Prince Philip prostate cancer denied
Update: 2.30 BST Buckingham Palace has denied reports in this morning’s London Evening Standard that Prince Philip has prostate cancer. They also denied the Standard’s earlier claim that he had a heart condition.
The BBC’s Royal Editor, Nicholas Witchell, who has just gone to air after a long delay over the story, was distinctly cagey in his language. He said the Palace told him the claims were untrue “as far as they knew.”
Prince Philip, 87, was said to be continuing with his duties after the Evening Standard claimed that tests confirmed he is suffering from prostate cancer.
The tests were said to have been carried out in April, presumably during his stay in hospital for a chest infection. Aides insist he is in “robust health” and will carry on with his duties, despite the heart condition for which he takes daily medication.
The aide reportedly continued, “Despite his heart problems and the cancer, Philip’s in robust health for a man of his age and is determined to plough on. He’s mentally very sharp and he’s always said he’ll continue carrying out his royal duties until he’s physically immobile.
“He is utterly dedicated to the Queen and this country and his role as the effective managing director of the Firm is not in question.”
Yesterday, we reported that the Queen had cleared her diary for the remainder of the Balmoral holiday. The reason given was that Gordon Brown may resign at any moment.
Royal Anecdotes wishes Prince Philip the best of health. We understand this condition is normal in men of his age and has a slow progression rate. In most cases it does not require invasive treatment.
One doesn’t really know what to say in matters like this, apart from the fact that I ‘m sure I can speak for the rest of the RA family on wishing him the best of health and wish him good luck in any treatment that follows.
By james on August 6th, 2008 at 11:35 am
True, James.
The BBC isn’t breaking this story as I write, although the Mail and Telegraph have lifted it from the Standard.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 11:39 am
I do think the wedding will take place sooner rather than later now. I’m sure he will want to see the future of the family taken care of.
By james on August 6th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Unless it casts a blight over it, James. If doctors have only given him a short while to live, that could hold up a Royal wedding.
Let’s hope that’s not the case, although the BBC’s refusal to break this story has some uneasy overtones.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
The APA is now saying that it’s not true! I hope they’re correct! Although it is thought to be a treatable cancer. I would hate for him to have to go through treatment.
John, any more insight?
By Julie on August 6th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Best wishes to Prince Philip in his treatment. Just the other day I was watching a public television documentary on Windsor Castle featuring PP. He was so knowledgeable about the castle and its history. You could tell he really knew his stuff and had a passion for the place. How sad for Her Majesty. She’s already lost so many family members.
By lizzy on August 6th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Lizzy, the Palace is denying it right now. So we have two contradictory accounts. Without confirmation by the Palace we can’t be certain what’s going on.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Well, this story got the blood pumping! I know that the palace does not usually comment on stories but sometimes it would sure be wonderful to get a full update so we know if we should be worried.
Certainly everyone should be entitled to their privacy but disclosure of something of this magnitude could only be good for all. I certainly did not know how common this is in older gentlemen until this story!
By Julie on August 6th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Julie, it seems that men in their 80s are not treated for this condition because it has a very slow progression. This means it probably can be contained, which explains the Duke’s reluctance to have it in the public domain.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
From what I’m reading the seriousness of his condition, assuming the reports are true, depends on if the cancer has spread to other parts of the body.
By lizzy on August 6th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Good point! That makes sense and I would say that since this may be not be a true story at least the good that comes from all this is that some of us are learning about the condition…or I am anyway
By Julie on August 6th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
While this is sad news true or false at the age of 87 any medical condition can occur. PP is a true fighter and given that he refuses to curtail his duties tells me that given the proper medical treatment he is fine. I wish him the best and hope and pray that he will be by HM’s side for her Diamond jubliee.
By Trudie on August 6th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Hear, hear, Trudie, I’m sure we all wish that.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
I find the Palace statement very odd. It seems only to muddy the waters rather than clear the matter up.
I also believe the public has a right to know about the health, good or otherwise, of members of the Royal Family. It hardly seems like a matter for the PCC, unless the story is untrue.
