Click on this if you want to have an informed opinion in this discussion.
What Michael Reagan said wasn't a matter of a "different opinion" -- He attacked his brother for writing what Ron, himself, had witnessed.
Michael Reagan held himself up as an "expert" on A/zheimer's disease because he's on the board of an organization that fundraises to provide seed money to fund off-beat research into A/zheimer's that doesn't fit standard scientific protocols as set out by the NIH.
And Lawrence O'Donnell's comment about "nothing more fun to watch than an lrish family fight, but we never know when A/zheimer's starts, and family members, after it's discovered, they kind of look back and they go 'Hey, remember that time when he couldn't find his keys?'..." exposed O'Donnell's ig-nor-ance of the subject and his real purpose for having Michael Reagan on at all -- Exploitation. An "lrish family" pile-on. A train wreck for viewers to rubberneck, gawk at.
A/zheimer's isn't about "forgetting where you left your keys"; it's about not knowing what keys are and what you do with them. It's not a matter of forgetfulness as much as disordered thinking.
And for O'Donnell to frame the discussion in terms of "not knowing when A/zheimer's starts" ignores the fact that once it has been determined that it is A/zheimer's, the earliest signs and symptoms are not difficult to track and date, which is something that Ron Reagan (and many others) did.
There is news value to this story that Ron Reagan tells (a new diagnosis date, 2 years earlier, the extent of his disordered thinking while in office), but to have Michael Reagan on is to prevent that news from getting into the public square. Michael Reagan's raison d'etre is to distract attention from his brother's testimony.
About Most Popular
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
0 comments:
Post a Comment