All the evidence says Clinton is in better health than Trump is. She’s younger and she was willing to release her full medical records, which he has not done.
So by all means, feel concern over the health issue and vote appropriately.
The advanced age of both Clinton and Trump would be a negative to me in a comparison with a younger otherwise suitable candidate. But Clinton was running mainly against an even older person with whom I had even less ideological common ground than with Clinton. And I preferred every other GOP candidate to Trump as it was. Now against one another, it’s neutral: they are both almost the same advanced age.
Unless one could show one has poorer health prospects than the other. But this is basically impossible not so much because ‘there’s no evidence X has poor prospects so assume it’s fine’ as it’s just too easy to fudge and hide, if not really obvious which it isn’t in either case.
And her father didn’t die of late-onset Alzheimer’s, which starts to show symptoms in the mid-60s like rambling speech, lack of control, impulsive behavior and… oh, never mind.
Yes we should care about the health of the candidates:
One, a 68 year old female with a controlled thyroid condition and a resolved transverse venous thrombosis with no underlying clotting disorder, possibly exacerbated by a concussion from which she has completely resolved, a coronary calcium score of zero, normal carotid arteries on ultrasound, a very good lipid panel result, who exercises regularly inclusive of all of aerobic, strength, and balance training, who has a very healthy diet, and whose family history includes longevity in her parents with her mother into her 90s. All included in her medical report by a physician who provided these details, whose signed credentials are real, and who Clinton can actually say the correct name of.
The other, a 70 year old male (older than anyone else ever to assume the presidency), whose medical report was written by someone who Trump initially named as someone who is dead who signs with false credentials who comically declared that Trump would the healthiest President ever, whose labs are all “positive” (which would be very bad if true), who is visibly of … ahem … elevated BMI, whose exercise such as he gets is golf, whose diet that he advertises is McDonalds burgers, fries, KFC, and of course taco bowls, and whose family history is a father who suffered from Alzheimers (although both his mother and father lived long) and a brother who died young of alcoholism complications.
Objectively on identified health measures there is no contest here: a 68 year old woman of normal BMI, with those shared reports, of pretty ideal diet and exercise habits, and of excellent family history, is of much less health risks for the next four years than is a 70 year man without much shared health details,with pretty crappy diet and exercise habits, of visibly elevated BMI (centrally located), and a family history of dementia.
That said running for president is a stress test in and of itself. Anyone who is not killed by the process has at least some degree of baseline health. His relatively elevated health risks, statistically significant as they may be, is not the reason to keep him away from the nuclear football.
Honestly, I could not make it though this grueling test of a campaign. That she has is strongly suggestive of a vigorous constitution, good for at least one full term.
Just to add - just by age and gender alone - not factoring in Clinton’s superior health habits, body habitus, and more detailed and frankly believable medical information - Clinton’s life expectancy is 4 1/4 years more than is Trump’s and she has roughly half the chance of dying over the next four years than he has. Both however are more likely to last the four, or even eight, years, than not.
Considering how stressful a presidential campaign is (both mentally and physically), my ‘candidate health standard’ is, “If you make it through election night without dropping dead, you’re healthy enough to be President”.
Yeah, I won’t be particularly shocked if Trump is diagnosed with this sometime next spring. His ego, of course, will deny it.
The spectre of a Hitler going mad in office, surrounded by Reaganista/Bush II controllers, should keep everyone awake until the election is over.
What evidence would you accept as proof that Donald Trump is truly healthy?
Just in terms of risk factors for dementia (Alzheimers inclusive) …
“Above the age of 65, a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease or vascular dementia doubles roughly every 5 years.” Trump’s greater age puts him at greater risk.
Gender? More older women have dementia than men … because women like much longer: “women are not more likely than men to develop dementia at any given age.”
Heredity. Yup major risk factor. Family history makes for a major increase in risk as one gets over 65.
Lifestyle choices: “regular physical exercise, not smoking, drinking alcohol only in moderation (if at all), and maintaining a healthy diet and weight. The dementia risk is lowest in people who do three or more of these, not just one or two.” Trump’s lack of regular physical exercise and lack of maintaining a healthy diet and weight, elevates his risk even more, while Clinton’s hitting all three places her in the lowest risk category.
Having reading as a leisure time activity also marks one to be at lower risk. Trump infamously does not read much.
Yes we should care about the candidates’ health when they start the job at or approaching 70 years old … risk dementia in office even more than death.
Not to mention, that as a woman, the actuarial tables alone are in her favor.
A letter from a reputable doctor who has examined him thoroughly and recently, preferably with an established history of doing so, would be fine.
You know, pretty much what every other candidate in modern times has provided.
Have you looked at the pathetic scrap his campaign tried to pass off as such?
Yeah, I should have mentioned that in the same post rather than a whole 11 minutes later!
Yes, by age, gender, body habitus, known health and lifestyle habits, tests done and shared, and family history, Clinton is of highly significantly less risk for death or disability (in particular cognitive disability i.e. risk of dementia while in office) than is Trump.
IF health risk is to be an issue (and not so sure that it should be) then Trump loses big time.
I do think that the subject should be brought up around the time of the VP debate though. While Clinton’s health risks are much lower than Trump’s the possibility that one of these VP candidates might be called into serve is greater than it would be for younger candidates with similar health habits to Clinton. (A younger man with Trump’s? Not so sure.) Voters being comfortable with the possibility of a President Kaine or Pence is marginally more important this cycle than in many others.
Hillary is 69 years old, Donald Trump is 70 and is taking statins. Why aren’t you MORE concerned about Trump’s health, since he’s 15 months older --*** obviously that much closer to death*** – and especially since his personal physician is prone to overstatement.
Trump’s personal physician (a GI specialist) may have signed that letter, but there is no way in hell he wrote it. It’s full of errors, and “Trumpisms”. (BEST health! Better than anyone!)
Donald is pushing the line about Hillary being weak and in failing health in his responses to her calling him a waitress. He keeps harping on it being a short speech, because she doesn’t have the stamina for a long one -
“Hillary Clinton only knows how to make a speech when it is a hit on me. No policy, and always very short (stamina). Media gives her a pass!”
Did she ask for a refill on the decaf?
“Here’s a tip for you Don: Lay off the orange paint.”
What the hell? I swear have no idea how that happened …
Tequila and bongwater is not for amateurs.