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
I am very sad to hear this news regarding the health of Prince Philip and I hope very much that it is not true. If it is true, we all need to pray for him. Prostate cancer is not a death warrant as long as it is caught early, treated aggressively and has not as yet spread to other vital organs. Let us all hope for the best for the Duke of Edinburgh, who has been a tower of strength for the Queen, the Royal Family and the UK. May God continue to bless His Royal Highness, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and keep him strong and healthy.
By Gigi on August 6th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Amen!
By Julie on August 6th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Actually, Gigi, there is news out just this week that treating prostate cancer aggressively, especially in men over 75, may do more harm than good. The side effects of surgery and radiation (impotence, incontinence, etc.) outweigh the risks of this typically slow-growing form of cancer. I’m sure you heard the news that the new recommendation is that men over 75 not even get tested, since they are not likely to live long enough for the cancer to endanger their lives.
Unless the cancer is already at an advanced stage, he is not likely to suffer its ill effects. That is, if the story itself is true.
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
By the way, Gigi, did you get the rain you hoped for?
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
John,
The Evening Standard is a very reliable newspaper isn’t it? I don’t think they would lie about something so serious. Maybe Prince Philip is just a proud man & doesn’t want anyone’s sympathy. It would make sense for William to take over Sandringham if his grandfather cannot do it anymore.
By Lizzy on August 6th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
I am hoping for the best for Prince Philip, the Queen, and the royal family and that the news article is incorrect. I am sending good thoughts. In any case, he is important to the Queen, the rest of the RF,and England and has their support.
He also is being kept in thoughts of all of us.
By kat on August 6th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
My dear Dan, I am sorry to say that we only got one-half inch of rain, due to the mercurial attitudes of Mother Nature! Quite an unreliable sort, I assure you. If she really supposes that one-half inch of water will cure our drought conditions, I wonder at her thought processes, which baffle me. We are bracing up somehow, with ‘somehow’ being the operative word.
By Gigi on August 6th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
As a royal watcher, I’d like to know what’s going on their daily life. But speaking of their health, such as illness and pregnancy, I hope the media show their respect and wait until a person feel comfortable to talk about the issue.
By Mikado-watcher on August 6th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
The Evening Standard is part of the Daily Mail group. It’s pretty reliable but clearly broke industry standards in this case. The whole Palace statement is a plea for privacy rather than a rebuttal of the story itself.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
In the Daily Telegraph, it looks like the Duke is set to file a PCC complaint against the Evening Standard for breach of privacy. Good for him, I say! While he is certainly a national treasure, I feel strongly that he ought to have the same right to privacy as anyone else, particularly when it involves something as personal as one’s health.
Whatever he has, or does not have, I wish him good health and thank goodness he is not one of those sorts to go on the Oprah Winfey show blabbering about his condition. Lovely to see that the veddy British stiff upper lip still exists in some parts!
By alsgal on August 6th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Alsgal, I totally agree. I believe this story has some legs but should never have been revealed by the Standard. Prince Philip deserves his privacy.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
In the states we expect to know the health problems of public servants, but perhaps because we elect them, and therefore we should know whether they are fit for the job.
Is Prince Philip considered a public servant, or is the Queen the only member of the Royal Family who, as Head of State, is (for lack of a better term) a government employee?
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Dan, Prince Philip is not a public servant. As a very senior part of the Royal Family he stands above that.
He is a member of what Walter Bagehot call the “dignified part of the constitution.” As such he should be able to preserve his dignity and not have his medical details splashed all over the media.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Quite right, John, and I bitterly resent any media outlet publishing something that we aren’t even sure is accurate. Who do these people think they are, anyway?!
By Gigi on August 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Gigi, the problem is that once this is out there, everyone else has to follow suit or seem out of touch. The Standard clearly breached the guidelines and should bear the brunt of the blame.
The BBC is now carrying the story as just that.
