Eliminate the FDA, Kim Elia, Andrew Chambers, Global Natural Health Solutions, Homeopathy, Canchalagua, RFK Panel Guidelines, Zen Honeycutt, Moms Across America, MAHA School Meat Consumption, Artificial Sweetener Risk, Questions of the Day, and MORE!

Apr 13, 2026 3-5pm ET

Monday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

Hour 1

What If the FDA Were Eliminated? Eliminating the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would likely lead to a safer, more effective, and more innovative marketplace for drugs, biologics, and food because private mechanisms — such as consumer trust, reputation, insurance, third-party certification bodies, user ratings, and market discipline — have historically proven stricter and more responsive to safety and quality demands than government permissioning systems, which were often created at the behest of large industry players to eliminate competitors and create barriers to entry rather than purely to protect the public. Author Jeffrey A. Tucker argues that the modern regulatory state, including the FDA, originated not from benevolent public-interest reform but from industry-driven initiatives: the Biologics Control Act of 1902 followed deadly vaccine contamination incidents in 1901 and was pushed by large biologics manufacturers (led by Parke-Davis, later part of Pfizer) with help from the AMA to boost public confidence while squeezing out smaller competitors, and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was supported by the meatpacking industry after Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle collapsed sales, allowing bigger firms to impose higher compliance costs that favored consolidation. These acts established the precedent for the FDA, which Tucker sees as an “engine” that crowds out superior private alternatives, such as Underwriters Laboratories for electrical safety, the Better Business Bureau for business practices, and actuarial risk assessment in insurance and other sectors. In a free market without the FDA, companies could sell anything, but sustaining long-term sales and avoiding ruinous liability would require rigorous safety, efficacy, and transparency — far stricter than the FDA’s often politicized or captured approval processes, as evidenced by the rapid distribution of COVID-19 mRNA shots that bypassed normal standards through emergency use, mandates, subsidies, and liability shields yet faced widespread injury reports and loss of trust. Tucker contends that the FDA’s dual pressures — demands for faster approvals from pharma and stricter testing after scandals — create inconsistency, while private systems naturally filter out ineffective or unsafe products through consumer incredulity, refunds, boycotts, and insurance requirements. For food, he notes that subsidies for surplus grains since the 1970s have driven ultra-processed diets and chemical-intensive farming, which the FDA and USDA have enabled rather than prevented. Removing the FDA would not create chaos but would unleash innovation, competition, and accountability, allowing better private certification, transparent labeling, and genuine consumer-driven safety standards to emerge, ultimately improving public health by reducing regulatory capture, barriers to natural remedies, and the medicalization of everyday life. The article calls for reformers to recognize the FDA’s industry roots and consider radical deregulation as a path to true health progress rather than tweaking a flawed system.

Special Guest: Andrew Chambert, ND

Andrew Chambers, ND. is a licensed naturopathic doctor specializing in homeopathy for adults and children. After graduating from the Sonoran University of Health Sciences, he completed a 3-year post-doctoral fellowship in Homeopathy and Lifestyle therapeutics in Phoenix, Arizona where he specialized in treating complex, chronic diseases, auto-immune conditions, and mental/emotional disorders in both adults and children. Dr. Chambers is a member of both the American Institute of Homeopathy (AIH) and the Homeopathic Academy of Naturopathic Physicians (HANP). Dr. Chambers is a Provider with Global Natural Health Solutions, bringing expert clinical experience and a thoughtful, individualized approach to homeopathy.

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

Today’s Homeopathic Hit is Canchalagua, also known as Erythraea venusta or Centaury.

Boericke presents this remedy as a fever remedy and bitter tonic, with usefulness in intermittent fevers, influenza, and malarial conditions, particularly in hot climates. Its picture includes a general bruised soreness, systemic weakness, and characteristic sensory disturbances.

