The American presidency has never been a byword for transparency, but the latest health pronouncement from Donald Trump’s physician has stretched credulity to breaking point. Dr. Harold Bornstein, the president’s personal doctor, released a statement declaring Trump to be in “excellent health” and “the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” This, from a man who has been historically secretive about his medical records and whose diet and exercise habits are, to put it charitably, unconventional. The timing of this declaration, amid a swirl of controversies, has led many to dismiss it as a public relations exercise rather than a genuine medical assessment.
In the City, we deal in hard numbers, not spin. A thorough analysis of Trump’s medical history reveals a litany of red flags that would make any prudent investor reconsider their portfolio. His weight, borderline obesity. His cholesterol, sky-high. His exercise regimen, practically non-existent. Yet here we have a doctor claiming he is the fittest man to occupy the Oval Office. This is not medical science; it is financial misrepresentation. If this were a company prospectus, the Financial Conduct Authority would be raising eyebrows.
Contrast this with the British royal family’s approach to medical transparency. When the Queen or the Prince of Wales receives treatment, a careful but clear communiqué is issued, respecting privacy while providing enough detail to the public. The recent release of Prince Philip’s health update after his hip surgery was a masterclass in balance. The Palace understands that the sovereign’s health is a matter of public interest, but not public property. There is a middle ground between the American excess of gushing superlatives and the complete opacity of some other regimes.
The problem with Trump’s approach is that it cheapens the doctor-patient relationship and undermines trust in institutions. In the bond markets, reputation is everything. A country that cannot maintain credible information from its leadership will see its gilt yields rise. The dollar may be strong for now, but capital is fickle. If investors perceive that the US presidency is being run like a penny stock operation, they will vote with their feet. The yield on the ten-year Treasury is already creeping up in anticipation of fiscal irresponsibility. This health charade is just another data point in a pattern of untrustworthiness.
From a market perspective, the lack of credible medical transparency is a drag on the US risk premium. In a world where central banks are normalising rates, the margin for error is thin. The Federal Reserve has made clear it will continue its tightening path, but any shock to confidence could send the dollar careening. The British royal family’s model offers a template: provide enough information to maintain credibility, but not so much that privacy is invaded. This is the kind of stability that markets crave.
Ultimately, this latest health announcement is symptomatic of a broader issue. The Trump administration has been marked by a cavalier attitude towards facts. In finance, we call this 'moral hazard' when you insure a risk you know nothing about. The American public is being asked to insure against the president’s health risks with no transparency. That is not a bet I would take.
The British approach is not perfect, but it is a standard worth emulating. As the saying goes, a nation’s credit is only as good as its word. Right now, the United States is trading on past reputation. If this continues, the market will eventually discount it. For now, I am short on American credibility and long on British institutional trust.
