Vickers: Prince Philip had pancreatic cancer for eight years & didn’t disclose it

As an American, I know I have no room to talk at this point, but it’s wild to see how little outrage there is about heads of state refusing to disclose their serious medical situations. Currently, Americans have never been told what’s wrong with Donald Trump – we’re only left to surmise that he’s deeply unwell and that everyone around him seems to treat him like a dementia-addled madman who has the nuclear codes. Well, back in Queen Elizabeth II’s final years, no one around her thought to inform the public of what was ailing her as well. That would have ruined the fun of “blaming QEII’s death on Prince Harry and Meghan.” It was only after QEII passed away at the age of 96 that biographer Gyles Brandreth suddenly claimed that QEII had suffered a form of bone marrow cancer in her final year. Well, now it turns out that the palace was also hiding Prince Philip’s cancer diagnosis as well. Hugo Vickers claims that Philip was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in June 2013. While Philip was not the head of state, it’s utterly bizarre that no one thought to publicly disclose this at any time.

Prince Philip lived with pancreatic cancer for nearly eight years before his death, a major new book reveals. In Queen Elizabeth II, serialised exclusively in the Mail on Sunday, biographer Hugo Vickers discloses that the then Duke of Edinburgh was diagnosed with inoperable cancer in June 2013 during an 11-day stay in hospital.

He died at Windsor Castle in April 2021, two months before his 100th birthday, with ‘old age’ listed on his death certificate.

On the last night of his life, Prince Philip gave nurses the slip and shuffled along a corridor at the castle on his Zimmer frame before pouring himself a beer and drinking it in the Oak Room, a sitting room, Vickers reveals.

He added: ‘The following morning, he got up, had a bath, said he did not feel well and quietly slipped away. By this point, he had lived with pancreatic cancer for nearly eight years – far longer than the usual survival time from diagnosis.’

Queen Elizabeth was not there when her husband of 73 years died and was said to have been upset that ‘as so often in life, he left without saying goodbye’.

Philip was hospitalised in December 2011 for a blocked coronary artery, and in 2013 was treated at the private London Clinic in Marylebone.

Doctors detected a shadow on his pancreas, and ‘cut him right across his stomach’ for exploratory surgery. ‘The verdict was inoperable pancreatic cancer,’ Vickers writes. Four years later, he stepped down from royal duties.

Vickers says that in 2019 there were ‘such serious rumours’ about Philip’s health that plans were drawn up to postpone the general election if he died.

‘But then [he] perked up… Someone said he was being public-spirited and making an effort to survive so as not to upset the election.’

[From The Daily Mail]

While it was known circa 2016-2017 that Philip was in poor health, most people attributed it to his age, given he was already in his 90s (he was 99 when he passed). That’s when he retired from public life as well, in 2017, and he was shuffled off to Wood Farm where Penelope Knatchbull was his “constant companion” and she was the one who looked after him. Then the pandemic happened and they made Philip move to Windsor Castle, where he was miserable. Anyway, what is the rationale for refusing to disclose Philip’s cancer diagnosis? They can’t argue “well, he wasn’t the head of state” because they also refused to disclose the head of state’s cancer diagnosis too! Additionally, Hugo Vickers is still trying to blame Harry and Meghan for Philip’s death, while also saying “well, the poor man had pancreatic cancer for eight years too.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

37 Responses to “Vickers: Prince Philip had pancreatic cancer for eight years & didn’t disclose it”

  1. Tessa says:

    Of course Andrew did not upset his parents in their last years according to bots and derangers. The queen hid him out and had 12 million to pay off the lawsuit against andrew. When is vickers going to write the real truth about andrew. Never.

  2. Michelle says:

    It’s highly unlikely that he had pancreatic cancer and lived for 8 years. The survival rate of 5 years for someone with pancreatic cancer is about 10%. I also don’t think doctors just cut open your stomach to do exploratory surgery – especially on an old man. This story seems totally made up.

    • Hypocrisy says:

      My thoughts exactly.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Along with the got up and poured himself a beer, had a bath, then died story. 🤣

    • Lady Esther says:

      That stood out to me, too – I thought pancreatic cancer was one of the deadliest forms of cancer. For him to live that long with it seems improbable…it could have been something else, who knows. We’ll never know, much like how Philip was able to amass a fortune north of 70 million pounds (rumored) given his lifestyle and lack of official income. Shady…like Andrew, hmmmm?

