Clearing up a few more things about Biden’s cancer diagnosis; plus Scott Adams
A sad note: Scott Adams says he has terminal prostate cancer. Adams is only 67 and a big voice on the right, and I’m certainly sorry to hear it.
He says he has “the same cancer” as Biden, and although that’s certainly true in the basic sense, it’s impossible to know exactly what similarities they share because we don’t know too much about when Adams was diagnosed or how (except he says it wasn’t recent), what his Gleason score and metastatic status were at the time of diagnosis, and what treatments he’s undergone in the past. At this point, however, he seems to have run out of effective treatments and is in serious pain. He says he’s probably going “to be checking out from this domain sometime this summer.” The article goes on to say he’s indicating it might be an assisted suicide.
Now, back to Joe Biden.
I wrote a lengthy post yesterday on that topic, and there was plenty of discussion in the comments. Some of it indicated to me that some of what I was saying may have been misunderstood. So I’m going to clarify here.
In yesterday’s post I was not saying that for sure the announcement about Biden’s diagnosis, and especially its recent timeline, was the truth. I said this:
Of course, there’s zero reason to trust anything that is said about his health, due to past experience with coverups of Biden’s state. But what we’re reading about his prostate cancer diagnosis could certainly be true …
I wrote that because a great many people, some of them doctors on cable news shows, are saying for various reasons that Biden had to have gotten the diagnosis much earlier. I very much disagree with that and I continue to say it’s possible that Biden’s diagnosis was in fact very recent. What are the odds? I’d need more information, such as whether he was being given regular PSA tests, and that information hasn’t been released yet.
I began yesterday’s post by saying I’m not a doctor. One of the commenters in the thread wondered why I was criticizing the opinion of one of the doctors who spoke about Biden’s diagnosis. I criticize doctors at times because I find flaws in what they’re saying (or what they’re reported to be saying; the two are not always the same).
For example, there’s this observation:
A handful of medical experts were quick to question how the former president could be diagnosed at such a late stage — especially given that prostate cancer can be detected early with routine bloodwork, which is recommended for men over the age of 50.
“It is inconceivable that this was not being followed before he left the Presidency,” Dr. Howard Formman said in a post on X.
Not in the least inconceivable. In fact, the PSA test (the screening blood test) is not routinely recommended for someone of Biden’s age. I wrote an entire post about that back in 2011 and linked to it yesterday; I’ll link to it again here. The directive about that is still in place; see this for more details, as well as this from ye olde CDC. From the latter site:
Men who are 70 and older should not be screened for prostate cancer routinely.
Of course, many men do continue to be screened by having the PSA test after 70. Unless Biden had some extra reason to be screened – such as, for example, a family history – his doctors may just have been following these recommendations and not screening him that way. Have you noticed there’s not been any mention of his PSA level (at least, I haven’t located anything that mentions it)? We merely read that his diagnosis began with a palpable nodule. He was probably being screened that way for something like prostate enlargement, very common in elderly men, and that precipitated the rest of the testing and the discovery of the cancer.
I’m not a doctor, but I know these things because I follow them and have followed them for years. And I know them also from the personal experience of people I know who have had prostate cancer diagnoses at advanced ages. The person I know who had a diagnosis of aggressive prostate cancer at a similar age as Biden was told by his urologist that he shouldn’t pay any attention to a slightly elevated PSA and shouldn’t have any testing, although his internist had already ordered it and recommended a special MRI. The MRI showed a very high likelihood of cancer and his biopsy showed it was very aggressive. When the biopsy results came back, the doctor who did it told him that it was a very good thing that his alert internist had done the testing because it may have been caught before it metastacized, which it almost certainly would have in fairly short order and that it might even be metasticized now on the cellular level. The point of that story is that his urologist would have missed it, and he probably would have been in Biden’s shoes if the urologist had been in charge. Plus, the urologist would just have been following the guidelines.
My guess is that Biden’s doctors followed the guidelines and he wasn’t having PSA testing.
More from Dr. Foreman on Biden:
“Gleason grade 9 would have had an elevated PSA level for some time before this diagnosis. And he must have had a PSA test numerous times before. This is odd,” he added. “I wish him well and hope he has an opportunity for maximizing his quality of life.”
I have no idea why this doctor says that, but it’s not “odd” for an 82 year old man not to be tested.
Let me repeat that the person I know with Gleason 9, who is about Biden’s age, had a PSA of only a tiny bit over 4 when diagnosed. He was having his PSA tested every year, and a year before his PSA was 2.3. As I already indicated, his urologist didn’t even think he should be tested but his internist was doing it anyway, and the internist decide this jump in a year needed further investigation. The urologist disagreed and recommended ignoring it, but the MRI and then biopsy was done and the surgeon who did the biopsy praised the internist’s decision because of the very aggressive nature of the cancer.
In addition – and any doctor should be aware of this – there’s a group of men who have prostate cancer and whose PSAs are not elevated:
A false-negative result means that the test shows that the PSA level is normal even though prostate cancer is present. Not all prostate cancers cause a high PSA level. PSA testing misses about 15% of prostate cancers.
Lastly, I know some men who were very conscientious about getting PSA testing and yet who had sudden elevations and were already metastatic at diagnosis. I’m not saying this is common, but it’s possible.
“Prostate cancer can develop between screening tests,” Morgans said. “It doesn’t necessarily grow super slowly. It can develop between screenings, and it can be aggressive when it does develop; that doesn’t mean it’s not treatable.”
That is what I already knew, and it could apply to Biden if he has in fact been getting regular PSA testing.
And there’s also this:
However, in hormone-resistant aggressive subtypes, PSA may be at a low level in the initial stages. …
There’s no single timeline, but aggressive prostate cancer progresses in the body rapidly. This tendency is in stark contrast to traditional adenocarcinomas of the prostate gland, which tend to progress very slowly for years. …
Aggressive prostate cancer tends to present with metastasis in the bones and lymph nodes in the pelvic region despite a low PSA level.
The announcement of Biden’s diagnosis, however, said that his cancer is not hormone resistant, which would give him a somewhat better prognosis.
Yesterday, commenter “Alan” wrote:
I was listening to Dr. David Samadi – a fairly famous urologist – on Megyn Kelly this evening and he made an interesting point: The only way to determine whether prostate cancer is hormone sensitive is to administer hormone blockers and watch whether the PSA decreases over time. No way they could have gone from nodule discovery to this point in a few weeks or months.
I responded that what that doctor said isn’t strictly true. It may be the only certain way to tell if a cancer is hormone-sensitive, but there are other ways to see if it’s most likely hormone-sensitive and therefore whether hormone blockers are a good idea. Here’s a description of one such test.
Put all of that together and I think it’s very possible the story being put out about Biden is the truth, although an incomplete one. I’d like a more specific timeline as well as information on whether or not he had regular PSA tests, and if not why not, and if so what his figures were over time.
And of course it’s also possible they’re lying; wouldn’t be the first time. But at the moment I see no reason to assume it.
Not in the least inconceivable.
neo:
Of course not.
But that’s not the bar in this case.
The question many of us are addressing is how conceivable it is that the nodule and diagnosis announcements could occur exactly at the most opportune time to derail the Robert Hur tape and the Tapper & Thompson book on the coverup of Biden’s cognitive decline.
They have lied and spun about Biden in everything else to cover up his deficits. Why not with his prostate cancer?
Oh, Neo. Of course the Biden people are lying. That’s their default action.
Clay and Buck made two points today and yesterday.
1. Biden slipped up in a speech about two years ago and said he had cancer. The WH walked it back.
2. The reason why the WH never disclosed the cancer diagnosis is because Jill was intent on Joe running for the second term. And he may well have won but for that failed debate.
There needs to be a Warren Commission-like investigation on this. Who knew and when did they know it. The point of the Commission is to come up with a fix to the 25th Amendment. Pete and the rest of the Cabinet let it slide as with Joe incapacitated, they could do (or not do) whatever they wanted. Ask the people flying out of Newark if Pete did a good job.
The Press also needs to be shamed and put out of our misery.
The very idea that a man sick with cancer and with a feeble mind was POTUS is completely intolerable. What if the ChiComs would have attacked Taiwan? Or Russia attack Poland? Or if the ChiComs unleashed a deadly virus on America? Or shutdown our power grid?
We had so much damage inflicted upon us by the Biden Administration that names have to be named. Dr. Jill, Ron Klain, etc.
The thing that really burns my butt are the cases where Americans were murdered by illegal aliens that were let into this country by the Dems. The American people are not to serve as collateral damage so that the Dems can import more voters and cheap labor.
The reputation of the Democrat party – such as it is – must be totally destroyed.
Since the Navy is responsible for the President’s health needs, while Mr. Biden may not have known about his cancer until recently, the Navy may very well have known for quite some time?
Cornhead:
He did have cancer. Multiple skin cancers. I addressed that in a comment yesterday, with links.
The Navy keeps it quiet because they can do whatever they want with Joe as president.
huxley:
Yes, of course the timing is suspicious. But that absolutely does not mean they’re lying. Nor has the announcement taken too much focus from the cover up of his cognitive problems. In fact, the cognitive coverup enhances the conspiracy theories about a cancer diagnosis cover up. But none of that changes the facts I’ve described here, about why his cancer might have been missed till now. Nor does it change the fact that a number of the experts are saying things about prostate cancer and its diagnosis that are simply wrong.
neo:
Also, to fight on your turf. You say the Biden story is not inconceivable. But neither is winning the Powerball Lottery.
How likely is the Biden story? That’s the hinge of this discussion.
Neo, I appreciate your rational and well-informed thoughts — but when it comes to the Bidens, given their history, I find it hard to believe anything at all that they say.
This is an example of recent history and its impact; first thought is that they’re lying. Lengthy discussion followed about how it might, possibly, be true. This time.
huxley:
From what I know about prostate cancer, from a combination of the personal experience of people I know plus some fairly intensive research I’ve done on their behalf, I’d say about 50% likely.
A lot more likely than a Powerball win – although of course the likelihood that SOMEONE will win the Powerball is exceedingly likely. 🙂
Neo: After all these years, you should know that the Dems are lying. Yeah, it’s possible they are telling the truth but it is extremely unlikely. Just look at their track record!
The Biden Crime Family got millions and got away from it. We probably don’t even know the half of it. I want to see Jill’s and Hunter’s crypto accounts.
Why would any American President allow untold millions into the US? And don’t even get me started on the Green New Deal.
Today’s Dem party exists for the people at the top to get rich and screw everyone else.
The only way I could conclude that the Dems are telling the truth here is after the review of hundreds of documents and depositions of scores of people. Since that can’t be done quickly, the prudent thing to do is to assume the Dems are lying unless there is definitive proof to the contrary.
For America to survive, the Press and Dem party (in its current incarnation) must be totally destroyed.
Mrs Whatsit:
My belief that they might be telling the truth on this, or it least close to the truth, is definitely not based on trust of their word. I don’t trust them. But as I wrote in the comment of mine above this one, I think the chances of this being the truth are about 50%. For me, the story is quite plausible, and experts on TV who are saying its a lie are also misstating many facts about prostate cancer. So I see no reason to trust those experts either.
Huxley, Neo said it’s “very possible” and “Not in the least inconceivable”. Winning the Powerball Lottery is both not “very possible” and “Not in the least inconceivable”, if that makes any sense.
I agree with Neo on this. Given their history we’re all certainly well within our rights to be highly skeptical of anything the Biden team says. But that in and of itself is not enough to just completely dismiss their story. I’m also not saying you should just take it at face value either. Of course I’d say that it’s also “very possible” that they’re just lying and Biden and/or his handlers did in fact know about his cancer diagnosis while he was still president, but we just don’t have enough information to make that determination. And we might not know the real truth about that for long time, if ever.
Cornhead:
See my 2 comments above this one.
I have disagreed with such consensus so far on other topics, and have yet to be proven wrong. Just to take one example, I have always maintained that Madoff’s sons were innocent. Many people thought me naive for saying that. However, I’m not naive. I believe that time and evidence have made it clear I was almost certainly correct on that, although of course many people cling to the notion that they were guilty.
As I said, I’m about 50/50 with this Biden cancer diagnosis thing. I’d like to learn more about the timeline and whether he had PSA testing for screening. My guess is that he did not.
I don’t know either but I’m not surprised. I’ve seen doctors chime in where they clearly didn’t know what they were talking about. (And I say that as you do, I’m not a doctor either.) So I’ve seen a couple cases where insurance companies refused to pay for a double lung transplant on a patient with lung cancer with tumors in both lungs. I’ve seen doctors chime in on twitter that they should pay. The problem is that if you know anything (which apparently doesn’t include those doctors) this is clearly experimental surgery and it’s not clear if it’s a good idea or not. (Insurance companies generally don’t pay for experimental treatments.) So I can’t say I’m surprised to hear a doc spout off where they don’t have the information and make what is clearly an uninformed opinion.
@BigD. Yeah, it’s almost as if Doctors are human beings like the rest of us and as such have all the failings of that condition. These failings include things like having questionable opinions, giving bad advice, and getting emotionally attached to bad ideas and the like. Unfortunately having a good education and a relatively high intelligence doesn’t make people immune to such failings.
Why would the President of the United States NOT get PSA testing? That’s the issue!
“Men who are 70 and older should not be screened for prostate cancer routinely.”
That utter nonsense is from the CDC. Obama started this garbage by saying men don’t need PSA tests and what’s the point of a woman having a mammogram.
The CDC pushed all the Fauci/Wuhan Flu garbage including, “Get the Wuhan Flu vaccine or you will infect others and by the way the vaccine works. Oh, and don’t forget to get boosters. It was all a lie. The CDC is not to be trusted. Maybe that will change under RFK Jr. Jury is out.
I’m 78 and had a PSA done every year after 50. It’s just a blood draw. By 2020 my PSA test indicated I needed a biopsy. I did so. My urologist saw the results of the biopsy and said removal or radiation and you should live another 10/15 years. Do nothing and die a horrible, painful death. I watched my father, brother in law and father in law all die of the spread of prostate cancer and knew what to do.
Any man who who doesn’t do a PSA test is a fool – same as not doing a colonoscopy. It’s reasonable, preventative medicine. Of course, it is your right not to. If you go any doctor who says you don’t need both of them then drop that Quack Doctor fast. It’s your life, but choose wisely.
From what I know about prostate cancer, from a combination of the personal experience of people I know plus some fairly intensive research I’ve done on their behalf, I’d say about 50% likely.
neo:
Yet some MDs say otherwise, emphatically so. Plus putting the onus on skeptics to absolutely prove otherwise is IMO is pretty weak tea.
However, you keep avoiding the question of timing. How did the nodule/cancer announcements just happen to occur at such an opportune time to reveal Biden’s condition?
Sure it could have happened that way. But in that time frame with that president and that team of serial lying conspirators willing to do anything to protect Biden?
Your 50% odds are spread over months. Yet it happened in one very specific week. I’d generously say your 50% odds drop by a factor of ten to 5%.
huxley:
Coincidences happen all the time. They prove nothing. Of course, I’m also not saying the Biden people are telling the truth. I think 50% possibility is about right. Your mileage obviously differs.
The genomic Decipher test described in the link is all about deciding which patients with recurrent PCa benefit from ADT in addition to radiation therapy. It also aids decison-making about the timing of PSMA PET imaging and the start of radiation therapy. The sensitivity of the PSMA PET is poor for PSA 0.2, fair for PSA 0.6, and good by the time PSA rises to 1.0 or higher but by then the risk of metastasis is high.
The higher the Decipher score the better patients do with combination therapy. Patients with lower Decipher scores may choose radiation without ADT and avoid the misery of hormone therapy because the added benefit of ADT was not shown to be significant.
I’m 4 years into my own journey and just went down the recurrent PCa road this last year. My own high Decipher score convinced me the benefits of a short course of ADT outweighed the downside of hormone therapy which others I’m sure can attest to.
As I listened to Dr Samadi what I heard him say is that even the fastest acting ADT agent (Firmagon) would not show any PSA reduction for weeks so it was difficult to say how anyone would know in 4-5 days Biden’s PCa was hormone sensitive.
If it’s true that Biden’s last PSA test was 2014, as I just heard reported, and he hasn’t had a digital rectal exam then it’s highly likely his cancer has been brewing for at least 5-7 years as Dr Samadi and others speculate. Meanwhile he’s been ignoring the typical symptoms and he and his doctors chose to bet he’d succumb to something else before any potential PCa caught up with him. Unfortunately his PCa is more aggressive than the slow growing type most acquire making that a bad bet.