By John on August 6th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Not to parse your words too severely, but I think its a mistake to say a person’s “dignity” is compromised because of a health problem. The fear of a stigma attached to sickness leads many people to ignore signs of poor health—to grin and bear it, to keep that stiff upper lip—until the problem progresses to a stage at which it is too advanced to cure.
The Duke’s privacy may have been compromised, but his dignity remains intact, whether he is ill or not.
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
John, what do you think of the Telegraph’s new story, asserting that taking this issue to the PCC is a test based on the Max Mosley “right to privacy” case just handed down? The article suggests that, under the new rules the Duke may be seeking, printed reports of an incident such as Prince Harry’s Nazi costume would not have been allowed. Does this have legs?
Here’s the link:
http://tinyurl.com/6m6g6e
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
This is an even more interesting article:
http://tinyurl.com/5l2s3b
This privacy ruling could put RA out of business!
By Dan on August 6th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
they should be entitled to at least have their medical issues kept “under wraps” if they so choose….
By coni on August 6th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Does anyone know where the story of the Duke giving his relatives permission to record their eulogies originated from? This news got me to thinking about that. Is that a routine thing for the royals?
By lizzy on August 7th, 2008 at 2:06 am
That’s what we’re like over here, Dan. We invented the stiff upper lip.
There’s a particular problem with Royalty in that illness may affect the succession, so special privacy rules apply to them. And yes, dignity does cover not having your insides discussed in the public prints.
Obviously, if a top politician is ill the public wants to know if they are fit to take decisions. But that’s another matter.
By John on August 7th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Dan, the Mosely case was about a motor racing tycoon behaving in a way that could be construed as supporting the Nazis, bearing in mind his father was the leader of the British Fascists before the war.
There was a clear “public interest” (not just something the public is interested in) in looking into it. The judgement was flawed, in my opinion, and will probably be reversed at some stage.
The Prince Harry business concerned a fancy dress party and a lad who in no way could be called a Nazi by any stretch of the imagination. Since he was photographed in the street, it would be very hard to make a case for privacy. The fault, I’m afraid, lay in Harry’s choice of dress.
I agree with the part of the code that states, “Everyone is entitled to respect for his or private and family life, home, health and correspondence.” That is part of a civilized society surely?
In terms of what we report here on RA, there’s a difference between writing “Prince X has cancer,” and “The Evening Standard reports that Prince X has cancer.” The reporting of reports, whether they are true or false, is something that currently has to be banned separately by a judge in individual cases. If that were ever changed so that follow-on reports came under an automatic privacy ban, it would profoundly gag all reporting media.
Therefore this ruling may only criminalize the original reporter. When someone crosses the line, only they should be targeted.
It’s a tricky subject because no news source likes to be left out of the loop when a biggie is breaking.
Tony Blair’s wretched Human Rights Act is slowly strangling free speech in Britain. We await David Cameron’s Government in 2010 to repeal it and put in place a civilized code of privacy which doesn’t interfere with the public interest in criminal matters — the Robert Maxwell business is the one usually quoted.
By John on August 7th, 2008 at 10:16 am
The second article is more interesting, Dan, and shows that while, we have preserved the right to write, so to speak, the EU is now directly imposing the kind of conditions they have in France where the media is almost totally controlled and unable to report the unsavoury, even illegal, activities of their rulers.
We must resist that at all costs. I doubt this present government has the guts or the fight left in it to do it.
By John on August 7th, 2008 at 10:27 am
I personally find it very distasteful for any media outlet to publicly state that a man of PP’s stature is suffering any illness. That is something that is private. At the age of 87 I would be very surprised if he had no medical issues but to put it in the public domain where it is really no ones business goes beyond the pale.
By Trudie on August 8th, 2008 at 2:03 am
HM and HRH have dedicated their public lives…and much of their private lives…to their work. Certainly they are entitled to the privacy and respect that is extended to others of their age group. When there be an illness or health concern allow what we would want for ourselves…dignity and the right to inform, should “inform” be the desired choice.
By lynda on August 9th, 2008 at 2:30 pm