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?

What difference does it make to you? How are you being cheated? Unless you think it was a suspicious death it makes no difference.

Unless she was murdered her death is a private matter. The woman was 96 for heavens sake. There were likely loads of things wrong with her. It doesn’t really matter which one got her in the end, does it?

reason not treason

Why does it matter to anyone? Outside immediate family?

It’s nobody’s business, and I think after the age of 90 there’s nothing wrong with putting down “old age” as cause of death. It’s not really a lie considering that most people who get cancer at that age get it BECAUSE they are old.

This!

Agree.

Heart failure is a defined disease. It doesn’t just mean your heart packs up. Otherwise every death cert would say “heart failure” even after a plane crash!

“Frailty of old age” is still allowed on death certs. Last year my local coroner was signing off on this so long as they were over 80.

I think its right for posterity that the true cause of death is put on the death certificate. Particularly for a monarch when their death will be discussed for many generations to come.

However, my dad had prostate cancer for several years before he died. He died of sepsis and his cancer did not contribute to his death in any way. Therefore on his death certificate there was a list of contributing factors but his cancer was not one of them. If it didn't cause her death, why would it be listed.

And by the way, if Dr P, whoever they are, googles any sympton whatsoever, they'll find cancer is often suggested as a cause.

It’s obvious she was ‘suffering’ with something.
Does us knowing the gory details change anything, no.
Time to move on.

I hope her death was a pain free as possible, as I would wish for any old lady.

I’m not a royalist and I fail to see what possible reason you can have for feeling ‘cheated’’. Perhaps you’d like to share your private medical history here for everyone to pore over?

I think she should be allowed dignity and privacy on her death.

It serves no one to know her exact cause of death.

Having cancer doesn't necessarily = death caused by cancer. It could easily just be death with.

Also, you feel cheated? How bizarre. Nobody's business but the immediate family.

Doctors now are discouraged from putting old age as the cause of death on certificates , especially if they know of any illnesses that the patient has , there's lots of statistics taken from the certificate .
It doesn't mean , though, that in some cases they can't use old age as the cause.

It's really no one's business what was on the Queen's death certificate and no one has a right to know.

It doesn't matter what she died of. She was 96 and therefore death was to be expected to be honest. Its just not necessary to know. Because then people will pick apart what treatment she had, and why it hadn't worked. And if the Queen had that treatment then everyone should be given that for their totally different condition.

I think it was unlikely cancer was the immediate cause of death as she was mobile a few days prior and a rapid deterioration like that is unlikely. I think there was some acute incident such as a stroke or a fall that caused such a change. But ultimately l don't care. I don't think she owes that to us at all.

I read it on a Ukrainian FB group the day she died, friends of mine in Europe told me even earlier.

It was a very nice tribute and focussed on how, in great discomfort, she carried out her last duties & how the Ukrainians will never forget the hand of friendship given by the Queen and the British people.

I never mentioned it on here, as no one seemed to know, are we that insular?

As far as i'm aware, it was the UK press that decided they wouldn't report it.... stupid really, we live in a global news room.

But does it matter? in old age, cancers are very common.

This

“What is the point of the Palace not being honest?”

Because it’s none of your (or anybody else’s) business 🤷‍♀️

Cancer isn’t always listed on a death certificate as many PPs have pointed out. Close relatives have had the timing of their death greatly accelerated by cancer but ultimately the cause of death was something else and that’s what was named on their death certificates.

My Grandpa died of the type of cancer the Queen was supposed to have. There is absolutely no way in hell he would have been up and shaking hands with Liz Truss in the days before his death.

She may have had an underlying cancer, but ultimately she was 96 and old age likely contributing a significant amount to her death. We are owed nothing, it's her personal medical history. The only people who are owed that information is her

This.

She’s dead. What she died of doesn’t matter imo and isn’t particularly anyone else’s business but her families. Just because they are totality doesn’t mean we have to be party to everything.
As a royalist myself I respect their privacy, especially the queens tbh as she devoted her entire life to her country. If she wanted it kept quiet then so be it.
BUT I also think it’s just gossip from a so called friend who had his book ready in time for Christmas and is just making money of a dead woman.

Isn't the most important thing, that she was somewhere she loved when she died, surrounded by people who cared about her and who she trusted ? If you could choose a death, I reckon her's is probably about as close to perfect as you could wish for anyone.

Absolutely this!

The truth, or part of it, will emerge in about fifty years' time.

I don't think people in the 50s were even aware that George VI had lung cancer. It was just referred to as an abnormality of the lung, or something like that. Aa awful as it sounds, cancer was seen as slightly shameful and unspeakable back then, I have no idea why. He seems to have died in his sleep from a thrombosis related to it, but even to this day the facts aren't fully known. The RF are very keen to keep medical facts and diagnoses private.