Nov 21, 2025 3-5pm ET
Friday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:
Hour 1
‘Ultimate Sacrifice’? Higher Rates of Autism Found in Kids Whose Parents Served in the Military Brenda Baletti, the author presents a new preprint study by the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) which finds that children of U.S. military-service personnel face significantly elevated rates of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) compared with children in civilian families. Drawing on eight years of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s National Survey of Children’s Health covering more than 330,000 children between 2016 and 2023, the authors report an ASD diagnosis rate of 4.12% among children covered by military-insurance plans (such as TRICARE) compared with 3.19% in children covered by civilian plans. After adjusting for demographic and insurance factors, the children of military families showed a 30.73% higher likelihood of ASD diagnosis. The risk rises further when a mother served in the military (+46.19%) or a father served (+42.74%); among children of military fathers, diagnoses of moderate and severe ASD rose by 45.64% and 82.73% respectively versus children of non-military fathers. The author, adopting a critical tone, steers readers toward possible environmental or occupational exposures associated with military service—PFAS chemicals in firefighting foams, contaminated drinking water at bases like Camp Lejeune, higher vaccination rates, and other toxic hazards—describing these as plausible but not yet verified causal factors. The piece notes limitations including survey bias, provider-practice differences between military and civilian healthcare, and selection effects, yet emphasizes that “child exposure to toxins, either directly or through their parents, cannot be ignored and must be investigated with all due haste.” In her voice, Baletti frames this finding as a moral wake-up call: military children may be paying an unacknowledged neurological cost for their parent’s service, and policy makers owe them urgent transparency and research rather than silence.
HHS Finalizes Report on Gender-Affirming Care for Youth, Medical Groups Push Back Mary Kekatos outlines how the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a final report asserting that gender-affirming medical interventions in children—such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and gender-affirming surgery—pose significant long-term risks, and recommended psychotherapy as a preferred first step in managing gender dysphoria in minors. The report’s nine listed authors are reported to have expressed prior skepticism toward pediatric gender-affirming care, and at least six disclosed financial relationships or prior activism opposing such treatment. Major medical organizations including the American Psychiatric Association (APA), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Endocrine Society pushed back, criticizing the methodology as opaque, selectively reasoned and insufficiently transparent, arguing that existing studies show gender-affirming care is generally safe when delivered under individualized clinical protocols. In response to those concerns, the AAP and the American Medical Association (AMA) jointly rejected the report’s characterization of pediatric gender-affirming care as negligent or ideologically motivated. HHS, meanwhile, called the peer-reviewed report a “turning point for American medicine,” reiterating its commitment to guiding policy by science rather than ideology. The article frames the dispute as more than a medical debate, emphasizing that it intersects with legal, ethical and political dimensions, particularly in states that have already curtailed youth gender-affirming care or face lawsuits over such actions.
Ultra-processed food linked to harm in every major human organ, study finds A comprehensive review series published in The Lancet finds diets dominated by ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are associated with damage across every major organ system, influencing everything from metabolic, cardiovascular and digestive function to mental health and lifespan. According to the review—drawing on 104 long-term studies—92 found increased risk of chronic diseases and early death linked with higher UPF consumption, with evidence that the human body is “not biologically adapted” to these industrially formulated products. The article notes that in the UK and US more than half of the average diet is now made up of these foods, with intake reaching as high as 80% in some disadvantaged groups. The authors argue the shift has been driven by profit-oriented corporations aggressively marketing highly palatable low-nutrient foods, lobbying to avoid regulation, and displacing fresh and minimally processed food in vulnerable populations. While some critics caution that the UPF category and classification systems (like NOVA) remain imperfect and that causation is not fully established, the article emphasizes that waiting for perfect evidence is dangerous given the strength and consistency of current associations. Policy recommendations underlined include front-of-package warning labels, marketing restrictions especially toward children, elimination of UPFs from schools and hospitals, and global coordination akin to the tobacco-control era. The article’s tone is urgent, framing UPFs as a global “public-health scourge” comparable to early tobacco-era challenges, and calling for transformative regulatory action to protect health rather than relying solely on individual choice.
COVID Vaccine Under New Scrutiny After Studies Reveal Possible Health Risks The article reports that two large observational studies have raised fresh questions about the risk profile of Covid-19 vaccination, presenting data that suggest a higher incidence of acute kidney injury and dialysis among vaccinated individuals, and an unexpected increase in the incidence of mild respiratory infections such as the common cold among people who received four or more doses. One Korean University study found that while flu-like illness and pertussis decreased among highly vaccinated groups, common colds and other upper respiratory infections rose dramatically, a pattern the authors say could reflect complex shifts in immunity, behavior and healthcare-seeking rather than a direct vaccine effect. In a separate analysis, vaccinated individuals experienced higher rates of acute kidney injury and dialysis within one year compared with unvaccinated counterparts—though absolute numbers remain low and death rates were lower among the vaccinated overall. Experts quoted in the piece caution that these findings do not prove causality but instead point to associations that merit further investigation, highlighting limitations such as older age groups being more likely to receive boosters and lacking immunological data. As the author notes in a cautious tone, the research underscores the importance of continued monitoring of vaccine-related outcomes and suggests that public health messaging may need to evolve to address the full spectrum of post-vaccination health patterns, rather than assuming negligible risk beyond known benefit.