      This is the real “news” to me of Vickers’ book, despite all of the heavy breathing and pearl clutching about Harry and Meghan. If true, can you imagine Philip’s opinion of William and “Oh Dear My Cancer, I Can’t Possibly Work For Nearly Two Years, And Forever More If I have A Bad Day” Kate? Larking about in Norfolk, refusing to work because something something young family while Philip was standing up next to the Queen in his 90s, with cancer, doing his duty? Not to mention Andrew, of whose activities like the Queen he was surely fully aware? No wonder he was all “sod it, I’m going to live at Wood Farm with my second wife in all but name Penelope, and sock away as much money as I can.”

    • 2131Jan says:

      I’ve had three people in my life who’ve died from pancreatic cancer. By the end you are completely bedridden and usually very highly dosed with pain meds. You are not “shuffling” anywhere except off your “mortal coil”.

      Not just that, but if he DID have PC, there is NO WAY they’d do heart surgery (or ANY surgery) on him, at 99.

      At one time, I’d’’ve said there can’t be *anyone* stupid* enough* to believe this shizz. Now….¯\_(ツ)_/¯…. Yeah, now I know there are!

    • blondeinbmore says:

      Was going to comment this – 8 years with pancreatic cancer seems very unlikely.

    • ShazBot says:

      The only way this is plausible is if there is some super secret and expensive treatment only available to select people and that’s why the Royals keep their diagnoses secret.

    • MJM says:

      If true, It was likely a low grade neuroendocrine tumour of the pancreas which has a much longer survival time than ductal adenocarcinoma.

  3. Cheryl says:

    I would say this is made up. I was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 5 years ago. Biopsy first for staging. Then chemo, followed by a month of radiation with a chemo pill. I had a failed surgery in May 2022 to remove the tumor. I had a successful Whipple surgery in October 2022 in NYC. I know one person that received 50-60 chemo treatments and is stable after 5 years without surgery out of thousands. CT scans, MRI, Pet scans and biopsies are done before a Whipple is attempted. It took me 2 years to recover from surgery. I can’t believe it would even be offered to someone in their 90’s!

  4. Dee(2) says:

    So, two people in their 90s died after bouts of cancer, but it’s somehow their grandson’s fault as well? Cancer that one had three years before he even met his wife?

    This is what makes the British media so despicable. “If” true, they’ve long known this, just like they knew about the Queen’s bone cancer, but they still want to blame people that had nothing to do with it. Like they knew that Meghan had asked to get in patient treatment and they told her no, yet still harassed her day in and out in 2019.

    As for disclosing that he had pancreatic cancer, ehh. I can understand the argument with the Queen as she was the head of state and actually has a real role outside of ceremonial duties. But by then he was in his 90s. If he has just died of natural causes one morning in 2014 no one would have thought twice about it, and it would not have had any impact on running the country.

  5. megs283 says:

    What a burn: ” as so often in life, he left without saying goodbye.” I will haunt someone from the grave if they take a shot like that after my death!

    • Lady Esther says:

      By all accounts Philip thoroughly deserved that burn, if QEII indeed said it. He cheated on her throughout their marriage and was certainly a formidable man, physically and verbally aggressive and intimidating, insulting and racist to all and sundry whenever it pleased him. His ego after all he suffered as a young man could not accept being the consort to a woman on the world’s stage in that era, and he made sure that QEII and everyone else paid for it. I cannot imagine living with such a person, but for QEII the sun rose and set on him so that was that

  6. Amy Bee says:

    I don’t understand why the Palace gives health information to authors/journalists instead of announcing it themselves. It just reeks of unprofessionalism and it illustrates the symbiotic and toxic relationship between the press and the Palace. Is Robert Jobson or Robert Hardman going to be journalist that announce the type of cancer Charles has in their next book?

  7. PunkyMomma says:

    He may have had neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer, which has a much higher, albeit incurable, survival rate (survival meaning living 5+ years post diagnosis). Steve Jobs had neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer. It’s much slower growing.

    Perhaps that was the diagnosis with Philip, but at his age, I question the fact that he supposedly lived eight years with pancreatic cancer. Steve Jobs lived with his cancer for eight years as well, and he was a much younger man.

