Chaos and ‘Panic' Break Out at the Palace Over Kate Middleton's Health
A royal insider told The Daily Beast there was a 'real sense of panic' at the palace Wednesday, after Kate Middleton dramatically pulled out of a scheduled appearance at the Royal Ascot horse-racing festival at the last minute.
The palace has provided no on-the-record explanation for the absence.
However, Kate's team sought to play down the idea that the cancellation signaled a downturn in her health, with some media briefed that it was just a question of the princess seeking 'balance' as she continues to recover from cancer.
Kate herself clearly said that her plans could be subject to change when she announced she was cancer-free earlier this year, which at least gave a superficial plausibility to the claims that Wednesday's unscheduled cancellation was no big deal.
The U.K. media has largely gone along with the palace spin, dutifully reporting that Kate's decision to abandon the legendary Ascot carriage procession was almost routine. In fact, pulling out of such a high-profile event, just over an hour before she was due to appear with the king and queen, is highly unusual.
Behind the scenes in the royal household, people are far less sanguine.
The Daily Beast can reveal that the announcement left staff behind palace walls 'bewildered and worried' as they tried to figure out what was happening.
The situation was made worse by the fact that an official 'carriage list' published at noon by the palace said Kate would be there, only for her to cancel within the hour.
One former courtier who retains good links with serving staff said, 'Everyone was wandering around going, 'What is going on?' One minute she was going, and the next she wasn't. This is one of the biggest days of the year in the royal calendar; you don't just miss Ascot on a whim, so there was a real sense of panic. The chaotic nature of the announcement was eerily reminiscent of the dark days of last year. People were bewildered and worried.'
The insider added that rumors had briefly swirled around the palace that the future queen had been taken unwell and either needed to see a doctor or had been rushed to the hospital.
Kate's office did not respond to The Daily Beast's requests for comment, but a friend of the princess told The Daily Beast: 'My understanding is that Kate was basically exhausted after Trooping the Color on Saturday and Garter Day on Monday and couldn't face it. There are good days and bad days, as she herself has very candidly said. '
Kate's March 2024 announcement that she had cancer came after the catastrophic failure of an attempt to impose a news blackout on Kate's health. The information vacuum meant Kate's whereabouts became the subject of worldwide speculation.
This time, at least, palace aides have not tried to simply remain silent in the face of self-evidently unusual events.
Discreet briefings were issued to the media saying that while Kate was 'disappointed' not to go, she is seeking 'to find the right balance' when it comes to doing public engagements.
However, there was no denying that Prince William looked decidedly somber on arrival at the festival, although he seemed to cheer up later when he was photographed smiling and having a drink.
One of the few hints in the U.K. media that there might be more to Kate's non-appearance than meets the eye came in a line in a report in the usually well-informed Daily Telegraph, reading: 'Her appearance, recently so healthy, has belied how difficult things were last year, and how hard the fight to return to normality has been.'
Kate finished 'preventative chemotherapy' in September and announced she was in remission in January of this year.
She said, in a precedent-busting video: 'There are good days and bad days. I am learning how to be patient, especially with uncertainty.'
