zlacker

>>dale_h+(OP)
> “I’d like to extend my respect and compassion and sympathy for the ex president and his family, because they’re going to be going through an especially tough time,” Adams added.

That in and of itself puts him above what I've come to expect from this low-bar dip in American culture. Good for him.

>>JKCalh+xi
Except of course this other dig at Biden elsewhere in the article:

> “I have the same cancer that Joe Biden has. I also have prostate cancer that has also spread to my bones, but I’ve had it longer than he’s had it – well, longer than he’s admitted having it,” Adams said.

The use of the word "admitted" implies that Biden is either lying about how far it has progressed, or that he has known about it longer than he has admitted.

>>Admira+3M
I’m no doctor but I know PSA test would have identified its existence long before this stated progression. It’s a blood test that would be routine for any male his age, he’s probably had them at least annually for decades of his life at this point

The implied timelines don’t match.

>>conduc+VX
Not routine at age 82: "most organizations recommend stopping the screening around age 70" https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/psa-test/in-dept...

>>7402+601
I sincerely hope our presidents' care isn't limited common practice.

>>marcus+UA2
I don't think being a current or former president materially changes the rationale for that recommendation.

>>dragon+5V2
Sure it does. The death or major illness of a sitting president is impactful in a way that the death of an average retiree is not. The cost of performing the test is inconvenience (admittedly of a man whose time is very valuable), but the cost of missing a major health problem has geopolitical consequences. The health recommendations are definitely going to shift toward "better safe than sorry."

>>fwip+d63
> Sure it does. The death or major illness of a sitting president is impactful in a way that the death of an average retiree is not.

The recommendation is not based around the public impact of the patient's death, but around the expected utility of the test in improving the length and/or quality of the patient's life, which is fairly low in the best of times for PSA screening.

>>dragon+H93
A president and their team is absolutely going to take a "better safe than sorry" approach. The doctor is not the only person who decides what treatment should be, the patient does too.