Hour 2
No, Science Does Not Indicate That HPV Vaccines Can Eradicate Cervical Cancer Dr. James Lyons-Weiler challenges the prevailing narrative around HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccination, arguing that claims it will eradicate cervical cancer are scientifically unsubstantiated and potentially misleading. He posits that much of the public health messaging rests on assumptions of “type replacement”—where vaccine-targeted HPV strains are simply replaced by other oncogenic strains—and long-term outcomes that remain unproven. Lyons-Weiler critiques the methodological robustness of studies supporting eradication claims, noting that randomized, placebo-controlled trials lacked the duration and population diversity needed to definitively assess lifetime cancer prevention. He also raises concerns about surveillance bias, trial funding, and undisclosed conflicts of interest influencing vaccine policy. Adopting a cautionary tone, the piece contends that overstated effectiveness may undermine trust when measurable cancer incidence fails to fall dramatically within predicted timelines. Lyons-Weiler further warns that such overconfidence disincentivizes investment in proven cancer-screening programs—like Pap smears and HPV DNA testing—under the assumption vaccination alone suffices. In his voice, the article reframes vaccination policy as a complex interplay of science, commerce and public messaging, rather than the simple technical fix often portrayed.
Experimental mRNA Flu Vaccine Is More Effective Than Conventional Flu Shot, But Causes More Side Effects The article reports that a large phase-3 trial of an experimental mRNA influenza vaccine demonstrated higher protection—preventing 60-67% of flu cases compared with 44-54% for a conventional egg-based vaccine—and reduced the odds of flu infection by 29% versus the standard shot. Conducted in over 18,000 adults aged 18-64 during the 2022-23 season, the trial was funded by the vaccine maker and referenced by multiple infectious-disease experts as a step toward more effective flu protection and quicker strain matching using mRNA platforms. However, the article emphasizes that the mRNA shot also triggered more frequent mild to moderate adverse reactions: about 70% of recipients experienced local injection-site effects compared with 43% in the standard-vaccine group, and systemic symptoms such as fever, fatigue, muscle and joint pain occurred in approximately two-thirds versus half of the conventional-vaccine recipients. Importantly, serious adverse events—such as myocarditis—were similarly rare in both arms, mediating the safety concern to some extent. The write-up cautions that data are limited for older adults, children, and high-risk populations, and that the mRNA vaccine was compared only to egg-based vaccines, not newer cell-culture or recombinant versions. Researchers and commentators quoted in the piece urge that work continue to optimise the side-effect profile and extend evaluation across broader populations before widespread roll-out. They also note regulatory headwinds and funding constraints which may delay broader adoption of the mRNA flu platform despite its promise.
EPA Backtracks on PFAS Regulation—Just as New Evidence Shows These Chemicals Threaten Reproduction The article presents an urgent and critical perspective: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reportedly rolling back key reporting requirements for PFAS—long-living “forever chemicals”—even as emerging research increasingly links them to reproductive harm including sperm damage, disrupted hormone levels and developmental effects. The author argues that in the proposed November 13 2025 rule under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Agency plans to exempt PFAS in imported articles, trace impurities, by-products and small-volume R&D uses, a move described as gifting industry a “huge giveaway” that will reduce transparency of exposures. Meanwhile, public health studies cited suggest low-level PFAS exposures are associated with male infertility, reduced testosterone, altered fetal development and longer-term risks for children’s health. The commentary maintains that the timing is no coincidence: weakening regulation just as stronger evidence emerges amounts to regulatory abdication. The piece criticizes EPA for approving new PFAS-based pesticides while diminishing data-collection efforts it previously declared essential for understanding contaminant pathways, and frames the shift as evidence of agency capture and prioritization of industrial interests over consumer safety. Written in a confrontational tone, the article calls for immediate public pressure, congressional oversight and a return to science-based regulation rather than “business as usual.”
Memory Lapses and Brain Fog Skyrocket in Young Adults, Nearly Doubling in 10 Years The article by Dr. Joseph Mercola reports that cognitive problems such as memory lapses, brain fog, and trouble focusing have surged among young adults in the United States between 2013 and 2023, with prevalence nearly doubling in the 18-39 age group—from about 5.1 % to 9.7 %—according to a national survey published in the journal Neurology. Mercola frames the trend as more than mere self-reported symptoms, arguing it reflects deep metabolic, environmental and lifestyle dysfunction. He outlines that modern drivers include ultra-processed food, seed oils, disrupted sleep, digital overload, chronic stress and environmental toxins, all of which impair brain energy production, trigger inflammation and degrade neural function. The author also highlights that underlying conditions like hypertension and diabetes—once rare in young adults—are now contributing to vascular and metabolic damage that undermines cognition. While the original study noted social and economic disparities, Mercola emphasizes the biological mechanisms and advocates for proactive brain-health practices: optimizing gut health, avoiding refined vegetable oils, promoting mitochondrial resilience, managing stress and restoring metabolic flow. He suggests this cognitive decline among younger generations is effectively a public-health emergency and not simply a matter of aging prematurely. The tone is urgent and corrective, rejecting complacency in modern medicine and urging individuals to treat memory difficulty as a warning signal rather than an inevitable consequence of youth or digital life.
Question of The Day!
A friend was asking about natural.options for her niece. Here is her info.
Stage 2 Chronic Kidney Disease with some stage 3 labs and loss of growth is what my niece has at 8
Diana aka/muttero4
Hi RSB & Super D
My son lives in Thailand and I am going to visit him in December. I would like to take along some supplements to him on my visit for him to help boost his immune system and overall health. He is 25 years old. What would you recommend ? He is able to purchase very little supplements there and I question their quality.
Thank you !
Beth Gardiner
Bill from Seekonk, Massachusetts asks: Are supplements like NAC, vitamin E, ascorbyl palmitate, niacinamide, and pantothenic acid actually unsafe as one author claims? Is NAC really derived from duck feathers, can vitamin E oil turn rancid before use, and are these nutrients good or bad to take? Also, how can he donate to support the show?
Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!