King Charles has also said that he has cancer, which is understood to be being managed on an ongoing basis with weekly treatment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The best sunscreen of 2025 – and the two to avoid
With hot weather sweeping the UK and an amber heatwave warning in place, sunscreen is something we should all be wearing on the parts of our bodies exposed to the sun. But how can you be sure your go-to bottle is doing what it promises? To help shoppers find suncreams they can trust, consumer group Which? tested a range of high street and premium options using official British and international standards. SPF (which protects against UVB rays that cause sunburn) was checked by applying sunscreen to volunteers' skin and exposing it to controlled UVB light. UVA protection (which guards against long-term skin damage and ageing) was tested in the lab by measuring how much of the sun's rays were absorbed through the cream. This year, 13 products passed with flying colours – but two missed the mark in at least one test. This supermarket-own product passed the UVA part of the testing but fell short on SPF protection. According to Which?, lab results showed an SPF of 25.7 and then 20.7 on retest – lower than the SPF30 claim and below the threshold needed to pass. The supermarket told Which? it's "looking closely at the results" and is carrying out further independent testing with its supplier. Ultrasun met the SPF requirement in testing, but failed to hit the minimum UVA protection. Which? recorded a UVA protection factor of 9.1 and 9.5 across two tests, just below the required level of 10. Ultrasun told Which? it is "fully confident in its testing protocols and that its detailed testing processes continue to not only meet, but surpass industry standards." It also said its chosen testing protocol is one of the strictest available. Tested and approved – here are the sunscreens Which? says deliver on sun protection: Boots Soltan Protect & Moisturise Lotion, £5.50 Boots Soltan Protect & Moisturise Spray, £5.50 Nivea Sun Protect & Moisture Lotion, £7.90 Lidl Cien Sun Protect Spray SPF30, £3.79 Sainsbury's Sun Protect Moisturising Lotion, £5.50 Superdrug Solait Sun Spray, £5.50 Garnier Ambre Solaire Sensitive Advanced Spray SPF50+, £11 Sainsbury's Sun Protect Moisturising Spray Lotion SPF50+, £5.75 Aldi Lacura Sensitive Sun Lotion SPF50+, £2.99 Boots Soltan Protect & Moisturise Lotion SPF50+, £5.50 Nivea Sun Protect & Moisture Spray SPF50+, £7.90 Childs Farm Fragrance-Free Sun Cream SPF50+, £12 Soltan Kids Protect & Moisturise Lotion SPF50+, £5.50 When it comes to SPF, Which? and NHS guidance suggest looking for: A minimum SPF of 30 for UVB protection A UVA protection seal (a circle with 'UVA' inside) or Boots' four- or five-star UVA rating Water resistance if you're swimming or sweating Reapplication every two hours (more if swimming or towelling off) It's worth checking the expiry date too — suncream can lose its effectiveness over time. Kids' skin is around 30% thinner than adults', which means UV rays can cause damage more quickly. Their skin also produces less melanin – the pigment that helps protect against sunburn – so they need extra protection. Look for suncream with SPF 30 or higher, ideally labelled for children or sensitive skin. Water-resistant options are a good bet too, especially if they're splashing about. Wide-brimmed hats, rash vests and UV-protective sunglasses can all help keep them covered. And if you're unsure of a brand to go for before your next top up, Which? has lots of sunscreen information on its website. Suncream helps, but it's just one part of the picture. Here's what the NHS and British Skin Foundation recommend for staying protected during exposure to the sun: Stick to the shade (11am–3pm): UV is strongest midday, so take breaks under trees, parasols or cover –just remember rays can still reflect off water or sand. Cover up well: Wear loose, tightly woven clothes, a wide-brimmed hat, and sunglasses with a CE mark, UV‑400 or 100% UV protection. Pick sun-safe fabrics: Look for clothing labelled UPF 30+ – UPF 50+ gives the best protection. Apply early, reapply often: Use sunscreen 30 minutes before heading out, then reapply every 2 hours – or sooner if you're swimming or towelling off. Use enough: Aim for 6–8 teaspoons to cover your whole body – most of us don't use enough. Check the label: Go for SPF 30+ and either 4–5 stars or a UVA-in-a-circle symbol to ensure broad protection. Don't ditch it on cloudy days: UV still gets through clouds and bounces off sand, water and snow – protection's still essential. Read more about suncream: The 4 most important things to check on your sunscreen, according to a dermatologist (Yahoo Life UK, 5-min read) Why you need sunscreen all year round, even indoors (Yahoo Life UK, 6-min read) The 8 best sunscreens for kids and adults – and the correct SPF to use for your age (Yahoo Life UK, 7-min read)
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A simple blood test could offer first reliable diagnosis for ME
