The King "remains wholly positive about his treatment", says Buckingham Palace.
  • GreatAlbatross@feddit.ukMEnglish
    331·
    11 months ago

    He’s doing well being open about medical issues, imho.
    It’s a good thing to do when you’re in a position like his, as it might encourage others to get things checked out sooner rather than later.

  • Flax@feddit.ukEnglish
    18·
    11 months ago

    A statement from Buckingham Palace:

    During The King’s recent hospital procedure for benign prostate enlargement, a separate issue of concern was noted. Subsequent diagnostic tests have identified a form of cancer.

    His Majesty has today commenced a schedule of regular treatments, during which time he has been advised by doctors to postpone public-facing duties. Throughout this period, His Majesty will continue to undertake State business and official paperwork as usual.

    The King is grateful to his medical team for their swift intervention, which was made possible thanks to his recent hospital procedure. He remains wholly positive about his treatment and looks forward to returning to full public duty as soon as possible.

    His Majesty has chosen to share his diagnosis to prevent speculation and in the hope it may assist public understanding for all those around the world who are affected by cancer.

  • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
    101·
    11 months ago

    Prostate cancer is very common, very survivable, and very easily treatable. It’s a serious health problem, but he’s almost definitely gonna be fine

    Me fail reading comprehension. The article says it’s NOT prostate cancer

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    51·
    11 months ago

    Rishi says it’s been caught early, which by normal Tory truth-telling standards probably means it’s stage 4 and we’ll get another few days off this summer.

    Hope it’s a nice day. Be a shame to waste it on bad weather.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    The type of cancer has not been revealed, but according to a palace statement the King began “regular treatments” on Monday.

    Buckingham Palace says the King “remains wholly positive about his treatment and looks forward to returning to full public duty as soon as possible”.

    He will postpone his public engagements and it is expected other senior royals will help to stand in for him during his treatment.

    The King, 75, returned to London from Sandringham in Norfolk on Monday morning and the palace says he has commenced treatment as an outpatient.

    Although he will pause his public events, the King will continue with his constitutional role as head of state, including paperwork and private meetings.

    UK figures suggest, on average each year, more than a third (36%) of new cancer cases were in people aged 75 and over.

    The original article contains 280 words, the summary contains 139 words. Saved 50%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    1014·
    11 months ago

    Is this good or bad news? I don’t know much about the UK, but I thought he was kinda unpopular.

    • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.ukEnglish
      19·
      11 months ago

      I want to see the monarchy abolished but don’t wish him personally any great ill will. He’s more of a meddler in affairs of state than his mother and has been nonce-adjacent too many times for me to trust his judgement but this brings me no joy - too many friends getting cancer at the moment.

    • Hyperreality@kbin.social
      17·
      11 months ago

      He’s not hated, certainly not hated enough for people to wish he dies of cancer.

      He’s less popular than his mother, but that’s mainly because people are simply ambivalent about him.

      • UID_Zero@infosec.pubEnglish
        5·
        11 months ago

        I can’t think of anyone I’d wish to die of cancer. I watched my father become a shell of a man while cancer took him, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

        Really, I wouldn’t wish anyone dead, but definitely not of cancer. What a horrible way to go.

        Fuck cancer.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      217·
      11 months ago

      Generally it’s considered bad when people have cancer.

      The monarchy has no real power, and they’re no worse at wealth hoarding than any other billionaire, so it’s vaguely uncouth to be happy he has cancer.

      • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.worldEnglish
        181·
        11 months ago

        The monarchy has no real power

        "The Queen successfully lobbied the government to change a draft law in order to conceal her “embarrassing” private wealth from the public, according to documents discovered by the Guardian.

        A series of government memos unearthed in the National Archives reveal that Elizabeth Windsor’s private lawyer put pressure on ministers to alter proposed legislation to prevent her shareholdings from being disclosed to the public.

        Following the Queen’s intervention, the government inserted a clause into the law granting itself the power to exempt companies used by “heads of state” from new transparency measures.

        The arrangement, which was concocted in the 1970s, was used in effect to create a state-backed shell corporation which is understood to have placed a veil of secrecy over the Queen’s private shareholdings and investments until at least 2011."