The moral of the story is get checked regularly and because every physician has a different opinion get to a well-regarded cancer center for the best care, if you can.
John Galt III:
And yet the recommendation for over 70 is not to have PSA screening, and it’s not just the CDC saying that. You, by the way, with a father who died of prostate cancer, have a family history and a PSA would therefore be recommended for you even over 70.
I don’t know whether you read the post I wrote on the recommendation, but there’s a lot in there about why they stopped recommending routine screening for older men. I am in favor of screening, by the way.
crasey:
Yes, it’s a very complex decision. I hope your treatment goes well.
I hadn’t heard any statements about Biden not having had regular PSA testing for years, but that’s been my suspicion all along. Do you have a link for that?
Assumptions for your consideration:
1. PSA testing not recommended for patients over 75. Biden was 78 when elected.
2. As they are O’Bamaoids, I assume everyone on the dem side is lying all the time about everything.
3. For the Deep Conspiracy crowd, I will note that both Biden and SA were fully vaxxed. SA stopped his a couple years ago. Ukn about Biden. Is the vax enough of an insult to the body to cause cancer or simply enough to push a willing recipient over the edge?
All that being said, I’ve been listening to SA since 2015, as he was the only one to not only predict Trump’s victory but to explain why it happened. The intervening years have been an education in persuasion, some of it maddening, some not so much, but always educational. I feel like I did when I lost Rush. Cheers –
Thank you, Neo. So far, so good. Just heard it on FNC at the open of The Five.
“…willing to do anything to protect Biden…”
…AND to protect the Holy Covid narrative.
And so…how many will be outraged by THIS?
‘QUOTE OF THE DAY;
‘In the Manhattan Institute 2024 President’s Update, Reihan Salam notes that Martin Kulldorf’s essay “Harvard tramples the truth” was City Journal’s most-read story last year. Dr. Kulldorf tells his story of the suppression of truth by academic and public-health in the first person…’—
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/05/quote-of-the-day-38.php
Here is a report from Biden’s spokesman regarding his PCa diagnosis.
“Former President Joe Biden last underwent a Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) blood test, one of the most common ways to screen for prostate cancer, in 2014 while he was serving as Barack Obama’s vice president, a spokesperson for his office announced Tuesday. …
“I think the likely scenario, knowing Kevin O’Connor pretty well, is that they had a discussion on what a PSA test is, and they decided not to do one because it would likely be elevated and cause a story, since a lot of older men have high PSAs that are false positives,” a long-serving aide to Biden told The Post Monday.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2025/05/20/biden-spox-the-president-was-never-diagnosed-with-prostate-cancer-until-now-n2657386
1. It’s not impossible that Biden’s doctors had not detected his prostate cancer earlier, but look at your own numbers: “PSA testing misses about 15% of prostate cancers.”
15% chance. Possible. Not probable.
2. You mention the CDCs recommendation that people over 70 not even be tested, but you fail to explore WHY. From the same source: “The goal of screening for prostate cancer is to find cancers that may be at high risk for spreading if not treated, and to find them early before they spread. However, most prostate cancers grow slowly or not at all.” [emphasis added]
They stop recommending prostate screenings at 70 for precisely the reasons people are mentioning: it is a slow growing cancer and for people over 70, the side effects of treatment may be worse than the cancer itself.
I was diagnosed at age 55. My father died of it at 65 after being diagnosed stage 4 at 62. I started getting tested at 45 because of my family history. My PSA was still technically in the normal range when I was diagnosed, but the increase over time, combined with family history and my insistence is what convinced them to do further testing. It saved my life. If I’d waited until my PSA was abnormal, it would have been too late.
Personally I think the CDC guidelines are bunk.
“This occurs when a man has an abnormal PSA test but does not have prostate cancer. False positive test results often lead to unnecessary tests, like a biopsy of the prostate. They may cause men to worry about their health.
…
A prostate biopsy can cause:
Pain.
Blood in the semen or ejaculate.
Infection.”
Oh, in that case I guess a biopsy is a bad idea.
Was a biopsy unpleasant? Sure as heck was…but considering that the possible alternative is the long, slow, agonizing death my father suffered, I’d say it was worth the discomfort and “worry” about my health.
