top of page
Search

Normal People Have Memory Lapses-- But The Media, Looking To Drum Up Drama, Doesn't Go Wild Over it



Late yesterday, the NY Times published Paul Krugman’s column, Why I am now deeply worried for America. He’s been feeling sanguine until just a few days ago he wrote. “Economically, we’ve had a year of strong growth and plunging inflation— and aside from committed Republicans, who see no good, hear no good and speak no good when a Democrat is president, Americans appear to be recognizing this progress. It has seemed increasingly likely that the nation’s good sense would prevail and democracy would survive.” So what changed? “[W]atching the frenzy over President Biden’s age, I am, for the first time, profoundly concerned about the nation’s future. It now seems entirely possible that within the next year, American democracy could be irretrievably altered.”


What’s got him down in the dumps “is the way the hand-wringing over Biden’s age has overshadowed the real stakes in the 2024 election. It reminds me, as it reminds everyone I know, of the 2016 furor over Hillary Clinton’s email server, which was a minor issue that may well have wound up swinging the election to Donald Trump.”


Yes, it’s true that Biden is old, and will be even older if he wins re-election and serves out a second term. I wish that Democrats had been able to settle on a consensus successor a year or two ago and that Biden had been able to step aside in that successor’s favor without setting off an intraparty free-for-all. But speculating about whether that could have happened is beside the point now. It didn’t happen, and Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee.
It’s also true that many voters think the president’s age is an issue. But there’s perception and there’s reality: As anyone who has recently spent time with Biden (and I have) can tell you, he is in full possession of his faculties— completely lucid and with excellent grasp of detail. Of course, most voters don’t get to see him up close, and it’s on Biden’s team to address that. And yes, he speaks quietly and a bit slowly, although this is in part because of his lifetime struggle with stuttering. He also, by the way, has a sense of humor, which I think is important.
Most important is that Biden has been a remarkably effective president. Trump spent four years claiming that a major infrastructure initiative was just around the corner, to the point that “It’s infrastructure week!” became a running joke; Biden actually got legislation passed. Trump promised to revive American manufacturing, but didn’t. Biden’s technology and climate policies— the latter passed against heavy odds— have produced a surge in manufacturing investment. His enhancement of Obamacare has brought health insurance coverage to millions.
If you ask me, these achievements say a lot more about Biden’s capacity than his occasional verbal slips.
And what about his opponent, who is only four years younger? Maybe some people are impressed by the fact that Trump talks loud and mean. But what about what he’s actually saying in his speeches? They’re frequently rambling word salads, full of bizarre claims like his assertion on Friday that if he loses in November, “they’re going to change the name of Pennsylvania.”
…Over the past few days, while the national discussion has been dominated by talk about Biden’s age, Trump declared that he wouldn’t intervene to help “delinquent” NATO members if Russia were to attack them, even suggesting that he might encourage such an attack. He seems to regard NATO as nothing more than a protection racket and after all this time still has no idea how the alliance works. By the way, Lithuania, the NATO member that Trump singled out, has spent a larger percentage of its G.D.P. on aid to Ukraine than any other nation.
Again, I wish this election weren’t a contest between two elderly men and worry in general about American gerontocracy. But like it or not, this is going to be a race between Biden and Trump— and somehow the lucid, well-informed candidate is getting more heat over his age than his ranting, factually challenged opponent.
As I said, until just the other day I was feeling somewhat optimistic. But now I’m deeply troubled about our nation’s future.

Perhaps looking down the page to Dr. Charan Ranganath, a professor of psychology and neuroscience and director of the Dynamic Memory Lab and UC, Davis would cheer him up a little. Ranganath’s OpEd, I’m a Neuroscientist. We’re Thinking About Biden’s Memory and Age in the Wrong Way. “As an expert on memory, he wrote, “I can assure you that everyone forgets. In fact, most of the details of our lives— the people we meet, the things we do and the places we go— will inevitably be reduced to memories that capture only a small fraction of those experiences. It is normal to be more forgetful as you get older. Broadly speaking, memory functions begin to decline in our 30s and continue to fade into old age. However, age in and of itself doesn’t indicate the presence of memory deficits that would affect an individual’s ability to perform in a demanding leadership role. And an apparent memory lapse may or may not be consequential depending on the reasons it occurred.”


