Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Charles cancer update

329 replies

PrettyFlyforaMaiTai · 20/12/2024 06:34

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

OP posts:
TaggieO · 20/12/2024 10:06

Based on this thread I think the only thing that can be said for certain is that @Petrasings knows fuck all about cancer. Beyond that it’s all just speculation.

Superworm24 · 20/12/2024 10:07

If it were prostate cancer I wish he would speak openly about it. I know it's up to him but I feel there is so much shame around this type of cancer. My friends dad ignored his symptoms for a few years because he was too embarrassed to go to the GP.

magicalmrmistoffelees · 20/12/2024 10:08

Superworm24 · 20/12/2024 10:07

If it were prostate cancer I wish he would speak openly about it. I know it's up to him but I feel there is so much shame around this type of cancer. My friends dad ignored his symptoms for a few years because he was too embarrassed to go to the GP.

They explicitly said it wasn’t prostate cancer when he was diagnosed.

WinWhenTheyreSinging · 20/12/2024 10:09

fedup33 · 20/12/2024 08:27

Sorry you have been through this. I think you are right. In a totally non bitchy way, I think Catherine looks terrible. Sorry but I do.

Considering the news cycle now seems to virtually forget that Catherine's cancer was discovered during treatment of another issue that required major abdominal surgery, I think she looks bloody miraculous.

Nanny0gg · 20/12/2024 10:10

Petrasings · 20/12/2024 07:27

It was our understanding he has advanced pancreatic cancer.

Where did you get that from?

mindutopia · 20/12/2024 10:12

I have cancer (stage 3 melanoma) and my guess is that this is something not necessarily related to the prostate procedure that was picked up in a scan, perhaps one done post-surgically to check something like blood flow or urine or whatever. Whenever I have one of my many scans, they always remind me that it’s possible they’ll find a surprise and unrelated cancer somewhere else in the body when they are checking what they already know is there.

My guess this is something that popped up on a scan, but perhaps isn’t operable because of location/type. For some cancers, there is surgical removal followed by some sort of treatment. For others, it’s straight to treatment, either because of the location (hard to remove) or just the type (treatment without surgery is just as effective, minus risks of surgery).

I wouldn’t read too much into the treatment continuing into the new year. He was only diagnosed in February of this year. He probably started treatment a few weeks later. Though if he needed surgical removal, it could have been a couple months as surgical site has to heal first. He also had a break for travel at some point which they announced. Treatment quite often lasts a year or more. Mine is 12 1-month cycles. If I’d needed a different regimen, it would have been however many months of one type then followed by the 12 months.

Very normal for treatment to last at least a year or longer and doesn’t mean it’s terminal and he’s about to keel over. I also suspect he may be getting a Cadillac service, which could very well mean more treatment than us peasants would normally get. Wish him all the best. It’s a long road to be on.

BarbaraHoward · 20/12/2024 10:15

WinWhenTheyreSinging · 20/12/2024 10:09

Considering the news cycle now seems to virtually forget that Catherine's cancer was discovered during treatment of another issue that required major abdominal surgery, I think she looks bloody miraculous.

Yes exactly. She's clearly been through hell.

Over40Overdating · 20/12/2024 10:15

Petrasings · 20/12/2024 07:30

Most blood cancers are also terminal - although there is hope for new treatments now.

No, most blood cancers are NOT terminal. Where are you pulling your so called medical knowledge from? You talk about another poster being ‘astonishingly rude’ whilst spreading nonsense like this.

Most blood cancers are manageable/curable now and the long term survival rates are higher than they have ever been. Blood cancers are amongst the most treatable and with best outcomes.

Signed, an actual blood cancer survivor actively involved in education and awareness.

MissMarplesNiece · 20/12/2024 10:17

I don't think it's Pancreatic Cancer which I've had - luckily caught when the tumour was very small. Even so I lost masses of weight which I've never put back on, and I turned bright yellow even in the early stage. I don't see signs of massive weight loss or skin going yellow with Charles. Its left me very weak, I've never gone back to being the person I used to be.