A simple blood test could provide the first reliable diagnosis for myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and end the lengthy process of trying to identify the debilitating condition, scientists have found. It's thought more than 400,000 people in the UK suffer with the condition, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Pain, brain fog and extreme low energy that does not improve with sleep are just some of the symptoms of ME. There is no cure and the cause is unknown. Currently the only way to diagnose it is by ruling out other illnesses – a long process that can mean patients wait years for a diagnosis. However, researchers at the University of Edinburgh believe they have made a breakthrough. The study published in the Journal EMBO Molecular Medicine used data from the UK Biobank – a large-scale resource based on the health data and biological samples of 500,000 UK participants. Researchers compared blood samples from 1,455 ME patients with more than 131,000 healthy people. They identified differences in cell counts and molecules that differed in concentrations between the two. The differences in samples for the ME patients were related to chronic inflammation, insulin resistance and liver dysfunction. These findings were compared and replicated in data from a group of American patients and healthy controls. Researchers found 116 'biomarkers' for ME in the blood of men and women with the condition. This is a key finding because the condition affects men and women differently. Professor Chris Ponting, of the university's Institute of Genetics and Cancer, said: 'For so long people with ME/CFS have been told it's all in their head. It's not. We see [it] in their blood. 'Evidence of a large number of replicated and diverse blood biomarkers that differentiate between ME/CFS cases and controls should dispel any lingering perception it is caused by deconditioning and exercise intolerance.' These biomarkers did not change when the participants were any more active – consistent with the view graded exercise therapy, which aims to gradually increase activity levels, is unlikely to be helpful. In fact, the largest differences were seen in people who reported post-exertional malaise. This is when the symptoms of the condition become worse even after minor physical effort. Dr Sjoerd Beentjes, of the university's School of Mathematics, said: 'Blood differences are sometimes attributed to reduced activity levels rather than ME/CFS directly. Our study provides strong evidence ME/CFS affects blood traits through paths other than activity.' However, this research is still at an early stage and there is no guarantee a test will be possible, study authors stressed. Professor Kevin McConway, Emeritus Professor of Applied Statistics, Open University, who was not part of the study, said: 'There is a lot more to do.' 'These findings could help in finding a set of blood biomarkers that can reasonably reliably distinguish people with ME/CFS from those who do not have that condition, but that, without a lot of further work, the findings do not in themselves provide such a set of biomarkers,' he added.
Washington Post
43 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Health officials issue warnings as UK bakes in the first heat wave of 2025
LONDON — British health officials are warning people across the country to take precautions when out in the sun as the U.K. bakes under its first heat wave of the year. Temperatures are expected to peak at 34 degrees Celsius (93 degrees Fahrenheit) in some parts of eastern England on Saturday following a week of unusually warm weather, according to the national weather agency the Met Office. That's about 12 C (22 F) higher than normal for this time of year. The U.K. Health Security Agency has issued an amber heat health alert covering all of England because of increased health risks for people over 65 and those with heart and lung problems. 'Heat can result in serious health outcomes across the population, especially for older adults or those with pre-existing health conditions,' Dr. Agostinho Sousa, head of the UKHSA, said in a statement. 'It is therefore important to check on friends, family and neighbors who are more vulnerable and to take sensible precautions while enjoying the sun.' Saturday is expected to be the hottest day of the heat wave, with temperatures falling slightly on Sunday and dropping back into the more normal temperatures next week, the Met Office said. The heat alert is currently scheduled to remain in effect until Monday morning. Unusually, temperatures in London this week have been higher than in many parts of Western Europe. That's because the high temperatures are not the result of hot air moving north from the Iberian Peninsula or North Africa as is often the case, the Met Office said. Instead, this weather system originated in air high over the Atlantic Ocean south of Greenland. As it approaches the U.K., it descends toward ground level, causing it to warm rapidly, Chief Meteorologist Matthew Lenhert said. That said, it has been plenty hot in Europe too. Aviation enthusiasts attending the Paris Air Show in Le Bourget, north of Paris, this week sought the shade of a Boeing 777's wing, cooling off as temperatures hovered in the low 30s C (mid-80s F.) Met Office scientists this week published research showing that climate change is increasing the likelihood of extreme high temperatures in the U.K. The chance of temperatures exceeding 40 Celsius (104 F) is now more than 20 times higher than it was in the 1960s, the researchers said.
