Former President Joe Biden’s administration announced on May 18 that he has been diagnosed with an advanced form of prostate cancer. This revelation led to speculation across social media platforms, with several users shedding light on an old video clip of Biden from three years ago. Some began to question whether Biden was aware of his diagnosis much earlier and had chosen to keep it concealed. ‘Joe Biden stated quite clearly more than TWO YEARS ago that he was a cancer patient. Isn’t it amazing though, that at that time, the Biden administration labeled it a mistake’ questioned one user on May 18. Several conservative commentators started echoing the same question.
The controversy revolved around a clip from Biden’s address in Somerset, Massachusetts on July 20, 2022, where he spoke about climate change and the importance of clean energy. If we are going by the White House’s statements from that period, Biden was merely discussing the removal of several non-melanoma skin cancers before his presidency, which had been detailed in his 2021 health record summary. Surprisingly, there’s no record of Biden’s spokesperson or any White House official ever calling these remarks a ‘game-changing blunder’.
Amplifying the aura of speculation, here’s what Biden stated back in July 2022: Gina McCarthy, at that time a past regulator in Massachusetts, was discussing how locals had to wipe their car windshields clean of dirt every morning. He mentioned how this scenario was akin to his childhood surroundings in Claymont, Delaware, which had a large number of oil refineries. This, in turn, led to high amounts of pollution. It is disheartening that Biden tried to connect this pollution to his ill health and that of his childhood friends, stating that this might have been the reason for the unusually high cancer rate in Delaware during that time.
As a result of Biden’s 2022 public address, social media debates erupted, predominantly focusing on whether Biden had slyly disclosed a major health issue. The Republican National Committee highlighted this matter with a post, ‘Did Biden just admit to having cancer?’ In line with these concerns, let’s revisit his 2021 health records. As per the Presidential Physician and Biden’s long-time primary care doctor, Biden had had ‘several localized, non-melanoma skin cancers removed’ prior to his presidency stint. The successful surgeries, as reported, resulted in ‘completely excised lesions, with clear margins.’
The May 18 announcement was specifically regarding prostate cancer, and this diagnosis came after doctors discovered a tiny lump on Biden’s prostate. To understand the gravity of this, the severity of prostate cancer is determined based on the Gleason score calculated from the appearance of the cancer cells under a microscope. Having a Gleason score between 9 and 10 is as bad as it can get, and Biden’s achieved the high end of this range.
For a person having a Gleason score between 9 and 10, it becomes difficult to screen the progression of the disease due to its aggressive nature and rapid development. ‘It’s not uncommon to see this type of scenario in an 82-year-old. While routine screenings are an option, the disease’s rapid progress can still catch one off guard. This situation doesn’t come as a surprise as it’s a standard case of metastatic prostate cancer belonging to his age group,” were the remarks made by an expert.
Former President Donald Trump seized the moment to question the transparency of Biden’s administration during a press conference on May 19 in which he declared it’s ‘sad’ but posed a question on why ‘the public wasn’t notified earlier, because reaching a Gleason score of 9 must have taken substantial time.’ While his observation creates a picture for the layman, it’s important to note that a Gleason score doesn’t necessarily indicate the amount of time the cancer has been developing but is rather a measure of the aggressiveness of the disease.
Cancer can be present in the body for a long period, growing silently without any obvious symptoms, which makes it harder to detect clinically. For instance, for prostate cancer, this silent growth period could be anywhere from seven to ten years, or even longer.
Further adding to the mystery, some aggressive prostate tumors do not express a lot of the blood levels of prostate specific antigen, a molecule that is usually a powerful marker for prostate cancer. Therefore, even if Biden had been routinely screened for prostate cancer, it’s plausible that the PSA levels would have been low, thereby not raising any alarm.
Considering Biden’s age, it might be that he didn’t undergo regular prostate cancer screenings during his presidency. Reputable organizations like the American Urological Association and the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force advise against routine prostate screenings for men over the age of 70. As one specialist rightly noted, ‘It’s often good practice not to screen people in their 80s, as most of the cancers detected at this age do not need treatment.’
One can’t help but ponder if this is yet another instance where the administration failed to lead with transparency. While the delayed revelation allowed Biden to buy some time and dodge negative press, it inadvertently led to speculation and mistrust among the populace.
It’s not too far-fetched to question whether Biden’s team, while having knowledge of his pressing health issues, merely dismissed it as ‘good practice.’ The choice of the Biden administration to keep this under wraps instead of maintaining an open dialogue with the public leaves one to wonder.
Truth be told, the scenario as it stands seems to depict a trust issue more than a health issue. From the nation’s perspective, transparency from the highest office in the land is always desired, and any attempt to misrepresent the facts can lead to doubt and speculation.
In conclusion, while prostate cancer is indeed a serious health concern that needs proper attention, it should neither serve as a shield for the administration to keep relevant facts from the public, nor an excuse to avoid addressing the grave concerns citizens have about the effectiveness of the Biden administration.