Charles cancer update

[PrettyFlyforaMaiTai]

Charles’ cancer treatment will continue into next year

”his treatment has been moving in a positive direction and as a managed condition the treatment cycle will continue into next year" according to palace sources.

I don’t mean to be a negative Nelly but this doesn’t seem as positive as they’re trying to make out.

news.sky.com/story/kings-cancer-treatment-will-continue-into-next-year-sky-news-understands-13276684

This!

My dad died of an aggressive form of prostate cancer at 51, it's not always slow growing, at least not in younger men.

And it's bloody prostate!

Agree! Only one poster heard it weirdly ..

Who the hell do you think you are to tell me to lay off!

She clearly misunderstood what she heard, she heard speculation in books discussed and assumed it was fact, when it wasn't. Whether you think she's believable or not is irrelevant, she didn't hear it reported from an official source even if she says she did.
Strange how in this thread not a single other person heard it on the news that the Queen had cancer and died from it. Because no such announcement was made.
If it had been reported from an official source an internet search would come up with something- it doesn't.
People need to get their facts straight before spouting off.
What did you hear reported on that day on the BBC that has never been mentioned since?

An official BBC announcement of the specific medical diagnosis of Queen Elizabeth....
we've heard it all now

I did not read further than your "She clearly misunderstood...".

Who the hell are you to tell another poster what they did, or did not, hear on that day! When all manner of commentators were spouting all manner of air filler.

But no matter what twaddle was filling the air waves that day, there was no factual, official confirmation that Queen Elizabeth died of a specific type of cancer.

Nope.

But there were all sorts of tidbits being put out on the radio that day (I was stuck in a traffic jam) that I have not heard repeated.

And @EmotionalSupportCuttlefish obviously has clear memories of hearing one such thing being mentioned because of a conversation that ensued.

Absolutely, but it's a massive leap to decide that something you've heard must be factually correct. It's pretty damn obvious from a quick bit of research that there has been no official announcement that Queen Elizabeth had a certain type of cancer. So why a couple of posters claim they know is bizarre

It may well have been mentioned, there was a lot of speculation. It absolutely was not announced, on either BBC or ITV news, that the Queen was suffering from a specific type of cancer.

Agree entirely!

But my reaction is to a poster who persists in insisting ( in an unpleasant way) that a second poster can't have witnessed something, even though the second poster has provided circumstantial detail that convinces me they did witness what they claimed.

Just because I didn't hear it, and it has never been officially confirmed, doesn't mean the OP didn't hear someone say it on the telly.

Boris Johnson claims the Queen had bone cancer, in his memoirs. Claims.

The poster claims she heard it announced on BBC or ITV news. She simply cannot have done, because it never was announced by either of those TV stations. She most likely wasn't watching with her full attention, and heard some discussion about the claims in the 2 books, and took that as an absolute fact. Why she persists in saying it' was officially announced is anyone's guess.

To be fair, he would definitely have been told. It's not a "my neighbour's cousin cuts Fergie's hair and she said.." situation.

He was, god help us, the actual Prime Minister, and there's no way he wouldn't have been briefed on the state of her health.

And whilst I always assume that he'd tell any lie that suited him, there wouldn't be much in it for him in this one. Although I guess if he'd said nothing then someone might have mistaken him for a discreet and trustworthy individual, which would be disastrous for his reputation.

I clearly heard a BBC presenter announce as fact something on that day that thereafter I have never heard again ( and appears to have been buried).
You didn't hear what @EmotionalSupportCuttlefish did. That is not proof that it wasn't broadcast, only that you didn't hear it being broadcast. That the OP can provide context for the memory, as in it being part of a social situation, underlines the veracity of her memory IMHO.

Funnily enough no one else heard it either....

What matters the most for any cancer is the stage it is caught at and sometimes the primary cancer site is clouded by the secondary cancer site. For example non-Hodgkins lymphoma is a serious cancer and immunotherapy does not work well for some and is inaccessible to many. Some seriously messy responses on this thread. - 'a better cancer to get' is not anything that should come out of anyone's mouth. Sometimes the treatment causes more damage than the disease.

I stopped reading this thread halfway through.

The endless speculation is both odious and bonkers.

None of you knows, and why should you?!!

Yes it is obvious Boris Johnson would have been told what was happening with the Queen's health as Prime Minister.

...that has read this thread or posted on it to confirm.

Old age is a perfectly fine cause of death.

May we all be so fortunate as to have it listed on our death certificate.

That was written on my aunts death certificate….. she was 88….. she had copd and various other health conditions….but at the end of the road it would have been difficult to say she died of one or the other , if any of them….. just got old, body got tired and died ….. old age on a death certificate is what I would be happy with on mine

Some people live in fairyland.....

Frailty due to old age is what's written on my mum's death cert. She wasn't quite as old as Queen Elizabeth but was very nearly.

Really living up to your name.