Kids COVID jab safety, Dr. Matt Chalmers, Long-term wellness, Nutrition, Women’s health, Kirsch $5 million challenge, Michael Boldin, Tenth Amendment Center, Deep fake concerns, Elon Musk Neuralink, High School debate-debate, Rule by Indefinite Emergency Edict, Taxing the Rich fallacy and MORE!

May 26, 2023 3-5PM ET

Friday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:

FDA Finds Evidence of Serious Safety Signal for COVID Vaccines in Young Kids — Says It Proves Shots Are ‘Safe’ Children ages 12 to 17 who received the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine face a heightened risk of heart inflammation, according to a new U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) study. But because the study only identified a safety signal for two heart conditions — myocarditis and pericarditis — in children “these results provide additional evidence for the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines in the pediatric population,” FDA researchers concluded. Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough said he disagreed. “My concern is that these data represent a gross under-reporting of the frequency and severity of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis,” McCullough told The Epoch Times. “There have been > 200 papers in the peer-reviewed literature and over 100 fatal documented cases largely among young men, peak ages 18-24 years, some with autopsy-proven COVID-19 vaccine heart inflammation resulting in death,” McCullough added. In the study, published Monday in JAMA Pediatrics, FDA researchers examined health outcomes in more than 3 million children who received the Pfizer mRNA vaccine through mid-2022. They found the number of cases of both myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, and pericarditis, inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart, were high enough to meet the criteria for a safety signal.

Special Guest Dr. Matt Chalmers

I’m willing to bet $5M that vaccines cause autism My goal is to expose the truth. If vaccines don’t cause autism, everyone should be rushing to enter into a written agreement with me to prove me wrong because it’s a slam dunk to make $5M in just 4 hours. We’ll agree on a very simple statistical experiment that no one has done, it will be definitive for the bet, have a mutually trusted third party do the experiment, and the statistically significant outcome (or lack thereof) will determine who wins the bet by that trusted third party. Fair and objective. Neither side can cheat. Supposedly, most of the world thinks it is proven that vaccines do not cause autism, so this should be a no-brainer to accept my bet. I should be inundated with offers from drug companies and others. If you are interested in accepting the bet, simply use my Accept Bet form and we’ll be in touch. Drug companies who make vaccines should be jumping on this offer, right? I will also pay a $50,000 finder’s fee, after the contest is over and payment is made, to any person who finds a counterparty who will accept my bet. As for those who believe my bets are not serious, you can have your attorney contact my attorney and we’ll provide the evidence of the previous offer (we’ve agreed to terms, have both signed a written agreement, and are in the process of choosing judges). This offer can be modified or revoked at any time prior to acceptance via my Accept Bet form. Only one winner.

Hour 2

Special Guest – Michael Boldin

Microsoft chief says deep fakes are biggest AI concern Microsoft President Brad Smith said Thursday that his biggest concern around artificial intelligence was deep fakes, realistic looking but false content. In a speech in Washington aimed at addressing the issue of how best to regulate AI, which went from wonky to widespread with the arrival of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Smith called for steps to ensure that people know when a photo or video is real and when it is generated by AI, potentially for nefarious purposes. “We’re going have to address the issues around deep fakes. We’re going to have to address in particular what we worry about most foreign cyber influence operations, the kinds of activities that are already taking place by the Russian government, the Chinese, the Iranians,” he said. “We need to take steps to protect against the alteration of legitimate content with an intent to deceive or defraud people through the use of AI.” Smith also called for licensing for the most critical forms of AI with “obligations to protect security, physical security, cybersecurity, national security.” “We will need a new generation of export controls, at least the evolution of the export controls we have, to ensure that these models are not stolen or not used in ways that would violate the country’s export control requirements,” he said.

BRAIN WAVES Neuralink gets FDA approval for first in-human study after implant tests on monkeys ‘played pong with their minds’ ELON Musk’s neurotechnology company has received FDA approval to launch its first-in-human clinical study, it was announced today. Neuralink was founded by the Tesla CEO in 2016 focusing on developing a brain-computer interface called “the link.” The company is developing a neural chip implant that could help disabled patients move and communicate againCredit: TWITTER/@neuralink Musk said the company’s goal is to develop a surgically embedded neural-chip implant to help disabled patients move and communicate again and possibly restore vision. This is the result of incredible work by the Neuralink team in close collaboration with the FDA and represents an important first step that will one day allow our technology to help many people,” Neuralink tweeted. “Recruitment is not yet open for our clinical trial. We’ll announce more information on this soon!” Musk retweeted the announcement hours later with his congrats. “Congratulations Neuralink team!” he wrote. The Neuralink technology was previously tested on monkeys while waiting for FDA approval, shocking the world after tests showed one of the animals playing video game pong with its thoughts. In a speech at the company headquarters back in December, Musk said: “We want to be extremely careful and certain that it will work before putting a device into a human.” “The progress at first, particularly as it applies to humans, will seem perhaps agonizingly slow, but we are doing all of the things to bring it to scale in parallel.”