Ozgirl75 · 20/12/2024 10:23

TheFormidableMrsC · 20/12/2024 08:49

It was confirmed early on that he did not have prostate cancer. He had an enlarged prostate and treatment for that revealed whatever it is he currently has. I always thought it was probably more serious than they have let on. He most definitely does not have pancreatic cancer as it is very unlikely he'd be here or indeed look as well as he currently does. I have a friend who has, thus far, survived operable early stage pancreatic cancer but he is an absolute shadow of his former self physically.

When my mother had stage 4 cancer, they described her treatment as "management" as she was not curable. She had palliative chemotherapy which does not have the same ravaging effects as some, but not all, curative treatments.

Sadly, I fear the King is a stage 4 patient but I hope that his condition can be managed for some time to come.

You can be “terminal” in that you’re not curable even if you’re not stage 4. My dad is not curable even though his cancer hasn’t spread, because it isn’t one that can be cured. He doesn’t consider himself “terminal” because he sees that as approaching the end, and he isn’t, he considers that his is just “not curable”.

ToomanyMilesAway · 20/12/2024 10:23

TaggieO · 20/12/2024 07:29

@Petrasings have you ever seen anyone with pancreatic cancer?? He most definitely does not. It is one of the most debilitating things that can happen to the human body. It has a less than 5 perfent 1 year survival rate. Absolutely nobody looks the same thus far in as they did pre-diagnosis. Doesn’t be so stupid.

Have to agree with you there. My father died of this in less than 4 months of diagnosis and was skeletal.

Twitwootoo · 20/12/2024 10:27

Quite frankly given he’s taking on a full programme of work including international travel it doesn’t sound like they’re expecting him to keel over so I imagine it’s well managed and he can crack on with living and doesn’t need everyone speculating

Superworm24 · 20/12/2024 10:28

magicalmrmistoffelees · 20/12/2024 10:08

They explicitly said it wasn’t prostate cancer when he was diagnosed.

Thank you! Sorry I had seen PPs mention it. I don't really follow RF news.

EdithWeston · 20/12/2024 10:29

Ozgirl75 · 20/12/2024 10:23

You can be “terminal” in that you’re not curable even if you’re not stage 4. My dad is not curable even though his cancer hasn’t spread, because it isn’t one that can be cured. He doesn’t consider himself “terminal” because he sees that as approaching the end, and he isn’t, he considers that his is just “not curable”.

Yes, there’s an important difference between incurable and terminal

You can have a normal life and a normal/near normal lifespan with an incurable chronic or well-managed cancer; and it’s pretty likely you’ll die with it not of it.

Terminal has a different meaning - it doesn’t say how long you’ve got left, but it means that the patient is going to die from or because of the cancer

ISeriouslyDoubtIt · 20/12/2024 10:31

It's not unusual at all for cancer treatment to last for a year or 18 months. Friend's husband had melanoma, all removed by surgery, multiple scans and tests to see if it had spread, luckily it hadn't, but he's still having 18 months of immunotherapy.
So it isn't at all unusual for Charles' treatment to be continuing into next year.

doodleschnoodle · 20/12/2024 10:32

This was the Princess of Wales at the concert a couple of weeks ago. To all the people saying she looks 'awful', can you explain why? Not a cherry picked photo, I could pick dozens from that event where she looks just as lovely.

Charles cancer update
EmotionalSupportCuttlefish · 20/12/2024 10:37

ISeriouslyDoubtIt · 20/12/2024 09:11

@EmotionalSupportCuttlefish
You really need to put up some proof of your statements about the queen having had multiple myeloma. No such official statement was ever released so I don't know why you're so confidently stating it as fact when it isn't.

I could equally ask you ehy are you 'confidently stating' that it wasn't released?

I remember watching the news with my DH and the newscaster said that QEll had been diagnosed with MM two years prior to her death. I turned to DH and said that was what my DM had effectively died of.

I didn't imagine it so unless you were her private physician and know categorically to the contrary, you need to let this go.

