In Sep. 2016, in the heat of the general election battle, the issues of health was raised among the two presidential candidates and much was focused on and speculated about Hillary Clinton all across the media.

Image/Mary Pahlke via pixabay
Image/Mary Pahlke via pixabay

Medical determinations of Mrs. Clinton being the victim of Parkinson’s disease and issues with a bout of pneumonia had real and arm-chair physicians appearing on TV interviews and typing away on their blogs.

Clearly, no one can make a diagnosis from afar, and a medical professional shouldn’t try, because it stirs unnecessary controversy and conspiracy.

On Sept. 13, a Senior Editor for the New Republic, Jeet Heer, rightly denounced the speculations of Mrs Clinton’s health, albeit from a gender angle.

However, a short five months later, it appears the New Republic now believes it’s okay to publish speculation about President Trump’s health in an article by Dr. Steven Beutler.

In his piece, Dr. Beutler, an infectious disease specialist, lays out his theory for Donald Trump’s behavior–Neurosyphilis.

Beutler notes his observations of Mr. Trump’s behavior comparing it with the symptoms of the late-stage of the sexually transmitted infection. He also admits his diagnosis is not conclusive (duh?).

Does Trump suffer from this condition? I cannot, of course, establish this diagnosis from a distance. There’s a great deal of information I don’t have access to, which could be critical in reaching the correct conclusion. In Trump’s case, there are many diagnostic possibilities, and we have very little background information because the slim medical summary he released was vague, unverifiable, and possibly outdated.

He later in the article discusses Trump’s past sexual history that also leads him to his unsubstantiated theory.

Really? Is this what a medical professional should be writing about in any publication? One has to ask, what are Dr. Beutler’s motives?

As for the New Republic, shame on you for publishing this sensationalist, unsubstantiated, conspiratorial article (the exact nonsense you excoriated a few short months ago) and shame on you for the hypocrisy.