Jul 7, 2025 3-5pm ET
Monday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:
Hour 1
Brave Doctor Faces 35 Years in Prison For Not Killing His Patients During the Pandemic Dr. Michael Kirk Moore Jr., a Utah plastic surgeon and former U.S. Navy flight surgeon, faces up to 35 years in federal prison for allegedly distributing over 1,900 falsified COVID-19 vaccine cards, injecting patients with saline instead of government-issued vaccines, and destroying nearly $28,000 worth of federal vaccine doses during the pandemic. The Department of Justice, under Biden-appointed prosecutors and now overseen by Acting U.S. Attorney Felice John Viti, has charged Dr. Moore with conspiracy to defraud the United States and multiple counts related to conversion and disposal of government property. The trial begins July 7, 2025, at the Orrin G. Hatch U.S. Courthouse in Salt Lake City. Advocates, including health freedom activists and vaccine safety figures like Robert Scott Bell, are rallying in support, citing Moore’s adherence to the Hippocratic Oath and his refusal to administer what he considered dangerous and experimental mRNA vaccines. Despite the DOJ’s aggressive approach—including pretrial incarceration and restrictions on Moore’s communication—the case has garnered national attention as a test of medical autonomy. Supporters argue that Moore acted with parental consent, without personal gain, and out of ethical duty, while critics assert he undermined public health policy. The judge has prohibited discussion of vaccines or COVID-19 motives in court, further fueling concerns of a politically driven prosecution. The case has been linked to broader tensions around pandemic policy, free speech, and bodily autonomy, and legal experts are calling for dismissal or presidential pardon if convicted.
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!
Welcome back to another Homeopathic Hits segment on The Robert Scott Bell Show! Today we examine Hippuricum Acidum, a remedy originally proved by Dr. Wm. B. Griggs. Derived from hippuric acid, this medicine acts deeply on the joints, liver, mucous membranes, and respiratory tract—especially when right-sided symptoms dominate.
When the body feels inflamed, tired, and sore from the inside out, Hippuricum Acidum may help restore structural clarity and systemic balance.
Download the Information Sheet
Hour 2
RFK Jr. Clarifies Stance on Wearables Robert F. Kennedy Jr. clarified his previous comments suggesting he wanted “every American wearing a wearable within four years,” acknowledging that he used imprecise language. While still advocating for broad adoption of health-monitoring devices like smartwatches and continuous glucose monitors as part of his “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, he emphasized that the program would be voluntary, temporary, and under strict privacy protections. The clarification comes amid strong reactions—within his own civil liberty-supporting base—fearing a drift toward mass surveillance tied to biometric data. Kennedy reaffirmed his long-held concerns about the “internet of people” and committed to ensuring data collected by wearables remains private and not subject to government or commercial exploitation. His administration is launching an HHS-led campaign to normalize wearable health tech, aiming to empower individuals to track vitals and improve health outcomes. The effort is linked to a proposed multimillion-dollar marketing initiative intended to reframe wearables as personal empowerment tools rather than monitoring instruments. Despite backlash from some supporters, the administration remains firm on the benefits of preventative care, while taking care to frame its wearable strategy as centered on consent, privacy, and self-responsibility.
From Promises to Delays: How Trump’s Fight Against ‘Forever Chemicals’ Changed Over the Years The article chronicles the shift in the Trump-era EPA’s approach to PFAS (“forever chemicals”), contrasting early aggressive actions with later regulatory delays under his administration. Initially, following the 2017 discovery of GenX contamination in North Carolina drinking water, EPA launched a strong multi-pronged strategy, including setting federal caps on PFOA and PFOS, supporting legal efforts, and publicly committing to nationwide PFAS reduction. However, in his second term, the article notes that Trump’s EPA began withdrawing from earlier commitments and slowing rulemaking. The piece suggests political and industry pressures influenced the change, with lasting effects including continued PFAS persistence in water supplies. It warns that these setbacks undermined both public trust and health protections, emphasizing that communities remained exposed while awaiting regulations. The article concludes that while the initial momentum demonstrated how seriously the crisis could be addressed, subsequent inaction prolonged risk—even as scientific warnings and public concern grew.