CDC in short: “Well, you may not REALLY be at risk of an agonizing death featuring years of debilitating pain and suffering, so it’s better that you not subject yourself to a few minutes of discomfort and the possibility of a few days of disturbing side effects.”
Or maybe it’s better translated as “why don’t you just die already instead of insisting on expensive medical procedures for a cancer that will take a decade to kill you anyway?”
But, hey…be sure to wear pink during breast cancer awareness month, OK?
(not that I’m bitter or anything)
Two thoughts: It is inexcusable for a man of a certain age not to have the digital exam on an annual basis. One of the urologists commenting on the case said that hormone therapy may be the best course of treatment for this type of prostate cancer. However he pointed out side effects of instability and memory problems. That sounds like Biden for the last four years. Just maybe he has been receiving that treatment for some period of time. I guess we will never know.
Sailorcurt:
As I indicated in my comment at 5:17, I am in favor of routine PSA screening for older men. I have felt more and more that way in recent years because of the experiences of some of the men I know.
In addition, I have made it very clear in this post that I think that Biden’s doctors did NOT give him the PSA test in recent years. Now, through “crasey’s” comment at 5:39 PM on this thread, I discover I was absolutely correct about that and that he has not been given the test since 2014.
In addition, I wrote an entire post in 2011 on the subject of the recommendation that men not be tested after 70, and I already linked to that post twice. So I am very well aware of the reasons for the recommendation, which I go into in that post. Did you follow my link and read my post? If not, here it is again.
Since 2011, when I wrote that post, they have developed a type of MRI that can determine the chances of prostate cancer after an elevated PSA, and therefore whether a biopsy is indicated. So the number of unneeded biopsies has been reduced. We are still left with all the other problems described in that 2011 post about how much treatment helps, versus the side effects. But the advent of the MRI for prostate cancer at least makes it more likely that older men having PSAs and MRIs might have fewer unnecessary biopsies. It’s not just about the side effects of the biopsies – which sometimes lead to intractable or even fatal infections, by the way. It’s the side effects of the treatments and how much they really do help older men – that’s the issue.
For anyone with a family history, PSAs are still recommended, by the way.
Good luck with your own health.
stu:
It just so happens that I’ve read extensively on the issue of androgen-blocking drugs and their effects on cognition. I had been researching that recently for a friend. The evidence for a deleterious effect is very inconsistent. The jury is very much out on the subject. It’s much more likely that Biden has had age-related cognitive decline, a very common phenomenon.
crasey:
Thanks for the link. So interesting, and as I suspected.
For anyone interested in more detailed information PCF.org is a comprehensive and easily digestible source. Their downloadable handbook and monthly webinars on topics of interest to patients and caregivers as some of the nation’s top specialists discuss different aspects of diagnosis, treatment or new advances. This month’s webinar (5/27 7pm Eastern) happens to be “Hormone Therapy: Why, When How.”
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/3817470906299/WN_0_nrAtl7S-aoHU0bDcN4rA
Their story is implausible at first glance, but I think you’re right that on more careful consideration it’s at leaset conceivable that they’re telling the truth, or something not too wildly divergent from the truth. Considering their track record for truthfulness, I still wonder, but it’s best not to go out on a limb saying a story is 100% impossible, only to be proved foolish. A lot of the assumptions in the public commentary about the gold standard of care for a wealthy, powerful, elderly man have been a bit hasty.
Nevertheless, the purveyors of this story scarcely have any ground to complain if most people’s reaction is “sure, maybe, but not on your say-so alone.”
In re Scott Adams – I am very saddened by his condition. We are losing a great voice for humorous exposition of many human foibles, especially in his business setting but applicable many others as well.
In re Joe Biden – we seem to be in a classic “Boy Who Cried Wolf” situation.
Or, chronic liars who cry wolf over and over again (“That’s no malarkey!)”, even when the wolf has been at the door on numerous occasions .
“My word as a Biden” hasn’t had any credibility for decades, except for the people who seem unable or unwilling to notice the lupine lurking.
Three thoughts.
1. Reading about various doctors’ recommendations and the differing ways patients respond to various tests and treatments it becomes quite clear why it’s called “practicing” medicine. 🙂
2. I wish I could find a doctor who seems as knowledgeable about men’s prostate issues as Neo is. I think many doctors don’t want to go into much detail because it takes too much time. Or they assume you won’t understand what they’re telling b you. 🙁
3. It’s been my observation that the doctors I have encountered have been very reluctant to tell me that I have cancer. Apparently, most patients don’t take the news very well, and the doctors are thrust into the role of pastor or shrink – something they’re not prepared for.