    My father died of pancreatic cancer seventeen days after his diagnosis. It’s a brutal, brutal way to die.

  8. Magdalena says:

    What I remember, is that although clearly unwell and although he could have used his recent bout in hospital as an excuse, several reporters admitted that Philip was DETERMINED to be present for Harry’s wedding to Meghan. He did not want to miss it and appeared to make a concerted effort to regain his strength to be able to walk into the church.

    So those leeches repeatedly attempting to blame his death – from cancer – on H+M can go hang, as far as I am concerned. The man kept up correspondence with Prince Harry and his family AFTER they had moved to the US, and that says everything. They probably made him move away from Penny and Wood Farm because she was not blocking Harry’s calls, depriving him of some extra “bants” (as Harry would say) later in his life, so if anything, the courtiers and reporters could be assigned the blame.

    • Isabella says:

      he also made a point of. being photographed with Meghan and Harry and Archie after Archie’s birth. He looked delighted. Charles was noticeably absent.

  9. Al says:

    Here’s my belief – that crisis manager came in and decided to pay a bunch of people, and publications, to write books and articles about Harry and Meghan (with a focus on smearing Meghan). The whole idea is to take the focus off the royal family in general (as usual). It is very obvious. Otherwise, they’d be writing books and articles on Andrew and the other royals, asking the hard questions about who knew what, and when did they know about his depravity and the payoff. Also, they’d be asking William about his links to Epstein. Their strategy is to blame Meghan for almost everything, because she’s the black/bi-racial person (and the female) and they know that the monarchists (and others) will beat up on her. When in trouble, use Meghan, and your subjects will forget about all your wrong doings and focus on the person of color, because she’s their greatest threat – apparently. Unfortunately for them, this will not work anymore – their Epstein problem will not go away anytime soon.

  10. Smart&Messy says:

    Frankenphoto alert: Her hands are totally photoshopped in the first picture.

    I disagree that they owe us a specific diagnosis, especially in the case of Philip who was a public figure, but his work or lack thereof had very little impact on the British public. In case of the monarch, people are only entitled to know if he/she can reliably do the job as required. I understand curiosity but I don’t think it’s in the public interest.

  11. Lili says:

    Now it makes more sense to me, Harry’s life was surrounded by death : mother, being a soldier and seeing the effects of War, grandfather Ill. Grandmother ill so why would he wait around to live his life he had to make the most of it . WTF these people have no idea how life affects anybody

  12. Meme says:

    honestly this is the one thing I don’t mind them keeping secret, because I don’t really care. I agree that you need to know if the actual person making decisions for the country is affected by illness, but it really doesn’t matter here. Because they don’t actually do anything that matters.

  13. Thinking says:

    I don’t think we needed to know in this case (if he did actually have it, which I’m not sure he did since I don’t know how you survive something like that for that long in your nineties).

    He didn’t have the power to drop nuclear weapons on anybody so, imo, I don’t need to know in this case.

  14. Cee says:

    I’m honestly surprised he lasted that long. Pancreatic cancer is devastating and fast.

    But yeah, they never disclose anything. Remember when Scooter King had COVID and the palace never informed the public? Right after he mocked first responders and “the silly virus”?

    Edit to add – if they lied about everything then what aren’t they telling us about Kate’s Big Disappearance (they can’t get the diagnosis straight) and Charles’s cancer?

  15. QuiteContrary says:

    ‘Someone said he was being public-spirited and making an effort to survive so as not to upset the election.”

    Oh, someone said that, did they? Who’s that someone? Is that someone in the room with you now, Vickers? Are you possibly that someone?

  16. RiaH says:

    Maybe pancreatitis, but no way did he have pancreatic cancer. That’s a mean cancer among all cancers being mean. There’s no way he lasted 8 years. Eight months? Ok, but not years.

  17. tamsin says:

    I find Philip surviving pancreatic cancer for 8 years at his advanced age impossible to believe. Seems to me that all royal books by these so-called royal experts should be shelved in the fiction section.

  18. bisynaptic says:

    Median survival for pancreatic cancer was 6 months, when I was in med school—and I doubt it’s changed all that much, since. Unlikely he lived with it for 8 years.

  19. Edna Fisher says:

    Has greyscale been ruled out as the cause of death?

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment