The question of character vs. professional competence has no definitive rules.
Did the fact that Bill Clinton got a bj from an intern in the White House make him a bad president?
= Some have said "Yes" -- because it's a matter of character.
= Many would say "No" -- they'd rather have a competent pro in the Oval office than an incompetent idiot -- even if that pro is a serial philanderer.
= Still others would split the difference -- his sexual indiscretions do not negate his overall high marks as a president. Still, knowing then what we know now, I wouldn't have voted for such a scummy man.
In the case of FM, his ("alleged") marathon cheating defines him as dishonest, fraudulent, sort of a con artist, and somewhere between delusional and sociopathic. However, if he were the greatest pediatric heart surgeon ever, and your daughter/son/sister/brother/niece/nephew needed surgery, would you reject him in favor of a lesser physician because he was a running cheat and a condemnable fraud of low character?
Or does dishonesty, dishonor and chicanery in one facet of a person's life predict with any degree of certainty fraud, cheating and false accomplishments in another?
= If you learn your CPA is leaving his wife for a new girlfriend he's been having an affair with, do you take your business elsewhere -- fearing he may be trying to cheat (on) you too?
= If you discover an acquaintance cheats at golf, wouldn't you suspect he plays fast & loose with the truth and integrity in other aspects of his life? (I would.)
So often we find, upon uncovering ONE cover-up/crime/sin/theft, that many many more lie beneath:
= Police arrest a thief or investigate a Paul Manafort for one infraction ... and soon unveil an abundance of other crimes.
= Spouses who are caught cheating "once" have usually committed adultery multiple times.
Indeed, the discovery of Frank's cheating in the LAM led to the discovery (or at least suspicions) of many more such frauds.
YES, some folks perhaps can compartmentalize Frank's pattern of cheating in marathons, and thus revile at others' assertions that his medical practice is likewise suspect.
But for me -- notwithstanding all humankind's susceptibility to mistakes and moral imperfections --
I think his medical practice DOES deserve at least a heightened scrutiny. Why?
Because change for the better (self improvement) is hard.
But change for the worse (ethical deterioration) is comparatively easy ... and builds momentum.
And as my parents used to say,
"Integrity is like a match. Once it's burnt up, it's gone... and virtually impossible to revive."