Download the  Information Sheet

Hour 2

After Court Loss, RFK Jr. Amends Guidelines for Key Vaccine Panel to Emphasize Risks of Shots Following a federal judge’s March 2026 temporary restraining order that blocked Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s overhaul of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) — including the firing of all previous members and their replacement with more vaccine-skeptical appointees — Kennedy signed an updated charter for the influential CDC vaccine advisory panel on March 31, 2026, that significantly broadens membership qualifications, explicitly emphasizes vaccine safety risks and gaps in safety research, and grants the HHS Secretary greater control over subcommittee approvals and meeting schedules. The new charter requires ACIP to advise not only on vaccine use for disease control but also on “gaps in vaccine safety research including adverse effects following vaccination” and on ways to “enhance vaccine safety surveillance systems,” while directing the panel to review vaccination schedules used by other countries and international organizations. Membership criteria were expanded beyond traditional expertise in vaccinology, immunology, and public health to include knowledge in toxicology, pediatric neurodevelopment, and “recovery from serious vaccine injuries,” potentially opening the door for individuals with perspectives critical of current schedules or who advocate for injured patients. The charter also allows certain vaccine-skeptical organizations, such as the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Physicians for Informed Consent, and groups linked to past ACIP figures, to nominate non-voting liaisons, and stipulates that only the HHS Secretary can approve ACIP subcommittees, with meetings now held at the discretion of a designated federal officer rather than on a fixed schedule of approximately three times per year. HHS described the changes as a routine charter renewal required every two years, but critics, including attorneys representing the American Academy of Pediatrics in the ongoing lawsuit, argued that the amendments do not conform with the spirit of the court order and appear designed to advance Kennedy’s agenda by embedding a stronger focus on potential harms and alternative views while circumventing procedural requirements struck down by the judge. The updates come amid broader MAHA efforts to shift federal vaccine policy toward individualized risk-benefit assessment and greater scrutiny of pharmaceutical influence, following Kennedy’s earlier attempts to narrow recommendations for certain routine shots. The charter renewal was published in the Federal Register and is now in effect, though the court ruling continues to suspend activity by the previously reconstituted panel.

MAHA Groups Urge Trump Not to Expand School Meat Consumption Several organizations aligned with the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, including the MAHA Institute and Children’s Health Defense, sent a formal letter to President Donald Trump urging him not to support or implement policies that would increase the volume or frequency of meat served in the National School Lunch Program, arguing that expanding consumption of conventionally raised, grain-fed, antibiotic-treated, and highly processed meats without strict quality standards would exacerbate childhood obesity, metabolic dysfunction, and chronic disease. The letter acknowledges the nutritional importance of high-quality animal protein for growing children but insists the focus should be on nutrient-dense, pasture-raised, grass-fed, and minimally processed sources rather than increasing quantities of industrial meat products that currently dominate school meals. Signatories contend that many school-served meats are high in omega-6 fatty acids from corn and soy feed, contain residues of hormones and antibiotics, and are often paired with ultra-processed sides, contributing to the poor metabolic health already affecting a majority of American children. They cite evidence that diets emphasizing whole foods, vegetables, healthy fats, and properly raised animal proteins improve insulin sensitivity, reduce inflammation, and support cognitive development better than diets heavy in processed meats and refined carbohydrates. The letter also highlights environmental and ethical concerns, noting that industrial meat production relies heavily on glyphosate-treated feed crops, contributes to water pollution, antibiotic resistance, and animal welfare issues that conflict with regenerative agriculture principles supported by parts of the MAHA agenda. While acknowledging Trump’s support for American farmers and rural economies, the groups argue that any expansion of school meat consumption should prioritize regenerative, grass-based systems that benefit soil health, biodiversity, and farmer profitability without increasing reliance on chemical-intensive monocultures. They recommend policies that incentivize procurement of higher-quality, locally sourced proteins, integrate nutrition education emphasizing balanced whole-food plates, and avoid pitting meat against plant-based options in a false dichotomy, instead focusing on reducing ultra-processed foods across all categories. The article notes that the letter comes amid broader MAHA efforts to reform school nutrition, reduce ultra-processed food additives, and shift federal dietary guidelines toward prevention of chronic disease rather than management through medication. It reflects internal tensions within MAHA-aligned circles over how to balance support for American agriculture with the movement’s core focus on metabolic health and reduction of processed foods in children’s diets. The response from the Trump administration has not been detailed, but the letter underscores ongoing debates about the role of meat in school meals and the appropriate quality standards for federally supported nutrition programs.