I do not know what the late Queen died of. I do know they reported, after her death that she had had a relatively recent diagnosis of bone marrow cancer. If that statement was false, then so be it. The BBC have been wrong before.

For clarification, I am a qualified health care provider and have a good working knowledge of cancer in it's varieties.

luckylavender · 20/12/2024 10:39

lolly792 · 20/12/2024 07:34

@EdithWeston Boris Johnson did write in his memoir that Queen Elizabeth had a bone cancer for some years before death.

(Giles Brandreth may also have written something about a blood cancer)

Neither had ever been officially reported though

If Johnson wrote it, it's probably untrue

Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 20/12/2024 10:39

ekk100 · 20/12/2024 07:03

Prostate cancers can be extremely slow growing, if it's managed well people generally die 'with' prostate cancer, not 'of' it. I'm assuming it's something like that. Maybe a bit of ongoing radio/chemo therapy and regular checks.

As also bladder cancer. Friend of ours has had both for more than ten years, and is still driving hundreds of miles for their hobby, holidaying abroad etc.

Over40Overdating · 20/12/2024 10:41

The tone of comments on Catherine’s looks are bonkers. I am not a royalist and would happily see the lot of them in the tower but to talk about a woman who has had major surgery and aggressive chemo in the last few months as haggard, as if that is some kind of moral failing, is disgusting. What should she look like?

On another thread, a cancer survivor who had cosmetic treatments to address the damage chemo did to her has been called vain and accused - by a woman proclaiming to be a feminist - of supporting the pornification of women, for caring about her appearance.

Women cannot fucking win when it comes to how we look even when we are cheating death.

When I was undergoing chemo I was mocked for having moon face, for growing excess hair and told it was ‘a pity you put on so much weight. You had a nice figure before this and you’ll never get it back’. As if the joy of being alive when I was told I would likely die was now marred by being ‘fat’ because I’d gone from size 10 to size 14.

Charles may be King but he has a right to privacy when it comes to his body and his treatment. Even if he announced it tomorrow it wouldn’t stop speculation. People would regurgitate facts and figures and previous case of the same disease with countdowns and predictions and the ins and outs of what was happening to his body, and poring over his appearance for signs of decline. Having cancer is bad enough without that level of intrusion.

Whatever else the monarchy owes us, the gory details of their bodily functions is not one of those things.

lolly792 · 20/12/2024 10:41

To reiterate again .....

King Charles and the Princess of Wales have both had a cancer diagnosis: this has been officially announced. The type has not been; just that King Charles' is not prostate cancer.
It has never been officially reported that Queen Elizabeth had cancer.

Someone speculating in their memoirs, or "a palace source" on X does not make something true.

FuzzyPuffling · 20/12/2024 10:52

ISeriouslyDoubtIt · 20/12/2024 10:31

It's not unusual at all for cancer treatment to last for a year or 18 months. Friend's husband had melanoma, all removed by surgery, multiple scans and tests to see if it had spread, luckily it hadn't, but he's still having 18 months of immunotherapy.
So it isn't at all unusual for Charles' treatment to be continuing into next year.

Or indeed for life.
( See my previous post re DH's blood cancer). He will always need treatment. Blood cancers are, sadly, not always curable.

Wilfrida1 · 20/12/2024 10:56

Bladder cancer has ongoing 'management', and not chemotherapy, so not outwardly noticeable.

Kitkat1523 · 20/12/2024 11:01

doodleschnoodle · 20/12/2024 10:32

This was the Princess of Wales at the concert a couple of weeks ago. To all the people saying she looks 'awful', can you explain why? Not a cherry picked photo, I could pick dozens from that event where she looks just as lovely.

She looks bloody lovely 😍

magicalmrmistoffelees · 20/12/2024 11:02

doodleschnoodle · 20/12/2024 10:32

This was the Princess of Wales at the concert a couple of weeks ago. To all the people saying she looks 'awful', can you explain why? Not a cherry picked photo, I could pick dozens from that event where she looks just as lovely.

I’d like to see a side by side photo with the posters saying how awful and haggard she looks 😏

Swipe left for the next trending thread