There is forgetting and there is Forgetting. If you’re over the age of 40, you’ve most likely experienced the frustration of trying to grasp hold of that slippery word hovering on the tip of your tongue. Colloquially, this might be described as ‘forgetting,’ but most memory scientists would call this “retrieval failure,” meaning that the memory is there, but we just can’t pull it up when we need it. On the other hand, Forgetting (with a capital F) is when a memory is seemingly lost or gone altogether. Inattentively conflating the names of the leaders of two countries would fall in the first category, whereas being unable to remember that you had ever met the president of Egypt would fall into the latter.
Over the course of typical aging, we see changes in the functioning of the prefrontal cortex, a brain area that plays a starring role in many of our day-to-day memory successes and failures. These changes mean that, as we get older, we tend to be more distractible and often struggle to pull up the word or name we’re looking for. Remembering events takes longer and it requires more effort, and we can’t catch errors as quickly as we used to. This translates to a lot more forgetting, and a little more Forgetting.
Many of the special counsel’s observations about Biden’s memory seem to fall in the category of forgetting, meaning that they are more indicative of a problem with finding the right information from memory than actual Forgetting. Calling up the date that an event occurred, like the last year of Biden’s vice presidency or the year of his son’s death, is a complex measure of memory. Remembering that an event took place is different than being able to put a date on when it happened, the latter of which is more challenging with increased age. The president very likely has many memories of both periods of his life, even though he could not immediately pull up the date in the stressful (and more immediately pressing) context of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel.
Other “memory” issues highlighted in the media are not so much cases of forgetting as they are of difficulties in the articulation of facts and knowledge. For instance, in July 2023, Biden mistakenly stated in a speech that “we have over 100 people dead,” when he should have said, “over one million.” He has struggled with a stutter since childhood, and research suggests that managing a stutter demands prefrontal resources that would normally enable people to find the right word or at least quickly correct errors after the fact.
Americans are understandably concerned about the advanced age of the two top contenders in the coming presidential election (Biden is 81 and Donald Trump is 77), although some of these concerns are rooted in cultural stereotypes and fears around aging. The fact is that there is a huge degree of variability in cognitive aging. Age is, on average, associated with decreased memory, but studies that follow up the same person over several years have shown that, although some older adults show precipitous declines over time,  other “super-agers” remain as sharp as ever.
Biden is the same age as Harrison Ford, Paul McCartney and Martin Scorsese. He’s also a bit younger than Jane Fonda (86) and a lot younger than Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett (93). All these individuals are considered to be at the top of their professions, and yet I would not be surprised if they are more forgetful and absent-minded than when they were younger. In other words, an individual’s age does not say anything definitive about their cognitive status or where it will head in the near future.
I can’t speak to the cognitive status of any of the presidential candidates, but I can say that, rather than focusing on candidates’ ages per se, we should consider whether they have the capabilities to do the job. Public perception of a person’s cognitive state is often determined by superficial factors, such as physical presence, confidence, and verbal fluency, but these aren’t necessarily relevant to one’s capacity to make consequential decisions about the fate of this country. Memory is surely relevant, but other characteristics, such as knowledge of the relevant facts and emotion regulation— both of which are relatively preserved and might even improve with age— are likely to be of equal or greater importance.
Ultimately, we are due for a national conversation about what we should expect in terms of the cognitive and emotional health of our leaders.
And that should be informed by science, not politics.

Now it’s up to Krugman and others with large media platform’s to make sure the voters know this.



 
 
 

7 Comments


Guest
Feb 15, 2024

Biden's age is beside the point. A year out, it looks like it will be impossible for Biden to win, and an organization that is supposed to be interested in winning elections won't even seriously discuss that.


I guess they think that once Biden is the candidate, it won't matter if all he can do is sit and drool during a debate with Trump, if we don't like it we can vote to burn the country.

Like

barrem01
Feb 14, 2024

"I wish that Democrats had been able to settle on a consensus successor a year or two ago and that Biden had been able to step aside in that successor’s favor without setting off an intraparty free-for-all. But speculating about whether that could have happened is beside the point now. It didn’t happen, and Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee." I disagree. There is a systemic problem that prevents the party from examining the candidate for such obvious flaws as advancing age. There is also a culture of self aggrandizing "white knight" thinking "I alone can save us", which should be replaced with a team and ideas based culture. Seasoned octogenarians can best serve the country and the part…

Like
barrem01
Mar 07, 2024
Replying to

I don't believe the party can change the voters and I'm not sure that would be the right thing to do if it could. But the party can look at itself and promote a better culture from within.

Like

Guest
Feb 14, 2024

All you have to do is watch video of him walking to Marine one in 2021 and compare it to him doddering toward it today. 3 years makes a very big difference in vitality. His lapses and oopsies are just another example.


Why is nobody asking the obvious question: can't the democraps come up with someone less awful... or maybe even GOOD? And if not, why not? (answer: money and voters)


"Why I am now deeply worried for America." -- Paul Krugman


A wise man would have expressed deep worries back when he was working for the guy who made a democrap party out of a Democratic one. I did.


slick willie gave wall street the 2008 crash. obamanation gav…

Edited
Like

ptoomey
Feb 14, 2024

Obviously, there should be parity in the coverage of the respective mental capacities of the 2 assumed nominees. For every incident of Biden confusing Mexico and Egypt, there's Trump confusing Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi 3 different times in the same speech. In the relative world in which we live, I'm not going to try to guess which of them has shown more public signs of deterioration.


I will, however, also note that I saw Biden deliver his stump speech during his abortive presidential campaign in 1987. I closely followed the Bork confirmation hearings that Biden chaired a few weeks after that. I closely followed the Thomas confirmation hearings that Biden chaired in 1991. There's no comparison between how Bi…


Like
Guest
Feb 14, 2024
Replying to

then you better hope he noms a better veep than kamala to take over when he can't function any more.

Like
bottom of page