The Queen died from...in The Times today

[NotInMyBackYards]

In TT today, Dr Porter discusses what is in the latest biography of the Queen (by Giles B.)

Dr P seems to agree with GB that the Queen had bone cancer. He doesn't say so in so many words but he does bullet-point the signs (of which she appears to have had a number.)

I'm a Royalist (with some exceptions, of course) and feel we are being 'cheated' by (perhaps) having the reason for her death being concealed.
She was well loved and admired by millions.
Isn't the least we are owed an honest account?

I am sure everyone could see that she didn't simply die of 'old age' (in so much as anyone in their late 90s does, to a degree.) The pain she was suffering, the weight loss, the circulation problems evident in her calves (varicose ulcers for years) and her hands.

It's as if we are being taken for fools and I wonder how, legally, her dr is allowed to complete the death cert inaccurately?

My late father had 3 conditions listed on his DC, including dementia, but he'd had two other conditions (major organ deterioration) for many years as well.
Considering he was 95, then 'old age' may have covered it but it wasn't just that.

What is the point of the Palace not being honest?

it was described when released as the partial death certificate

That's how I understood it too; the "primary cause" was given as old age, but the additional conditions - where presumably anything else would have been - weren't disclosed

Which suits me fine, in a nation where medical details are rightly private. After all she'd be no less dead no matter what it was, so why do we need to know?

Quite disgusted with Brandreth.

A death certificate is a public legal document

It has nothing to do with 'privacy' or private medical records

For the rest of us at least

@Backtothegymgirl she died in Scotland where the "old age" as first line in the death certificate is perfectly legal and acceptable.

The rest of the death certificate wasn't published - it was clearly stated at the time it was a "partial" release to the media.

So there may have been lines 2/3/4 below the main line with contributing causes but not released to the press. It is NOT lying as you say - it is just not giving out ALL the conditions she may, or may not, have had that contributed to her death.

I'm still not getting your point @Novella4
Lots of people get "old age" on their death certificates without any other cause listed even when the person has other medical issues. The Queen is another one. What do you know to be inaccurate in her case?

If it was a partial release to the media ( weird ) will the full death certificate be published ?
Just as the death certificate of each and every one of us will also be published , whether we like it or not ?

@LosingTheWill2022
I'm not the OP .

The OP was asking why old age was on the death certificate when journalists were mentioning cancer too.

You can have cancer and not die from it. If it wasn’t on her death certificate, it wasn’t the cause of death.

My grandmother, who passed in 2020, had lung cancer - she died of kidney failure unrelated to said cancer.

Of course . So kidney failure was listed

God @Novella4 will you give it a fucking rest.

Frailty of old age IS acceptable in Scotland as first line of a death certificate. It's possibly one of the many reasons why the Queen chose to remain at Balmoral in her final days, as well as her huge affection and memories for the area.

Which if you do "come from a family of doctors" you would know, right?

Why on earth does it matter to you. She was an elderly woman who lived her entire life in the public eye, constrained by centuries old meaningless traditions. Allow her some privacy in death. Any thing else is mawkish and ghoul like.

I highly doubt she died of cancer. She was on her feet the previous day and had been having people for the weekends etc. She got old, her health declined and she died. There was nothing unusual about her death at all. She lost weight which was typical. She had mobility issues, again typical. She had bruised hands…absolutely typical. She just faded away.

You don't deserve to know anyone's private medical information. You're not owed a bloody thing. The woman is allowed something of her life and death to be kept private.

In all honesty I can't see why it's so dreadful for the world to know what she died from. She was human. Doesn't this secrecy from the Palace try to maintain that the Royals are not like the rest of us and they just 'die' [from age.]

why is it so dreadful not to know what she died of unless you think it was something illegal ?
what will you do with the information of what she actually died of - she was 96, it's not like she suddenly dropped dead at 35. Are you keeping a log book of how the royals die ?

My mother died 2 weeks ago aged 100yrs. she had various health conditions but it is a good bet that being 100yrs old played a large part in the fact that she passed away, I would have no problem with 'old age' being listed as a cause of her death.

She thought she was coming back to Windsor. Her oldest dog had died and she had them flown back to Windsor to be buried. She was apparently very cut up about it.

This

What difference does it make to anyone at all what she died of, even her close family. She was 96, she died peacefully after a long and happy life. What more do you need to know?

Well if we were keeping a log book

George VI cancer from smoking
George V smoke related Ill health apparently
Edward VIII a life of excess
Victoria old age

My mother took her own life at the age of 83. At the time l lived 100 miles away from my home town.
The local coroner was incredibly kind, he agreed to conduct the inquest in private, so that there was no chance of there being a reporter from the local newspaper there.
My mother was a very private person, and would have been mortified if the fact that she'd ended her life had been made public.
The inquest being held in private meant that none of the family, myself included, could attend, but l decided that l'd prefer that (I had no siblings), and it also meant that hopefully the family that were living in my home town wouldn't be questioned by people about how she died. She was a good age, after all.

Surely the Queen and the Royal Family should be afforded the same dignity and privacy? She was 96. It's not unexpected at that age. And really, it's none of our business.

Can’t believe this tasteless thread is still here.

I wish my 97 year old mum’s death certificate had stated old age as the cause of death. At that age, what else could it be?

But its not a lie 🙄....my aunts said ol d age at 89.....she had cancer.... bit it was old age that took her ( organ failure etc) .....she could have lasted longer with just the cancer and not her other problems

Can't she have a bit of privacy in death? We aren't being cheated or taken for fools; I dont understand how you can think that way. We're all entitled to have our medical details kept confidential, even when we're gone.

Agreed. Everyone else has their death certificate as a matter of public record legally. The Queen though is above the law. Like all the Royal Family.

For some of us with elderly parents, the manner of the Queen's demise would strike one as odd - but then to get to 96 and be able to function as she did with her mental faculties intact is highly unusual. But most elderly have a slow decline, extended stays in hospital etc, there is a bit more forewarning. As there was with Prince Philip or the Queen Mother.
A fall would be the logical explanation for the rapidity of her death. Remember, this occurred to famous people such as Des O'Conner - pictures smiling from his window during lockdown, died soon after, also Christoper Plummer, like the Queen in his 90s and still acting - one fall and that's it. Nicholas Parsons was another who fell during a train journey, shortly after he died, he never recovered though he'd still been doing his radio show in his 90s, it is the main killer for the elderly, ironically of course you're less likely to go that way if you are in a wheelchair and more visibly impaired.

There's one exception. If your parent has the bed alongside a wall, well, that can be as bad, fall or no fall. They only have to sit on the bed and fall back and hit their head on the wall - bang! - and that's as bad as any fall really. Yet you wouldn't anticipate it, as it doesn't come from walking and falling over.