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?

My dad was 88 when died. His death certificate says that he died of pneumonia but he also had bowel cancer.

Even if she had bone cancer it doesn't necessarily mean she died from it. She may have died with it and still died of old age.

^ This. My DM has myeloma and her haematologist has said that people can live for 10-15 years with it and quite often die from old age rather than the myeloma (probably different if you develop it when younger).

It’s absolutely none of your business.

This is grim.

Jesus wept, she was 96. She lived well past the average. No one dies of old age, everyone has something that ultimately brings their life to an end. They have to put the medical term I imagine.

My Gm died age 80, in her chair, watching Songs of Praise. That was considered old back then. That is a good death, however, her certificate says "heart attack"

Why can't you just leave ER in peace?

I have no right to know.

I'd like to know, because my respect for her is already high - but if she carried on as much as she was able with such a painful and debilitating illness, never mentioned, it would rise even higher.

I can't believe anyone has to ask "seriously, what difference does it make?" about the cause of death of any head of state let alone QEII.

Have you not studied history?

It is none of my business. It is none of your business. It certainly wasn’t Lady Colin Campbell’s or Giles Brandreth’s news to tell. We all know now.

Well, I'm sure you're respect and esteem will be very helpful.😂

No she didn’t die as she was old, that’s the whole point of the thread. Unless you have additional medical information?

What information do you have that she didn't die of old age @Backtothegymgirl ?
Gyles Brandreth is quoted as say he "heard" she was "battling" bone cancer at the time of her death.

I don’t have any bad feelings towards the queen or RF but I don’t think the public need to know every single detail of their lives and if they’re entitled to some privacy it should at least be when one of their family members die.

From a historical point of view, it would be “nice” to know OP but I feel that we should just leave it be and allow her family to grieve the loss in peace- it’s still incredibly raw. I remember when my mum died, people had SO many questions. I wasn’t ready to talk. In some ways I never will be.

Yes, I understand the concept of next. What you’re not explaining is how her cause of death impacts them. In 200 years’ time, what will be the material effect?

There can be only one reason to want to know this and that is ghoulish curiosity.

Unless she was murdered, I fail to see why we are entitled to any level of detail. Seems mawkish and distasteful to me.

My mum died in 2020. Her death certificate stated simply, ‘frailty of old age’.

Because she was The Queen and she chose, in advance, to keep the details if her final illnesses, if any, private. She was allowed her dignity.

All I need to know is that she was a very good Queen, totally committed to her country and the commonwealth who died a widow and was not allowed personal comfort at her husband's funeral.

From a point of historical interest it does matter, you can know why Henry the 5th died, or Richard the third, it’s history. Elizabeth is part of our history. Why should the history books be wrong?

because there is no shame of dying from cancer. There is nothing to hide here. Why cover it up. On one hand I believe she is due privacy, on the other hand I strongly believe the records of her death should be accurate and not faked by her family.

You are only assuming this is a gap in information and that previous causes of death have been accurate. Again you only know what's been recorded in history books for any monarch and the same with QE. We will only ever know the information that is made available to us.

We are moving away from the times when our history has been defined by our monarchy. I don't think its really relevant how she died

I don't have an opinion on this really but just to note it is unusual for the reason for the death of public figures not to be stated, in accounts of their lives / death & obituaries.

There is no material impact. It’s history. accurate historical records. Elizabeth is not like your mother, she will be studied as part of history in years to come. If you’re 0k with those records being wrong so be it, but I prefer history taught to us as to be accurate.

Yes, thanks. It still makes no difference. We’re not talking about a death in battle or a beheading that changed the course of history. However she died, Charlie boy was always going to take over. And lo, it came to pass. Peeling back the shroud and poking at the corpse doesn’t change a thing.

And that’s your opinion, you think it’s ok for historical records to be wrong. I don’t. And I think there is no reason to hide it. We agree to disagree.

because there is no shame of dying from cancer.

But who is saying that she died from cancer? She may have died WITH cancer but that's probably true of many people who die. For those who think dying at 96 can't be due to old age jesus how old do you think she should have lived until?!

For goodness sake, read the op

If the Queen did have Myeloma and they announced it a few months prior to her death can you imagine the media frenzy? There would’ve been endless speculation and interviews about what she was experiencing etc. The internet would’ve been full of memes and arguments.

Why cover it up
You are creating a conspiracy out of nothing @Backtothegymgirl
It is highly likely that in due course it is made known if she had cancer at the time of her death. That may be on the full death certificate. It may not. It may not be true or it may be true but not a cause of death. The 'history books' will not be missing any vital information 🙄

If she had cancer then she probably took the decision not to disclose it herself. Perhaps she wanted to go with a degree of privacy and dignity, which was very much how she lived, despite a lifetime in the public eye. I am not a royalist either but can respect that decision and don't feel any right to more information.

I also agree with others that you can die with an illness, but of old age. We don't last forever.