Kate Middleton cancer in remission

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What kind of cancer?

Testicular

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What kind of cancer?

Are you asking the pp? Or the princess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

Please let us know these celebrities who during tough personal times used the experience to make a difference!

The classic examples for me are Betty Ford with alcoholism and Shirley Temple Black with breast cancer. Both did a ton to bring these conditions out of the shadows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

A lot of celebrities have come out with their cancer diagnoses well after treatment. A lot. Off the top of my head - Sheryl Crowe, Robin Roberts, Alyssa Milano. I think even Lance Armstrong didn’t put out that it was testicular cancer until well after he was done with treatment. RBG kept her recurrences under wraps. Pam from The Office just had breast cancer, but I think she didn’t go public until she was through chemo. I think it’s actually a perfectly normal thing to not want to be super public while going through active treatment.

Comparing Kate Middleton to RBG is crazy work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally I think the "discreet" announcements did more to fan a larger volume of speculation and gossip than if she had an announced what kind of cancer. Even if bad prognosis like pancreatic, would have had less vicious speculations.

Any details provided would have been analyzed and speculated to pieces. Keep in mind they have young children. They’re smart to keep the details locked down for that reason alone. Once they attach any details at all, their kids would see headlines like “Kate’s diagnosis carries 30% chance of death” or other such “analysis.” This way they have made it so they can control what their kids hear and understand about mom’s prognosis and that is more important than anything else to them, I’m sure.

She also has no obligation to share her medical information, ever, and good for her for putting herself first in this case.

They should be telling the kids what is going on though. And everything was analyzed to death from the photo to her absence. Of course she’s under no obligation to share but if she was ultimately going to (which she did) then can’t think of a worse way to do it.

I have a recurrence risk of 30% in the next five years. My kids are the same ages as Kates kids. What should I tell them?

An age appropriate version of that ideally developed in conjunction with a mental health professional? I know you meant that as some sort of gotcha but as someone whose parent died from cancer in my teens I can’t believe people are really suggesting secrecy is the best policy in 2024.

[Anonymous]

Sigh. 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

This is why she hasn’t said more. Right here. Or the PP guessing it’s ED related.

This is her body. She gets to say whatever she wants or doesn’t want to say about her body. Right?

All you ghouls and misogynists will just have to get used to disappointment.

I guess? What I liked about her was that she seemed like a regular person who had consciously taken on this public role and was taking it seriously. Her public persona of making appearances, looking polished and appropriate, seeming to care, seeming to be invested in raising her kids to be nice and as normal as possible...it seemed like she was not just a royal twit but someone who viewed her job as almost a sacred duty. And I get she's a human who might want privacy. But the confusing and contradictory statements, the AI photos, the maybe AI video announcement, the lack of doing even the most basic easy stuff, like thanking health care providers, the announcements now that she's not planning to do much work in the future....it doesn't accord with her image. Makes it seem like she's not who we thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally I think the "discreet" announcements did more to fan a larger volume of speculation and gossip than if she had an announced what kind of cancer. Even if bad prognosis like pancreatic, would have had less vicious speculations.

Any details provided would have been analyzed and speculated to pieces. Keep in mind they have young children. They’re smart to keep the details locked down for that reason alone. Once they attach any details at all, their kids would see headlines like “Kate’s diagnosis carries 30% chance of death” or other such “analysis.” This way they have made it so they can control what their kids hear and understand about mom’s prognosis and that is more important than anything else to them, I’m sure.

She also has no obligation to share her medical information, ever, and good for her for putting herself first in this case.

They should be telling the kids what is going on though. And everything was analyzed to death from the photo to her absence. Of course she’s under no obligation to share but if she was ultimately going to (which she did) then can’t think of a worse way to do it.

I have a recurrence risk of 30% in the next five years. My kids are the same ages as Kates kids. What should I tell them?

An age appropriate version of that ideally developed in conjunction with a mental health professional? I know you meant that as some sort of gotcha but as someone whose parent died from cancer in my teens I can’t believe people are really suggesting secrecy is the best policy in 2024.

DP. Kate and William said a while back that they delayed the cancer announcement in order to tell their children privately. While some will disagree with whatever they have told/are telling their children, since as we see some will disagree with everything they say or do, they are putting their family first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

A lot of celebrities have come out with their cancer diagnoses well after treatment. A lot. Off the top of my head - Sheryl Crowe, Robin Roberts, Alyssa Milano. I think even Lance Armstrong didn’t put out that it was testicular cancer until well after he was done with treatment. RBG kept her recurrences under wraps. Pam from The Office just had breast cancer, but I think she didn’t go public until she was through chemo. I think it’s actually a perfectly normal thing to not want to be super public while going through active treatment.

Comparing Kate Middleton to RBG is crazy work.

Comparing one person keeping their diagnosis private to another person keeping their diagnosis private. It's okay for some public figures to keep their cancer private, but not others?? Honestly, the current health status of the Supreme Court justices have a way bigger impact on your life than what type of cancer Kate Middleton has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

Please let us know these celebrities who during tough personal times used the experience to make a difference!

The classic examples for me are Betty Ford with alcoholism and Shirley Temple Black with breast cancer. Both did a ton to bring these conditions out of the shadows.

So anything in the last 50-60 years? What lame examples.

DP. Lance Armstrong for one. Only good thing that despicable person did in his life. Angelina Jolie especially with increasing awareness with BRCA mutation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

Please let us know these celebrities who during tough personal times used the experience to make a difference!

The classic examples for me are Betty Ford with alcoholism and Shirley Temple Black with breast cancer. Both did a ton to bring these conditions out of the shadows.

So anything in the last 50-60 years? What lame examples.

DP. Lance Armstrong for one. Only good thing that despicable person did in his life. Angelina Jolie especially with increasing awareness with BRCA mutation.

What was the measurable difference?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have always liked Kate, but this has made me like her less. She's in a position where she could raise awareness and reduce the stigma of cancer (especially if it's colon cancer) an she's chosen not to. I get that it's hard, but it's harder for everyone who doesn't have her resources. I so admire the celebrities who during tough personal times nevertheless use the experience to make a difference.

My guess is that she was treated outside the UK or had access to treatment regular people wouldn't and they don't want to publicize that.

A lot of celebrities have come out with their cancer diagnoses well after treatment. A lot. Off the top of my head - Sheryl Crowe, Robin Roberts, Alyssa Milano. I think even Lance Armstrong didn’t put out that it was testicular cancer until well after he was done with treatment. RBG kept her recurrences under wraps. Pam from The Office just had breast cancer, but I think she didn’t go public until she was through chemo. I think it’s actually a perfectly normal thing to not want to be super public while going through active treatment.

Comparing Kate Middleton to RBG is crazy work.

Comparing one person keeping their diagnosis private to another person keeping their diagnosis private. It's okay for some public figures to keep their cancer private, but not others?? Honestly, the current health status of the Supreme Court justices have a way bigger impact on your life than what type of cancer Kate Middleton has.

One person who kept their diagnosis private because they are on the Supreme Court is not the same thing as someone who is basically a royal influencer keeping it private. The reasons for keeping it private are not remotely the same whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Katie Curic and colon cancer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Katie Curic and colon cancer.

And breast cancer

[Anonymous]

You all realize Kate isn't actually an American. Why should she do what Americans have done when she's British? How about some British examples, the culture she is part of? Every single one of these people are Americans.