At High School Debates, Debate Is No Longer Allowed My four years on a high school debate team in Broward County, Florida, taught me to challenge ideas, question assumptions, and think outside the box. It also helped me overcome a terrible childhood stutter. And I wasn’t half-bad: I placed ninth my first time at the National Speech & Debate Association (NSDA) nationals, sixth at the Harvard national, and was runner-up at the Emory national. After college, between 2017 and 2019, I coached a debate team at an underprivileged high school in Miami. There, I witnessed the pillars of high school debate start to crumble. Since then, the decline has continued, from a competition that rewards evidence and reasoning to one that punishes students for what they say and how they say it. First, some background. Imagine a high school sophomore on the debate team. She’s been given her topic about a month in advance, but she won’t know who her judge is until hours before her debate round. During that time squeeze—perhaps she’ll pace the halls as I did at the 2012 national tournament in Indianapolis—she’ll scroll on her phone to look up her judge’s name on Tabroom, a public database maintained by the NSDA. That’s where judges post “paradigms,” which explain what they look for during a debate. If a judge prefers competitors not “spread”—speak a mile a minute—debaters will moderate their pace. If a judge emphasizes “impacts”—the reasons why an argument matters—debaters adjust accordingly.

The Perils of ‘Rule by Indefinite Emergency Edict’ On March 15, 2020, two days after then-President Donald Trump declared a national COVID-19 emergency, Cornell law professor Michael C. Dorf urged Congress to impose a nationwide lockdown and suspend the writ of habeas corpus. Congress never took either of those constitutionally dubious steps, which Dorf said were necessary to “save the nation.” Instead, as Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch noted last week, “executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale,” amounting to one of “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties” in U.S. history. That experience made it clear that legislators needed to reconsider the definition of emergencies and impose limits on the powers they confer. The context of Gorsuch’s comments was a case involving public health orders that allowed immediate expulsion of unauthorized immigrants, including asylum seekers, ostensibly based on the fear that they would exacerbate the COVID-19 epidemic in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued the first such order in March 2020, citing the authority granted by 42 USC 265, and the policy was repeatedly extended by the Trump and Biden administrations. Those Title 42 orders inspired litigation by opponents and supporters, resulting in conflicting district court decisions. Meanwhile, the public health rationale for the orders, never very persuasive, became steadily less credible.

Taxing the Rich Will Have No Meaningful Effect on Our Sky-High National Debt Whenever we have a national conversation about government debt, Democrats invariably respond that spending is not the reason the debt is now nearly equal to our national GDP. The real cause of our indebtedness, they inform us, is that taxes aren’t high enough and the rich don’t pay their fair share. From increasing the marginal tax rate to more than 70 percent for higher-income earners, to taxing 100 percent of income above $1 billion, to the president’s recent debt ceiling plan, Democrats overflow with ideas about how to tax us more. Not only do these ideas reflect incredible ignorance of economic reality, they’re also unlikely to have any meaningful effect on our debt levels and would surely slow the economy. Let’s be clear: America’s debt problem isn’t the result of former President Donald Trump’s tax cuts. While I believe these tax cuts should have been offset by closing some of our many loopholes and reducing government spending, they didn’t cause our fiscal problems. The fiscal imbalance is not because of reduced revenues. Last year, federal revenue as a share of the economy was a full percentage point above the historical average. As the Cato Institute’s Adam Michel reminded Congress recently, “It’s new spending that drives the deficit. For example, President Biden has added about $5 trillion in unnecessary spending to the national debt. That’s more than three times the 10-year revenue reduction of the 2017 tax cuts.” Trump was no better. Before the pandemic, I often lamented ballooning budget deficits under the Trump administration. And there’s also plenty of justified blame for presidents before Trump.

Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!