Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What did Dr. Harold Bornstein or other White House physicians say about Donald Trump's health?
Executive Summary
Dr. Harold Bornstein, Donald Trump’s private physician until 2015, later said he did not author the effusive 2015 health letter that declared Trump in “astonishingly excellent” health and that Trump dictated much of its language; Bornstein also alleged a 2017 removal of records from his office, a claim that sparked denials from the White House [1] [2] [3]. White House physicians who followed—most prominently Ronny Jackson—repeatedly portrayed Trump as in excellent or exceptional health, praising his genetics and cardiovascular status and clearing him to carry out presidential duties in public memos and statements from 2018 through 2025 [1] [4] [5] [6]. These accounts present a split between a private doctor disavowing a touted letter and official White House medical statements emphasizing fitness and longevity.
1. The surprising recantation that reshaped a public health claim
Bornstein’s later recounting contradicts the widely circulated 2015 letter that he had originally released on Trump’s behalf. He told reporters that the glowing phrases—calling Trump’s blood pressure “astonishingly excellent” and praising his “physical strength and stamina”—were dictated by Trump rather than being a clinical summary composed independently by a doctor, and Bornstein said he would advise Trump on what could not be included [2] [3]. This recantation undermines the provenance of a high-profile document that shaped early public perceptions of Trump’s health; the discrepancy matters because it shifts the letter from a physician’s objective evaluation to a partly self-authored statement with potential conflicts of interest and promotional intent [1] [3].
2. The contested claim of a records "raid" — fact, allegation, and denial
Bornstein told investigators and reporters that, in 2017, Trump’s representatives conducted what he described as a “raid” on his office to seize Trump’s medical records, which Bornstein said removed documentation relevant to the president’s history [1]. The allegation prompted pushback from White House spokespeople who framed any transfer of materials as routine or authorized rather than a forcible seizure, creating competing narratives about control and transparency over presidential medical history [1] [2]. The disagreement over that event is significant because possession of medical records affects independent verification of past diagnoses, treatments, and the continuity of clinical care, leaving a gap in what outside observers can independently review [1].
3. White House physicians’ public assurances: consistent praise from Jackson and successors
Following Bornstein, White House physicians including Ronny Jackson publicly described Trump as medically fit, often using emphatic language. Jackson said Trump ranked in the “top 10 percent of everyone his age” and praised his “incredible genes,” citing avoidance of smoking and drinking as factors supporting a favorable prognosis while acknowledging less-than-ideal diet and exercise habits [4] [5]. Official memoranda and statements from the White House medical team through 2025 continued to certify Trump as fit to execute the duties of the presidency, reporting stable cardiac, pulmonary, neurological, and metabolic parameters after annual exams [6] [4]. These documents function as formal certificates of fitness and are designed to reassure the public and governing institutions.
4. Diverging incentives: why Bornstein’s and White House doctors’ statements differ
The contrast between Bornstein’s later statements and the White House physicians’ evaluations highlights differing incentives and contexts. Bornstein was Trump’s private physician before the presidency and later cast doubt on the authorship and circumstances of the 2015 letter, which he implied served the patient’s PR aims [2] [3]. White House doctors operate within an institutional role that includes public reassurance and national security considerations; their memos and public briefings emphasize fitness and continuity to prevent destabilizing rumors [6] [5]. This divergence reveals that medical statements about a sitting president are shaped by both clinical findings and political or institutional priorities, which can lead to differing emphases and selective disclosures [1] [6].
5. What remains unsettled and why transparency questions persist
Even with multiple public statements from White House physicians affirming Trump’s health, Bornstein’s claims introduced doubts about the authorship and completeness of earlier assertions and about access to historical records [1] [3]. The core unresolved issues are provenance of the 2015 letter and the chains of custody for medical records—matters that affect independent verification and historical accountability; White House memos assert current fitness but do not retroactively resolve how the earlier letter was produced or whether records were fully preserved [2] [6]. The pattern of competing narratives shows that official medical clearances address current fitness but do not erase questions about past disclosures and record handling, leaving room for continued scrutiny.