@US Conservative A HUGE problem with diagnosing a politician from a distance based on a collection of video clips (often edited) is that you don't know what was particularly going on when the video clip was recorded. Sure, someone his age may experience an episode of confusion, say, in the presence of undiagnosed urinary tract infection, or a drop in pulse ox due to a bout of bronchitis, or severe hyperglycemia with high osmotic state, or a bout of ammonia elevation due to a side effect of a medication, or hyponatremia with a degree of cerebral edema, or an episode of transient ischemia due to a peak of blood pressure, or a drop in perfusion due to an arrhythmia, and so on and so forth. These issues may be reversible and once corrected, the senior citizen may resume much better performance. Is this normal? No, none of the above is. But it also doesn't mean that the moment pinpointed in a video is the person's baseline functioning. If a group of opponents will want to HIGHLIGHT the person's failures, they may be guilty of selective quoting, and they WILL probably find something. Like I showed, two can play this game: And by the way, no, I'm not implying that Trump is demented. I'm saying, if someone wanted to catch even ME having some iffy moments, the person would be able to... but someone willing to highlight my good moments instead, would also be able to show some fairly brilliant lectures... Like everybody my age, I have some days that are better than some other days. I've seen performances by Biden in debates and townhalls that do not appear consistent with a very significant degree of dementia like his opponents keep claiming (if we go by what they say, he is a drooling fool with advanced Alzheimer's). But of course, this diagnosis by video clip will NEVER include those good moments... I imagine that the opposition watches hours and hours of recordings of the president, to then catch and highlight the worst possible moments, and they will edit them and put them together in a manner that may impress the lay public. Whether or not it is truly a reflection of his baseline functioning, remains to be seen. Like I said, I reserve the task of diagnosing someone, to the patients I'm able to examine in person, both with the performance of a full physical and full neurological and psychiatric exam, and with being armed with various objective diagnostic tools. By the way, this is the ethical thing to do. There's been position statements, for example by the American Psychiatric Association, and by the ABPN, advising their diplomates to refrain from issuing public comment on possible diagnoses a politician may harbor, when they haven't been personally involved in establishing that diagnosis through state-of-the-art evidence-based practice. And this was at a time when some psychiatrists talked about Trump's possible pathological Narcissistic Personality Disorder. So, I'm sure at the time you agreed that such comments were inappropriate. Why is now appropriate to be diagnosing Biden from a distance?