After 78, the approximate average length of life in the U.S., every year is a bonus. One in six of us will die from cancer. So, when my doctors told me I had cancer (colon, and skin), it didn’t surprise me at all. Still alive, but old age is having its way with me. It’s unavoidable, so complaining does no good. 🙂
Sorry if I missed someone already stating this, but if Biden had prior indication why wouldn’t he have undergone some form of treatment until waiting until it is this far along? I know some people accept such a diagnosis as their fate and decide against treatment, but that doesn’t seem to fit his, or Jill’s personalities and he would have access to the best possible medical care available.
It seems highly unlikely he’d forego early treatment and risk his life to aid political timing. Especially 4 months after the Inauguration. At the very least, announce it on January 21 and start treatment then, if it was known then.
Regardless, I believe people have the right to keep their health personal if they choose. Or make it public if they choose. Even politicians and Commanders in Chief. If asked they shouldn’t lie. Being accountable to the public comes with the job, but if Biden did receive the diagnosis prior to this week and chose not to announce it until this week that should be his prerogative.
@ Barry > “how many will be outraged by THIS?”
Count me in.
“Zweig watched his two elementary-school-age children “slowly wilting in the gray light of their school-issued Chromebooks.” How long would they be cut off from the touch of a playmate or face-to-face contact with a teacher?”
One of our grandsons was very much dependent on contact with his buddies, and teachers, and not attuned to virtual classwork, although he was in middle school, not elementary.
In the spring of 2022, he killed himself.
I attribute his decline into depression to the prohibitions of all contact among groups of children, not just the schools. Without Scouts, church youth activities, and just playing in the parks, what else are teen boys to do?
I find I don’t really care whether of not the Biden team was lying. I’ll watch developments, but I am not going to spend time tracking things down.
I’m impressed that Scott Adams can still manage “Coffee with Scot Adams”. Pulling that off while being in unremitting pain is pretty remarkable. It is very hard to get motivated when you feel like sh*t. I doubt I could do it.
AesopFan, I am very sad about what happened to your grandson. Deepest condolences. And I will always be angry about what the lockdown freaks did to so many children and adults.
Biden says his prior PSA was eleven years ago, so at age 71.
Oh my God, AesopFan. I am so, so sorry! What an unfathomable tragedy.
I am so sad for him and all your family.
Cicero:
Apparently he was taking the advice of the CDC, et al.
AesopFan:
I am so so sorry.
The loss of a child or grandchild is the deepest sorrow humans experience. I’m so very sorry about your grandson, Aesop Fan.
Thank you all for your condolences.
I haven’t wanted to mention it before now, because so many families suffered similar tragedies, but the continued effrontery of the Democrats having the gall to pretend that they either didn’t do the things we know they did, or that the consequences weren’t all that bad because of what they did, finally reached my limit.
Very sorry AF to hear about your beloved grandson.
Fauci—protected by “Biden”—and his gang of assorted thugs have a lot to answer for.
My father had lymphoma for 17 years with no progression. He was regularly tested. Then it took off. They hit it with everything chemo, radiation. When he finally said no more, it only took ten days for his suffering to end. His doctor instructed me not to be stingy with the morphine.
His doc had called in the prescriptions for the end of life meds and I was sent to go get them. The only pharmacy on the island didn’t have all the morphine requested and more had to be sent from the mainland. There was one drug I had to get from the hospital. Someone must have told them about my truck because they knew who I was as soon as I drove up. I had never even heard of some of this stuff other than the morphine and the fentanyl.
His doc came to the house and met with my father for a while and then gave me instructions on the meds and how to keep the drug log. I and I alone dosed my father with every drug administered in the last ten days of his life.
I visited my mother (ALS) yesterday. She can barely speak and told me she doesn’t think she will able to eat much longer. She mentioned physician assisted suicide for the first time. All she wanted to talk about was Trump though. Her mind is still pretty good but I can see some slipping.
There are lots of ways to die and most of them are unpleasant.
I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather and not screaming in terror like his passengers.