How Biden cancer diagnosis could have gone undetected
Joe Biden's diagnosis with an aggressive form of prostate cancer has spurred some prominent conservatives to accuse the former president of a cover-up, but oncologists told AFP that screening limitations could very well have left his condition undetected until now.
The 82-year-old received the diagnosis last week after he experienced urinary issues and a prostate nodule was found, his office said Sunday.
While President Donald Trump said he was "saddened" to learn of his rival's condition, a chorus of Republicans led by Vice President JD Vance and Donald Trump Jr said or shared conspiratorial posts to the effect that Biden and his White House medical team had long concealed his illness for political purposes.
Questions over Biden's health dogged him throughout the waning months of his presidency and his short-lived reelection campaign. And they have been renewed in recent weeks ahead of the expected release of a book detailing what it calls his declining physical condition.
Prostate cancer, the most common among men, is typically diagnosed much sooner than other kinds of cancer. It can be caught in its early stages using blood tests that measure for a protein called PSA.
Medical experts interviewed by AFP said the late identification of an advanced cancer would not be unheard of, even for a former president receiving top-of-the-line medical care.
"We can't rule out the possibility that it was an aggressive form that developed quickly," said Natacha Naoun, an oncologist with France's Gustave-Roussy Institute.
Annual PSA screening after the age of 70 is not universally recommended.
The US Preventive Services Task Force advises against it, reasoning that the risk of false positives and the harms from biopsies and treatment outweigh the benefits.
"It could be they decided to stop checking PSA annually, and then he had urinary symptoms," said Russell Pachynski, an oncologist with Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, who told AFP that prostate cancer patients do not always experience telltale pains or signs.
It is also possible that Biden was undergoing routine screenings, but that those checks failed to turn up indications of cancer, Pachynski said.
"Maybe it was just unlucky that his particular cancer didn't express a lot of PSA and he still had a normal PSA. In that setting, you would not go checking the prostate or do a biopsy, etcetera, unless it was driven by symptoms."
Otis Brawley, an oncologist and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, said studies have shown both PSA testing and rectal exams are imperfect.
"It is not unusual for a man to be diagnosed with metastatic prostate disease despite normal annual screening," he told AFP. "This is part of the limitations of prostate screening."
bmc/mgs/dw
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
8 minutes ago
- CBS News
Planned PBS, NPR cuts would overwhelmingly hit outlets in states Trump won, report finds
The looming federal funding cuts to public television and radio would overwhelmingly gut outlets in states won by President Trump in 2024, according to a new congressional report. Approximately 60% of the hundreds of radio and television stations that could suffer funding cuts are in Trump-won states, according to a congressional report obtained by CBS News from Senate Democrats. The organizations that would be affected include public media outlets in cities as large as Houston and Miami, as well as smaller stations in tiny communities like Douglas, Wyoming, which has a population of 6,000 and hosts the Wyoming State Fair. The widespread cuts to public radio and television are a component of a Republican congressional plan to eliminate $9 billion in funding for programs approved before President Trump's second term began. The proposed rescissions package, which is scheduled for a House vote Thursday, includes $1.1 billion in cuts for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides funding to NPR and PBS. The cuts to public broadcasting are being touted by the Trump administration and Republicans as an effort to slash taxpayer funding for news media outlets they accuse of being "liberal" or politically biased in their content. Advocates for public broadcasting have lambasted the cuts as destructive, needless and harmful to communities that have very limited sources of local broadcast news. They also deny allegations of political bias. The list of hundreds of TV and radio outlets facing funding cuts shows a broad range of impact. Major public television and radio stations in Charlotte, North Carolina, and Washington, D.C., could each lose nearly $1 million in grants in the coming months. An FM community public radio station in Carbondale, Colorado, which touts itself as "Public access radio that connects community members to one another and the world," received $145,000 in federal grant funding last year. At each of the public media outlets, the list shows reductions that are sizable enough to potentially require staffing cuts, programming reductions or news cutbacks that threaten to exacerbate shortages of local news content. CBS News' review of proposed grant cuts shows Alabama, a state with an estimated 215 public media employees, would lose as much as $3 million in funding for its public television outlets in the coming months. In South Dakota, a sparsely populated state that nonetheless receives $3 million in funds for public broadcasting employees, the funding cuts would gut money for at least 20 media outlets, according to the report provided by congressional aides to CBS News. "The path to better public media is achievable only if funding is maintained. Otherwise, a vital lifeline that operates reliable emergency communications, supports early learning, and keeps local communities connected and informed will be cut off with regrettable and lasting consequences," said Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. "Federal funding for the public broadcasting system is irreplaceable," Harrison said. "Public media serves all — families and individuals, in rural and urban communities — free of charge and commercial free." Both PBS and NPR have sued the Trump administration over previous executive orders cutting their funding, with lawyers for both alleging that among other issues, the cuts violate the First Amendment. PBS CEO Paula Kerger previously said on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" that while PBS only receives 15% of its funding from the federal government, some of its smaller stations receive up to 50% of their funding from federal sources and said the risks to the smaller stations are "existential" if the funding is cut. NPR CEO Katherine Maher has said roughly 1% of the organization's budget comes directly from federal dollars. Some of the many impacted public radio and TV stations have posted messages protesting the proposed cuts in funding. The social media account of a Baltimore public radio station leader said, "This isn't hypothetical—it's real, it's happening, and it places the future of local, trusted public media at serious risk. Let me be clear: this is not a symbolic move. If approved, this action could irreparably damage the local public media." Rural communities, often referred to as "news deserts" because of the lack of local news organizations, would suffer the brunt of the pain. According to a joint statement by Rep. Mark Amodei, a Nevada Republican, and Rep. Dan Goldman, a New York Democrat, "Rural broadcasters face significant challenges in raising private funds, making them particularly vulnerable if government funding is cut." Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat who is the vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a statement to CBS News, "Trump wants Congress to vote to cut off public radio broadcasts our constituents count on for weather forecasts, emergency alerts, and updates on what's going on in their community—and force layoffs at local TV stations." House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, has championed the cuts and sought to rally support ahead of Thursday's vote on the rescissions package. "House Republicans will fulfill our mandate and continue codifying into law a more efficient federal government," Johnson said in a statement. "This is exactly what the American people deserve." In April, the White House released a statement saying taxpayers had funded NPR and PBS "for too long" and said they've "spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as 'news.'" The White House Office of Management and Budget did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
Americans think Trump's big military parade is not a good use of government funds, poll shows
A majority of Americans believe President Donald Trump's multimillion-dollar parade celebrating the Army in Washington on Saturday is not a good use of government funds, a new AP-NORC poll shows. Sixty percent of Americans surveyed in the June poll said they believe the parade is not a good use of funds, while 38 percent said they believe the parade is worth the cost. Forty percent of Americans approve of Trump's decision to hold the parade, compared with 31 percent who neither approve or disapprove and 29 percent who are against the decision to hold a parade. The parade this weekend, which also coincides with Trump's 79th birthday, is expected to feature 6,600 soldiers marching along with 25 M1 Abrams main battle tanks and dozens of other military vehicles. Several generations of military aircraft are planned to fly overhead, including a World War II-era B-25 bomber, Huey helicopters similar to those used in the Vietnam War, and a P-1 biplane fighter aircraft like the ones first used in the 1920s. Trump is also expected to give a speech. The cost of the parade is estimated to cost between $25 million and $45 million, according to Army officials. Some Republicans have raised concerns over the cost. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, told POLITICO last week he 'would have recommended against the parade' after learning of its estimated cost. In an NBC News interview in May, Trump said the amount spent on holding the parade would be 'peanuts compared to the value of doing it.' Most Republican lawmakers are planning to skip the parade, including Speaker Mike Johnson and several members who have previously served in the military. Only seven out of 50 congressional Republicans surveyed by POLITICO as of Tuesday said they were planning to attend. The poll also finds 60 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump's job performance, while 39 percent approve, marking Trump's highest disapproval rating in an AP-NORC poll since he returned to office in January. The AP-NORC poll was conducted June 5-9 and is based on interviews with 1,158 adults around the country. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 4.0 percentage points.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Child care costs as much as college. Here is what you need to know about fixes.
You might have heard that child care costs as much as college. Parents face big bills, long wait lists and a shortage of quality providers. At the same time, many child care providers say without assistance, they will be forced to close their doors. One of the biggest hurdles is finding qualified workers in an industry with low wages. For a first-hand perspective, the Ideas Lab's Kristin Brey talked with four early childhood education ambassadors from Milwaukee Succeeds, an organization connected with the Greater Milwaukee Foundation that focuses on early childhood education and high school success. The interviews (available in the video play list above and links below) include conversations with: Jackie Burrell, a former child care provider, educator and parent. She also serves on the Board of Commissioners for Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee; is the Westlawn Resident Council President; and is Foster Care to Adopt lead. See her interview. LaDonna Foster, a former child care educator and parent. She is also the lead coordinator and board member at Westlawn Resident Council. See her interview. Taffie Foster-Toney, lead case manager for Wisconsin Community Service and Driver's License Recovery and Employability program. See her interview. Vanessa Giraldez, current early childhood education parent and lead service navigator at the National Alliance on Mental Illness and program coordinator for the Lighthouse Project. See her interview. The future of proposed funding to support Wisconsin's struggling child care industry is in doubt after state budget negotiations between Gov. Tony Evers and legislative leaders collapsed June 4. Evers, a Democrat, proposed spending $480 million on Child Care Counts, a program that directs federal pandemic relief funding to child care providers across Wisconsin. Providers use the money to increase staff wages, to offset the cost of physical operating expenses like rent and utilities, to increase the quality of their programming and to prevent large tuition hikes. With the pandemic funding expected to run out this summer, Evers is asking for $480 million over the next two years to continue the program. It's unclear how much, if any, Republicans, who control the legislature, will support in their budget bill. The state's new two-year budget begins July 1. If the governor and legislature don't agree on a budget, spending will continue at current levels. How does Wisconsin compare to other states in responding to child care struggles? Here are solutions from two states highlighted by Milwaukee Succeeds: New Mexico: Voters passed a constitutional amendment dedicating 1.25% of state land trust revenue to early childhood education. In addition, the state now offers child care assistance to families earning up to 400% of the federal poverty level and has waived all family copayments. New Mexico is leading on both sustainable funding and affordability, ensuring families don't face out-of-reach child care costs while creating long-term stability for providers. Vermont: Lawmakers passed legislation that funds scholarships and loan repayment for early childhood education workers, expands family subsidies, upgrades the IT system, and sets equity-driven goals: no family should pay more than 10% of income, and providers should be fairly paid. Vermont is treating child care as public infrastructure, investing in both access and workforce quality while building a system that can meet long-term needs. The Wisconsin Policy Forum's recent budget brief for Wisconsin includes a table outlining policy options from other states. Jim Fitzhenry is the Ideas Lab Editor/Director of Community Engagement for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Reach him at jfitzhen@ or 920-993-7154. Kristin Brey is the "My Take" columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: WI lawmakers must be part of solution for child care woes | Opinion