        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          103·
          11 months ago

          Aight. I meant more like “the monarchy can’t order the military to detain people, or unilaterally pass decrees against the will of the people”.

          Asking parliament to pass an abusive law isn’t the same type of abuse of power that would justify wanting a monarch to die in the short term in my view.

          Charles is not Putin. I’m pretty firmly in the “overthrow the monarchy camp”, but that’s different from wanting an essentially harmless figurehead of an old man to have cancer.

          • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.worldEnglish
            12·
            11 months ago

            Charles is not Putin. I’m pretty firmly in the “overthrow the monarchy camp”, but that’s different from wanting an essentially harmless figurehead of an old man to have cancer.

            Who wants him to have cancer? You said they have no real power, I showed that they do. Obviously they can’t have people thrown out of windows but that wasn’t the point I was making.

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              41·
              11 months ago

              I was more saying we seem to have different definitions of “real power”. You’re not wrong that they have influence, but the influence they have doesn’t seem like “dictator level” power. Simple disagreement of terms.

              Given the context of someone asking “is it good the man has cancer”, people disagreeing with “there’s no real reason to want him to have cancer, so no” are easily mistaken as suggesting that maybe it is good he has cancer.

              • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.worldEnglish
                12·
                11 months ago

                “real power” to me, is being able to make the government craft legislation that suits you. I can’t do that, can you?

                • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
                  32·
                  11 months ago

                  Yeh, I can actually - I can write to my MP, go and see them in the local surgery and persuade them to table questions and even draft legislation It’s quite cool.

                • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  11·
                  11 months ago

                  Yes, we’ve already determined that we have different definitions.

                  To me, real power would be if they could just choose not to disclose the information.

        • Hyperreality@kbin.social
          1·
          11 months ago

          Those with true power and wealth are rich and powerful enough to convince the world that they aren’t that rich or powerful.

      • Sibbo@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        53·
        11 months ago

        Sure, death in itself is never a good thing. But since there is only one way for him to end his reign, you can’t really wish him away without wishing him harm.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          42·
          11 months ago

          Well, if the Brits voted to not have a monarchy, they could just kick him out.
          I don’t think the British monarchs in the current day need to be removed from office the way the French did it.

    • Flax@feddit.ukEnglish
      176·
      11 months ago

      He is only unpopular with the terminally online. At most, people are apathetic/don’t really have an opinion of him

    • Skua@kbin.social
      9·
      11 months ago

      He’s primarily unpopular with those of us that are against the monarchy as an institution rather than because of the man himself. If he dies that doesn’t get rid of the institution, it just changes which rich prick currently has the job

    • smeg@feddit.ukEnglish
      72·
      11 months ago

      You can hate someone and what they stand for without wanting them to get cancer. Call me an old bleeding heart, but I don’t think it’s very healthy to wish death on anyone.

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.caEnglish
        72·
        11 months ago

        When the system of government is literally based on succession through death, you kind of open yourself up to such questions.

        • Sibbo@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          31·
          11 months ago

          Yeah, that’s the problem here, right? If you wish him away, there is only one way.

          • anothermember@lemmy.zipEnglish
            4·
            11 months ago

            It’s not the only way, he could abdicate for one thing. There’s the possibility of democratic abolition of the monarchy (but if you go by opinion polls it doesn’t have enough public support at the moment).

          • smeg@feddit.ukEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            You can wish for the abolition of the monarchy (in a non-guillotine sort of way)

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.ukMEnglish
      4·
      11 months ago

      People on the whole don’t like the idea of that much wealth in one location, or the way that there are lots of loopholes and exemptions for them that commoners don’t receive.

      However, opinions of the bottom in the seat vary.
      The late queen was generally well regarded as a reasonably nice person.
      And the current king is getting nods of approval for championing environmental issues, and the way that he’s been very open about his recent medical issues (which hopefully will drive more prostate-holders to get checked).

      • Sibbo@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        34·
        11 months ago

        Imagine not being able to ask if it’s good or bad news that a politician resigns. The fact that there is only one way for him to quit doesn’t mean you can’t be happy about him quitting.