powers. By introducing the resolution as a privileged matter, Massie sought to force the House to address the impeachment question rather than leaving it indefinitely in committee. The dispute therefore centers on the constitutional division of war-making authority between Congress and the executive branch, Massie’s contention that Hegseth personally bears responsibility for unauthorized military action, and the administration’s position that its military operations comply with applicable law.

Hour 2 (Encore)

Trump’s Executive Order Gives Revived Task Force 90 Days to Produce Vaccine Safety Report An executive order signed Monday directs the HHS Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines to develop a new approach to the timing and sequencing of childhood immunizations, explore alternatives to aluminum-containing adjuvants, and continuously evaluate the risks and benefits of childhood vaccines, with plans to be delivered to the White House within 90 days. The panel, reestablished months after attorney Ray Flores with funding from Children’s Health Defense sued HHS for decades of noncompliance with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which requires the secretary to promote vaccines with fewer and less serious adverse reactions, establish a task force of NIH, FDA and CDC directors, and periodically report to Congress on safety efforts. Flores’ lawsuit noted that a 1990 task force was disbanded in 1998 and never revived, while the childhood schedule expanded from four vaccines in 1983 to more than 75 doses across 19 vaccines by 2025, and prior efforts including a 2018 Kennedy lawsuit found HHS could not locate the required reports. HHS reinstated the task force in August 2025 shortly before its response deadline in the Flores case, with NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya as chairman working with the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines. Experts including Dr. Jane Orient questioned reliance on government-approved experts with potential conflicts, Dr. Michael Palmer noted challenges in achieving unbiased review and translating findings into action, and CHD scientist Karl Jablonowski observed that policies set by executive order can be reversed and that limited time remains before the next election. The first major test will be the panel’s proposals due within 90 days.

Cam Newton backs Aaron Rodgers, claiming NFL ‘players, coaches and executives’ used fake COVID vaccine cards Former NFL quarterback Cam Newton, speaking on his “4th & 1” podcast, claimed that multiple players, coaches and executives fraudulently obtained COVID vaccination cards during the 2021 NFL protocols that required shots for team employees to avoid daily testing, masking and distancing rules, stating that nurses made significant money selling the cards and that he knew people in the locker room who did not get the shot but paid for a card. Newton’s comments support recent remarks by Aaron Rodgers on “The Pat McAfee Show,” where Rodgers suggested many people used fake vaccination cards that looked as if they were written in crayon, while unvaccinated players faced second-class treatment including yellow armbands, restricted training and limits on group sizes. Rodgers made the comments while criticizing Anthony Fauci’s Senate testimony in which Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment 111 times. Newton, who was unvaccinated while with the New England Patriots, experienced protocol issues after a medical appointment that led to a five-day re-entry cadence, lost practice time, his starting job to Mac Jones and eventual release from the team, later saying he felt bamboozled. The article notes that while Newton recalled the practice starting in 2020, the relevant NFL protocols began in 2021.

Questions of The Day!

Hi Robert, I’m an incredibly huge fan of yours but to keep my comment short I wanted to ask about a middle ear infection I’ve had for almost 3 months with mastoid effusion. As you can imagine this is incredibly terrifying and I haven’t had any success with antibiotics and common home remedies like garlic oil, tea tree oil and warm compression. I hope you can help me or guide me to someone that can. Please feel free to reach out to me by my email. Thank you for all your work.  – Constru

Hi Super Don,

Loved the song at the end of the show, played it a few times, I do not believe I heard that one before, very nice.

Also, do you still do my 1st car with the guest, I miss that, ever since you started the 1st car I have been trying to remember mine, all I can remember is it was a 60s Ford and kind of a golden brown.

Thanks, Take Care

Rita

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!

The post Jonathan Emord, Flock Camera Rebellion, Autism Research Attacks, AI Regulation Push, Massie’s Hegseth Impeachment Effort, ENCORE! Vaccine Safety Report, Matt Warnock, RidgeCrest Herbals, Cam Newton Backs Aaron Rodgers, and MORE! appeared first on The Robert Scott Bell Show.