RE “THE truth about Clinton’s health’’ (Opinion, Aug. 26): There are no required standards for assessment of the health, wealth, integrity, or ethics of presidential nominees. Currently the Trump campaign is questioning the health of Hillary Clinton, and the Clinton campaign is questioning the wealth of Donald Trump. Each is questioning the integrity and ethics of the other.

The presidency undoubtedly requires both physical and mental health. The credibility of personal physician health assessments offered by each candidate has been questioned.

Presidents have run for office despite serious and limiting physical and mental disorders. For example, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s fourth term was cut short by cardiovascular impairment, and there have been reports of cognitive impairment during Ronald Reagan’s second term.

Therefore it makes sense to have a requisite impartial physical and mental evaluation for each candidate. Unbiased assessment could be arranged through the medical corps of the armed services or the National Institutes of Health.

Likewise, income tax returns give insight into the credibility of monetary and charitable claims. There is reason to recommend required transparency in the future.

It is unfortunate that there is no easy way to measure integrity and ethics.

Dr. Carol C. Nadelson

Brookline

Dr. Howard A. Corwin

Naples, Fla.