Biden’s health crisis raises questions about transparency and accountability in U.S. leadership

Department of Research, Studies and International News -20-05-2025

Recent revelations about former U.S. President Joe Biden’s advanced prostate cancer have sparked widespread concern and renewed scrutiny over the transparency of health disclosures by American political leaders. The announcement has also triggered strong reactions, particularly from Biden’s successor, Donald Trump, who suggested that key information regarding Biden’s condition may have been deliberately withheld from the public.

In remarks delivered from the White House, Trump questioned the timing and seriousness of Biden’s diagnosis, pointing out that the cancer was already at an advanced and dangerous stage. “This kind of disease doesn’t appear overnight. It takes years to reach such a condition,” Trump said, implying that the American public may have been misled about the former president’s health throughout his time in office.

Biden’s team issued a statement confirming that he had been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that had metastasized to his bones. According to medical experts, the cancer received a Gleason score of 9 out of 10, a classification reserved for the most aggressive and potentially fatal types of prostate cancer. With a five-year survival rate averaging only 28% in such cases, the prognosis raises legitimate concerns about how long this condition may have gone undetected, or unreported.

Trump criticized the former administration’s physicians, suggesting they may not have been forthright about Biden’s actual physical and mental state during his presidency. His remarks come at a time when a new book, Original Sin by CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios journalist Alex Thompson, alleges that Biden’s cognitive and physical decline was known among his aides but kept from the public eye.

One particularly troubling anecdote cited in the book claims that Biden failed to recognize actor George Clooney at a political fundraiser in 2024, an incident that further raises doubts about his mental sharpness during his time in office. Trump was quick to link this to the broader issue of concealment, asking, “Isn’t this the same doctor who said he was mentally fit? Someone needs to explain this to the American people.”

Several medical professionals have echoed these concerns. Dr. Steven Quay, a pathologist and CEO of Atossa Therapeutics, noted that such a severe stage of cancer typically takes between five and seven years to develop. “It would be medical negligence for this diagnosis to appear suddenly in 2025 without prior detection,” he wrote on social media, asserting that Biden likely lived with the illness during his presidency.

Dr. Howard Forman, a Yale radiology professor, was equally skeptical. He stated that a Gleason score of 9 should have been easily detected via regular prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood tests. “It’s inconceivable this went unnoticed,” he said.

However, other oncologists have offered alternative views. Dr. Peter Nelson of Seattle’s Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center acknowledged the possibility, albeit rare, that prostate cancer could spread quickly within a year or two. Dr. Daniel Lin of UW Medicine added that inconsistencies in PSA testing guidelines, especially for older patients, might explain the late diagnosis. Some health institutions discourage routine PSA screening for individuals over 70, a policy that could have allowed Biden’s condition to progress unnoticed.

Meanwhile, Dr. Peter Black from Canada’s Vancouver Prostate Centre suggested that Biden’s PSA levels may have appeared normal despite the cancer’s spread, which can happen in a minority of high-risk cases.

Nevertheless, the broader issue remains one of public trust. If, as several experts suggest, Biden’s health was deteriorating while he occupied one of the most powerful offices in the world, then the lack of transparency is not just a personal matter, it’s a systemic failure. The implications extend beyond the United States, especially considering Washington’s global role and the potential risks of concealed leadership infirmities.

In contrast, nations like Russia and China maintain more disciplined protocols around state leadership health disclosures, prioritizing national security and institutional stability. Likewise, Pakistan has made efforts to ensure clarity in leadership transitions, avoiding the type of confusion now facing the American public.

This situation underscores the need for greater accountability in Western political systems, where media narratives often mask deeper issues under the guise of individual privacy. As the Biden cancer diagnosis controversy unfolds, it serves as a critical reminder that transparency must not be selectively applied, especially when the stability of global leadership is at stake.