Actually this happened to my dad. His speech became slurred, he couldn’t follow conversations, he acted like he’d had a stroke, until treated.
In my dad’s defense, he’s ninety-six.
There has been audio of him farting and maybe soiling himself during rallies, so I think the other part of the plumbing likely has a pathology, as well as, or instead of, a UTI.
Mmmm…I have a question:
Suppose it suddenly gets revealed to the public that Trump really does wear diapers.
Would that affect the election results?
I believe I can help you out on this one:
Are they aware of
I see no reason to think that at 78, with a lifetime of cheeseburgers and no exercise besides swinging a golf club, and a family history of dementia, that he’s simply succumbing to it as well.
His father was diagnosed at age 85 after years of noticeable decline. If Donald weren’t out there giving speeches all the time, it’s likely not to have been so obvious.
From Wiki:
In October 1991, [Fred] Trump was diagnosed with “mild senile dementia”, with his physician citing symptoms of “obvious memory decline in recent years” and “significant memory impairment”.
I’m surprised he hasn’t marketed a trump brand diaper.
Doubtful. A related question: SHOULD it influence results? Given the current circumstances, I’m not sure - but the issue would be the lack of transparency to date about Trump’s medical fitness for the job, not the shame factor.
What if there had been transparency all along? If any candidate had a medical condition that didn’t impact their intellectual functioning or day-to-day stamina, and didn’t have a prognosis of meaningful decline over the term of the presidency (“meaningful” being defined as "will impact the candidate’s ability to function effectively), that shouldn’t affect their candidacy. And the public doesn’t need to know the embarrassing details. A general statement that indicates “candidate X has a condition impacting GI tract functioning; it is well controlled, does not interfere with daily functioning, and is not expected to worsen in a way that can’t be effectively treated” would be fine.
Hard disagree. Unless it affects their mental abilities, or the likelihood they’ll drop dead within 4 years, it’s no one’s business. No one else in the world gets to know whether I have a condition impacting GI tract functioning.
ETA: same for nobody needing to know FDR was in a wheelchair. He likely would not have been in office if people knew that.
So you are okay with the Ronny Jackson assessment of Trump’s health?
I agree that people need not be privy to details. But if there is NO transparency, there can be no confidence. I’m willing to forgo the specificity of the “GI tract” comment. But a believable statement by a qualified medical professional doesn’t seem like too much to ask for.
I did not say lying about it was acceptable. Why would you assume I’d be okay with that?
A believeable statement by an independent physician affirming that the person is not going to drop dead within 4 years and that their mental capabilities are intact is enough.
I don’t think any physician can say that about anyone (that they are not going to drop dead in four years). They can, however, give us a description of the candidate’s overall health including any chronic conditions. Look at the statement about Kamala Harris’ health for an example.
I didn’t, which is why I asked. It was that “hard disagree” that made me wonder.
But I don’t think we’re actually in significant disagreement.
Docs will not, probably should not give a patients prognosis to anyone. Unless patient okays it.
Until you’re President of the richest, most armed country in the world.
It could be kept on the down low so his family and closest advisers are the only ones privy.
Of course people want to know. I still want to know about Biden. I’m worried they have him outside the country here recently. Does he really need to be traveling?
I’m almost positive Trump has classic older persons illnesses.
Probably heart disease.
Probably T2 diabetes.
Most likely dementia, not quite severe yet.
He shuffles his feet. He’s having some mobility problems.(This is conjecture, of course).
One UTI, one case of Flu, or RSV and he’s gonna be looking at the ceiling in a hospital room.
I despise the man, but I hope people around him are telling him the truth.
I don’t wish ill health on anyone.
He deserves, at least a paid by patient nice room in a home or cell.
Right, it was a sort of hyperbolic remark meaning that unless a person was clearly unlikely to live 4 more years, then the public has no right to their medical information.
Okay, then what sort of realistic statement would you want to hear?
Yes, that is essential. And any rational candidate for high office would accept that graciously. As in the link that @Dewey_Finn provided: “With Vice President Harris’ consent, I provide the following health information:”
I’m not the one who wanted to hear anything at all, unless it’s to say that dementia is evident or advanced cancer gives them less than a 50% likelihood of being alive during their term. In other words, I don’t agree that
but the issue would be the lack of transparency to date about Trump’s medical fitness for the job, not the shame factor.
If any candidate had a medical condition that didn’t impact their intellectual functioning or day-to-day stamina, and didn’t have a prognosis of meaningful decline over the term of the presidency (“meaningful” being defined as "will impact the candidate’s ability to function effectively), that shouldn’t affect their candidacy. And the public doesn’t need to know the embarrassing details. A general statement that indicates “candidate X has a condition impacting GI tract functioning; it is well controlled, does not interfere with daily functioning, and is not expected to worsen in a way that can’t be effectively treated” would be fine.
So you don’t want to hear anything except for the stuff that’s relevant? Isn’t that what, for example, the statement about Kamala Harris’ health does? And who decides what is relevant?
Or do you only want to hear about dementia or cancer?
How about you tell me what you think is relevant.