Meeting and remembering as many names as a president may need means little to me. If he meets several hundred people a day and forgets some names I'm not worried.
What about calling out in the crowd for people who are dead? (See Rep. Walorski).
Slurred incoherent speech with decent frequency that is more the kind of things I have concerns about.
I'd show you some video demonstrating this issue, but I'd be accused of posting propaganda.
The rubric your providing is appropriate for an average person who may need to remember only 8 to 10 names on the daily. If you forget names at that point yes an assessment is absolutely prudent, I would agree.
Perhaps when you're trying to convince people you're all there mentally, it would be best to make sure that you don't mix up the names of people in spectacular fashion... and not correct yourself.
ROFL!! Normally I find most of your arguments pretty strong if not intimidating but this, this one is hilarious. Seriously as if a group of strangers opinions should count as a rubric and not those who interact with him on the daily. Lolsly!!!
Voters are not a "group of strangers". They are the people that the President represents. Also, you'll note that other people's concerns are absolutely a factor in determining whether a cognitive assessment is appropriate.
In practice, cognitive assessment at the AWV may include testing with one of the available tools or direct observation by the provider, while also considering subjective cognitive impairment concerns raised by the patient, family, friends, or caregivers.
Learn about cognitive assessment considerations and research underway to better understand when to test for cognitive impairment and what tools to use.
www.nia.nih.gov
Now you may argue that none of us are Biden's "friends", but Biden represents us. And the point is, other's "subjective cognitive impairment concerns" are absolutely a factor in determining if cognitive assessment is appropriate.
As you test people and recieve results back, it's like you get to hone your discernment as a professional for when tests are truely necessary. So yes being a doctor with experience and knowledge is important.
Sure it is.
But you're making it sound like it's some kind of arduous decision-making process on whether or not someone should receive a cognitive assessment. It's really not. It's not a hard test. It's not invasive. It's not expensive. It would take 15 minutes. There is virtually no downside to doing the assessment.
Except it's not like that because chest pains are internal and cannot be witnessed by a doctor who can see other symptoms and make a judgment call.
You got a better example maybe?
It's exactly like that. The point is, if a doctor recommends something that goes against established norms, it's perfectly acceptable to question them.