"It seems entirely relevant to inquire about their medical histories and current health," the New York Times' editorial board writes. | Getty NYT editorial board demands 'full disclosure' on candidate health

For the sake of the American voter, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump should keep their word and release additional information about their respective medical histories and current health, The New York Times' editorial board declared in a piece published Monday.

While acknowledging that releasing health information to the public is not a requirement to be president, the newspaper remarked upon President Barack Obama's "graying hair" as an indicator of the American presidency as "perhaps the most grueling and stressful political job there is."


Both Trump and Clinton "would be doing American voters a great service by furnishing a much clearer picture of their physical health than the abbreviated and sunny reports provided so far," the board wrote, after the Democratic nominee was rushed away from a 9/11 memorial event while battling a case of pneumonia that the campaign did not disclose upon its diagnosis last Friday.

While Clinton has been more forthcoming with her medical records than Trump, the former secretary of state's July 2015 note from her physician "could use some updating," the board continued, granting that presidents have become more transparent, not less, over the last several decades.

Compared with Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, who hid their physical ailments from the American public, more recent presidents and candidates have been more open about their conditions, the board noted, pointing to Ronald Reagan's openness about colon cancer, John McCain's health transparency in 2008 and Obama's 2014 disclosure of acid reflux.

"Now Americans are deciding between Mr. Trump, who is 70, and Mrs. Clinton, who is 68. Whoever prevails will have to deal with round-the-clock demands, so it seems entirely relevant to inquire about their medical histories and current health," the board concluded, adding that should both candidates fulfill their pledges "and provide plenty of detail, the winners will be the voters."