It was actually in July of 2022 where former president Joe Biden made a surprising revelation while he was pontificating about climate change at the Brayton Power Station in Somerset, Mass. He implied that he and many others whom he grew up with were afflicted by cancer due to pollution. If this is true, it surely raises questions about his stance on environmental issues, doesn’t it?
At that time, Biden was referring to a couple of non-melanoma skin cancers that had to be surgically removed before his tenure in the Oval Office. This surgical maneuver was recorded in his health report of 2021. One may wonder, was this a desperate attempt to elicit sympathy or did the ex-president really imply a correlation causation fallacy between pollution and his personal heath?
Intriguingly, the fact that Biden’s prostate cancer, which came to light on May 18, 2025, wasn’t detected earlier is not as shocking to experts. Their claim is that this malignancy could have escalated rapidly and that screening isn’t typically done for men above 70. Would you accept this as a valid reason for the late diagnosis?
It was indeed on May 18 when the startling news about Biden’s aggressive prostate cancer came to light. This prompted a section of netizens to resurface a three-year-old video of Biden’s speech. One can assume they were operating under the belief that Biden had been aware of his health condition for some time.
A peculiar coincidence, or maybe not, is that Biden’s diagnosis seemed to coincide with the launch of a book titled ‘Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.’ This prompted a renewed scrutiny of certain comments Biden made during his July 20, 2022 address about climate change in Somerset, Massachusetts. Could this be a cover-up of epic proportions, taking cloak and dagger tactics to new heights?
In the 2022 speech, Biden touched on the surgical removal of several non-melanoma skin cancers that occurred prior to him assuming the presidency. These health incidents were enumerated in his 2021 health report. Did he use these incidents to divert attention from his deteriorating health?
Biden’s May 18 proclamation on his recent prostate cancer diagnosis followed the discovery of a small nodule on his prostate. The severity of Biden’s prostate cancer was scored at a high 9 out of 10 using the Gleason scale, which quantifies the abnormality of cancer cells observed under a microscope. Some might question, was the failure to identify and address this disease earlier a reflection of shortcomings in his presidential healthcare?
A Gleason score of 9 or 10 is epitomized by an expert in urology as ‘the worst form of prostate cancer.’ It seems, the invasive nature of this cancer as well as how quickly it can develop renders it ‘not really a disease that is screenable in most instances.’ So, can it be said that Biden displayed a lack of preparedness and vigilance in managing his health?
The expert claimed that Biden’s cancer condition is not uncommon amongst those in the medical industry. He stipulated that routine screenings would not have completely averted this health crisis as ‘it still can happen to you.’ Yet, shouldn’t that lead us to question the efficiency of Biden’s medical team?
The response to Biden’s diagnosis at a press conference swooped in with an air of sadness, accompanied by criticism about the public not being notified in time. We have to concur, the narrative seems to have a tone of concealment, don’t you agree? A score of 9 implies a considerable delay in acknowledging the condition.
However, medical experts are keen to point out that a high Gleason score does not necessarily testify to the duration of the cancer’s development. The score just provides a measure of how aggressive the cancer cells are. Notwithstanding, doesn’t Biden’s case underline the importance of regular screenings regardless of age or presumed health condition?
‘It’s actually good medicine not to screen people in their 80s,’ a specialist controversially claimed. Limiting regular screenings for people above a certain age seems to be an area where there is room for debate. The question is: isn’t it prudent to have regular check-ups despite one’s age, especially when one occupies the office of the President?
This concerning health news about Biden has thrown into sharp relief the importance of regular screenings and early prevention of diseases. Irrespective of what’s considered ‘good’ or ‘bad’ medicine, the well-being of the nation’s leader seems to be of paramount importance. A lesson to be learned, perhaps?