In a recent discussion on the Midas Touch Network, Dr. Aide Brown and Dr. Sonia Sloan tackled the pressing issue of former President Donald Trump’s health and his reluctance to disclose medical records.
As the 2024 presidential race heats up, questions surrounding Trump’s fitness for office are becoming more urgent, especially in light of calls from the Harris campaign for transparency regarding his health.
In a late-night post on Truth Social, Trump defended himself against these calls, claiming he has released more medical exams than any other president and that he has excelled in cognitive assessments.
He went so far as to assert that he is “far healthier” than previous presidents and even Vice President Kamala Harris.
However, a closer look at the facts reveals a different story.
Contrary to his claims, Trump has not provided extensive medical documentation, leaving many to wonder about the true state of his health.
At 78, Trump is the oldest candidate in history to run for president, a fact that raises legitimate concerns about his mental acuity.
Both Dr. Brown and Dr. Sloan highlighted that in recent months, Trump’s speeches have become increasingly erratic, leading to worries about his capability to serve effectively.
They argue that voters deserve clarity on whether he is mentally fit to lead, especially given the significant responsibilities tied to the presidency.
Interestingly, even conservative outlets like Fox News have joined the chorus of voices urging Trump to release his medical records.
The network recently surveyed around 230 healthcare professionals who expressed skepticism about Trump’s health status and called for greater transparency.
If Trump has no qualms about questioning the mental fitness of his opponents, shouldn’t he be held to the same standard?
During their discussion, the doctors emphasized the importance of understanding a candidate’s physical and mental well-being.
They pointed out that various medical organizations have established guidelines regarding the cognitive abilities of surgeons, which could similarly apply to presidential candidates.
Signs of cognitive decline, such as forgetfulness and poor judgment, are critical factors to consider when evaluating someone poised to hold the highest office in the land.
Dr. Sloan further elaborated on the medical assessments commonly used to gauge cognitive health.
She noted that terms like “exceptional” are not standard in medical evaluations.
Instead, there are established tests that can provide a clearer picture of a person’s mental status.
The lack of specific assessments mentioned by Trump raises eyebrows and fuels skepticism about his claims of being in peak condition.
The conversation took an intriguing turn as the doctors reflected on the tactics Trump employs to deflect scrutiny.
By attacking the mental stability of others, including Vice President Harris, he diverts attention from his own health issues.
This pattern of behavior has been consistent throughout his political career, highlighting a strategy of distraction rather than accountability.
In a particularly bizarre moment, the discussion recalled a Trump town hall where he seemingly veered off course, opting to dance and play music instead of engaging with voters.
Such antics only serve to further question his mental capacity and suitability for leadership.
The doctors underscored that the American public deserves a leader who is not only physically fit but also mentally sound to handle the pressures of the presidency.
Dr. Brown pointed out that while privacy laws, like HIPAA, protect individual health information, the public has a right to know about the health of those who seek to lead them.
This sentiment is echoed in the medical community, where transparency is crucial for informed decision-making.
The need for candidates to disclose relevant health information is becoming increasingly apparent.
Historically, candidates have not been compelled to reveal their health status, often relying on a gentleman’s agreement to share such details.
However, the landscape is shifting.
The adoption of the 25th Amendment in 1967 introduced some measures for assessing a sitting president’s capabilities but did not extend to candidates.
This gap in protocol leaves voters in the dark about critical information that could influence their choices.
As the conversation wrapped up, both doctors agreed that the American public must advocate for greater transparency regarding candidates’ health.
A 2006 research article highlighted the necessity for presidential candidates to disclose any medical conditions that could impede their duties, reinforcing the idea that an informed electorate is essential for democracy.
With the stakes higher than ever, the call for accountability grows louder.
The American people deserve to know if their leaders are fit to carry out the responsibilities of the office, especially when it comes to matters of national security.
As the election approaches, the demand for transparency will undoubtedly continue to rise, forcing candidates to confront the reality of their health disclosures.