PFAS exposure linked to changes in the gut microbiome during pregnancy A new study reported in Environmental Research demonstrates that prenatal exposure to PFAS chemicals significantly alters the composition of the maternal gut microbiome, with potential implications for pregnancy outcomes. Pregnant participants with higher PFAS levels exhibited marked reductions in beneficial bacterial groups that typically increase during gestation and support healthy placenta development. The study tracked PFAS blood concentrations across pregnancy, showing steady accumulation correlated with progressive shifts in microbiome composition. Other research corroborates these findings, suggesting PFAS compounds may disrupt microbial balance, immune function, and metabolic processes in both mothers and infants. Though human data are still emergent, animal and cohort studies indicate microbiome disruption could mediate links between PFAS exposure and adverse outcomes such as gestational hypertension, fetal growth impairment, and increased inflammation. Researchers call for further investigation into long-term maternal and child health impacts, as well as exploration of mitigation strategies—possibly including dietary or probiotic interventions—to counteract environmental chemical exposure effects on the microbiome.
Cambridge scientists find gut bacteria can remove toxic PFAS from the body Researchers at the University of Cambridge’s MRC Toxicology Unit have discovered that specific gut bacteria strains can absorb and sequester toxic PFAS compounds, offering a potential biological method to eliminate these persistent environmental pollutants from the human body. In controlled laboratory and animal experiments, scientists introduced nine bacterial species into the gut microbiome of mice. These bacteria absorbed between 25% and 74% of ingested PFAS, regardless of the concentration level. The bacteria formed tightly bound intracellular clusters of the chemicals, significantly reducing their toxic effects while also promoting excretion through feces. The study demonstrates a promising proof of concept that gut microbiota can serve a protective role in detoxification. While the findings are preliminary and based on animal models, the researchers believe this could pave the way for probiotic supplements designed to reduce PFAS accumulation in humans. The team is advocating for further research, including human trials, to validate the safety and effectiveness of this approach. If successful, this microbial detoxification strategy could supplement existing efforts focused on reducing PFAS exposure from food, water, and the environment. The results mark a breakthrough in developing biological defenses against long-lasting contaminants and represent a hopeful development in addressing a global public health concern tied to immune dysfunction, cancer risk, and metabolic disease.
More Radiation, Brought to You By Congress A new provision expanding the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), passed as part of broader federal tax and budget legislation, is drawing criticism from public health advocates who argue that it facilitates continued radiation exposure rather than preventing it. While the expanded RECA provides financial compensation for individuals affected by Cold War-era nuclear testing and related radiation injuries, critics contend the bill fails to address ongoing exposure risks tied to modern industry practices. They argue that Congress is perpetuating a system where harm is acknowledged only after it occurs, while failing to enact meaningful reforms that would reduce future exposure. The legislation’s emphasis on compensation without proactive safeguards is seen as tacit approval for the continued use of radiation in sectors like energy, medicine, and agriculture. Opponents further claim the law creates a moral hazard by providing financial relief while simultaneously allowing systemic exposure risks to persist. Instead of focusing on liability waivers and restitution payments, they urge lawmakers to prioritize regulatory reform, environmental protection, and long-term investment in decontamination and risk prevention. Critics warn that expanding RECA without addressing the root causes of radiation-related harm effectively institutionalizes harm as a cost of doing business, leaving public safety and environmental health vulnerable to political inertia.
Japan Ends Mandatory Child ‘Vaccines,’ Sudden Infant Deaths ‘Disappear’ The article claims that Japan’s decision in 1994 to end mandatory childhood vaccination led to a sharp decline in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), suggesting a direct causal relationship between vaccine mandates and infant mortality. It portrays this policy change as proof that vaccines were responsible for infant deaths and argues that public health improved after mandates were lifted. However, Japan did not stop vaccinating children; it reclassified vaccines from mandatory to recommended, and uptake remained high through public education and healthcare support. Scientific literature does not support the article’s assertion of a causal link between vaccines and SIDS. Multiple large-scale studies have concluded that vaccination does not increase SIDS risk and may even offer protective effects. Moreover, Japan’s improvements in infant mortality mirror global trends driven by better neonatal care, advances in medical technology, and increased awareness of safe sleeping practices. The article overlooks these broader health system factors and selectively interprets timelines to fit a predetermined anti-vaccine narrative. While it appeals to emotion and anecdote, it does not provide peer-reviewed evidence to substantiate its claims. As such, the article serves as an example of misinformation by equating policy shifts with causality without rigorous scientific backing, potentially misleading readers about vaccine safety.
Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!