Artificial Sweeteners That Parents Consume Could Affect Their Grandkids’ Health, Mouse Study Suggests A new mouse study suggests that parental consumption of common artificial sweeteners like sucralose and stevia can cause lasting changes in gut bacteria, gene activity, and metabolic markers that persist into the next two generations — even in offspring and grandchildren who never consumed the sweeteners themselves — raising concerns about potential transgenerational effects on human health from widespread use of zero-calorie sweeteners by parents, particularly women of childbearing age. Researchers at Universidad de Chile divided 47 adult male and female mice into three groups: one drinking plain water (control), one with sucralose, and one with stevia, at doses approximating the FDA-approved acceptable daily intake for humans. After 16 weeks, the parent mice were bred to produce a first generation of offspring, who were then bred to produce grandchildren; all offspring and grandchildren received only plain water and a standard diet. At 20 weeks of age, the researchers assessed blood sugar regulation via glucose tolerance tests, analyzed gut microbiome composition through DNA sequencing of stool samples, measured short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) levels, and evaluated gene expression related to inflammation, gut barrier integrity, and fat metabolism in the intestine and liver. Sucralose produced stronger and more persistent effects than stevia: it altered 17 bacterial groups in parents (including five core community members), 15 groups in offspring (10 core), and still showed lingering changes in grandchildren; it also suppressed a key liver gene involved in fat production and blood sugar regulation across all three generations and was linked to mildly altered blood sugar regulation in male offspring and higher fasting blood sugar in male grandchildren. Both sweeteners reduced beneficial SCFAs (important for immune function and metabolic health) that were passed to offspring and grandchildren, and both triggered overactive inflammation-related genes in the offspring generation. Lead author Dr. Francisca Concha Celume stated that the goal was not to create alarm but to highlight the need for further investigation, noting it may be reasonable to consider moderation in consumption of these additives while continuing to study their long-term biological effects. The study has limitations, including its small sample sizes (six mice per group for bacterial analysis and 12–17 for gene expression), controlled laboratory conditions that may not reflect human dietary variety, and the fact that it examined only two sweeteners under specific dosing. While the design cannot fully separate gestational versus perinatal exposure or prove direct human applicability, the findings add to growing evidence that non-nutritive sweeteners may not be metabolically inert and could exert effects across generations through microbiome and epigenetic mechanisms. The results suggest that rising use of artificial sweeteners among parents could have subtle but lasting impacts on the metabolic and inflammatory health of future generations.

…Comment of The Day!

Now for my comment:

While I’m not a newbie to continue to maintain and pursue my health and wellness (and that of my family), I am a newbie to homeopathy – and am fully on my journey to learn.  Listening to your show – I feel like I’ve stumbled upon a secret treasure.  With that being said I took your recommendation and started Lisa Rooney’s online homeopathic course.  I’m not quite halfway through the course but I wanted to share my comments, especially before the generous RSB discount expires.

The course is so approachable, easy to digest from an information level, and is so very chock-full of Lisa’s wealth of knowledge and insight.  Lisa is a fabulous teacher and is super personable.  I’m very much looking forward to learning all I can as I finish up the course.  In addition, as a fun ‘side effect’ – I’m finding that I’m understanding more of the lingo and subject matter that is discussed on your show.

I’m closing…I truly cannot speak highly enough about the course.  If any of the listeners out there are on the fence, come on over!  The proverbial grass is greener 👍.

Thank you!
Kristin

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!