Obama reacts to Biden diagnosis: 'Nobody has done more to find breakthrough treatments for cancer...than Joe'

Fox News - May 19th, 2025

Former President Joe Biden has been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that has metastasized to the bone, as reported by his personal office. The diagnosis, characterized by a Gleason score of 9, is considered severe, but the cancer's hormone-sensitive nature offers promising treatment options. Prominent political figures, including former Presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump, have publicly expressed their support and wishes for his swift recovery. Biden, who recently concluded his presidency, is currently reviewing treatment plans with his medical team.

The news of Biden's diagnosis has prompted a wave of reactions across the political spectrum, underscoring the former president's enduring influence and the bipartisan nature of the well-wishes extended to him. This development highlights Biden's longstanding dedication to cancer research and treatment initiatives, further exemplified by his leadership of the Cancer Moonshot program during his vice presidency. As the 82-year-old former president confronts this personal health challenge, the broader implications for public awareness and advocacy in cancer treatment remain significant.

Donald Trump Joe Biden Bill Clinton Barack Obama Healthcare Prostate Cancer Cancer Treatment Political Reactions

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a well-rounded and timely account of Joe Biden's prostate cancer diagnosis and the reactions from notable political figures. It is accurate in its reporting and presents a balanced view by including diverse political perspectives. The story is clear and engaging, though it could benefit from more in-depth analysis and expert commentary on the medical aspects of Biden's diagnosis. While it addresses a topic of significant public interest, the potential for controversy is minimal due to its respectful and factual approach. Overall, the article effectively informs readers about a significant development in the political and health landscape.

Accuracy

The story is generally accurate in its reporting of Joe Biden's prostate cancer diagnosis and the reactions from notable political figures. The claim about Biden's diagnosis, characterized by a Gleason score of 9 with metastasis to the bone, is supported by statements from Biden's office. The story accurately captures the essence of the statements made by Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Bill Clinton, who all expressed their support and well-wishes for Biden. However, the story could have included more specific details about the medical implications of the diagnosis for further precision.

Balance

The article presents a balanced view by including reactions from a range of political figures across the spectrum, including Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Bill Clinton. This diversity in perspectives helps to mitigate potential bias and provides a comprehensive view of the political world's reaction to Biden's diagnosis. However, the article could have benefited from including perspectives from medical experts or commentators to provide a fuller picture of the situation.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly written, presenting information in a logical flow. The language is straightforward, making it easy for readers to understand the key points about Biden's diagnosis and the political reactions. The use of direct quotes from public figures enhances the clarity and engagement of the piece. However, additional context or explanations about the medical terminology used could further aid reader comprehension.

Source quality

The sources cited in the article are credible, including statements from Biden's office and public figures like Obama, Trump, and Clinton. However, the article relies heavily on these political figures' statements without incorporating expert medical opinions or independent verification from medical professionals. Including such sources could enhance the depth and reliability of the reporting.

Transparency

The article provides a clear account of the sources of its information, primarily relying on public statements from political figures and Biden's office. However, it lacks transparency regarding the methodology used to gather additional insights or verify the medical details of Biden's diagnosis. Providing more context about how the information was obtained and verified would improve transparency.