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
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Beloved wellness trend promises health benefits — but instead it causes weight gain, shocking many
They're supposed to slim you down — but ice baths might actually be plumping you up. The frigid wellness fad beloved by celebs and influencers could be backfiring, new research suggests. Cold plunges — long-touted for easing sore muscles and torching fat — may crank up your appetite and make you gain weight, originally reported on by the Daily Mail. In a study, volunteers took 30-minute dips in tubs set at 95°F, 79°F and a chilly 61°F before an all-you-can-eat pasta test. The colder the water, the increased hunger levels — those in the iciest pool scarfed down over 200 extra calories. Talk about a chilling twist. Study lead Marie Grigg, a Ph.D. researcher at Coventry University, told the Daily Mail it's still a mystery why icy dips spike cravings. She noted that 'further research is required to identify if the afterdrop in core temperature is a potential mechanism responsible for compensatory food intake post cold-water immersion.' With cold plunges trending, experts warn the icy fad could backfire for anyone counting on it to shed pounds — and might force weight-loss pros to rethink their playbook. New York City trainer Natalya Alexeyenko has a theory. She said to the outlet, 'During cold water immersion, the body kicks into thermoregulation mode — blood vessels constrict, heart rate rises, and metabolism revs to keep your core warm.' But once you get out, she explained that your body keeps cooling — an 'afterdrop' — and sends a strong signal: 'We need energy now,' even if you're not hungry. The catch? Many of us answer that call with calorie bombs, packing on pounds. Her advice? Skip the snacks and 'refuel smart' with lean proteins, complex carbs, leafy greens — and don't forget a 'warm drink' to tame the urge. Ice baths and cold plunges may also blunt muscle growth and carry serious risks like hyperventilation, hypothermia, drowning or even cardiac arrest as the body fights icy shock. As The Post previously reported, cold water squeezes your blood vessels then pops them open, boosting circulation. But health expert François Haman recently noted to Yahoo Life, 'Assuming everybody responds the same way to cold is extremely dangerous.' He added, 'I've had some people have a lot of difficulties in the cold; other people had no issues.' Still, plenty of ice bath fans swear by the benefits. Dutch extreme athlete Wim Hof credits cold therapy and his breathing techniques for boosting body and mind, though research calls the inflammation benefits 'promising' but not definitive. Dr. Craig Van Dien, a rehab specialist, told Forbes there's only 'low-quality evidence' that cold plunges aid depression or recovery — but they can ease muscle soreness. Bottom line? 'Understanding your medical comorbidities and what risk they pose is extremely important before cold plunging,' Van Dien advised. He also stressed that people with heart or lung issues, diabetes, asthma or chronic conditions should check with a doctor first. So before you dive in headfirst, remember: That icy plunge or bath might not be the skinny miracle you hoped for — it could be the chill that fills you up instead.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UK MPs to hold crunch vote on assisted dying
British lawmakers could take a major step towards legalising euthanasia on Friday when they hold a knife-edge vote on whether to allow assisted dying for terminally ill people. MPs will either progress the legislation to the House of Lords upper chamber for further scrutiny or end it entirely following several hours of impassioned debate. Protesters both for and against the contentious bill are expected to gather outside parliament as the so-called third reading -- the MPs' last chance to debate its contents -- takes place inside. "It is about real people facing the prospect of a painful and undignified death either for themselves or a loved one," the legislation's proposer, MP Kim Leadbeater, told AFP in a statement. "The injustice and inhumanity of the status quo means we cannot wait any longer to offer them the hope of a better death." The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults with an incurable illness who have a life expectancy of fewer than six months. They would have to be able to administer themselves the life-ending substance, and any patient's wish to die would have to be signed off by two doctors and a panel of experts. A change in the law would see Britain emulate several other countries in Europe and elsewhere that allow some form of assisted dying. - Advert ban - Supporters say euthanasia would give the terminally ill greater protections and choice at the end of their lives, but critics worry that vulnerable people could be coerced into dying. The Royal College of Psychiatrists said last month that it had "serious concerns" about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the bill in its current form. MPs backed the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November. Since then the bill has undergone several changes, including applying a ban on adverts for assisted dying and allowing all health workers to opt out of helping someone end their life. Several lawmakers in the 650-seat parliament have subsequently switched positions, and parties are not telling them how to vote, making the outcome difficult to predict. An ITV News tracker of around half the parliamentarians estimates that 153 MPs plan to vote for changing the law, with 141 against. Some 21 remain undecided with another 21 due to abstain. Both the House of Commons and the House of Lords need to approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely sometime in the autumn, or the bill will fail. If it passes and receives royal assent, then it would be four years before an assisted dying service is implemented. A government impact assessment published this month estimated that approximately 160 to 640 assisted deaths could take place in the first year, rising to a possible 4,500 in year 10. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is expected to vote in favour but several of his top ministerial team, including the health and justice secretaries, have publicly opposed changing the law. Assisted suicide currently carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Separate legislation is going through the devolved Scottish parliament, while the Isle of Man at the end of March became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying bill. pdh/jkb/gv/sco
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
£28 family sunscreen among brands to fail safety testing, Which? finds
A £28 family sunscreen has failed an annual Which? safety test while a £2.99 supermarket alternative passed with 'flying colours', the watchdog said. Ultrasun Family SPF30, which costs £28 for 150ml and is marketed as being 'perfect for the whole family' and 'especially suitable for children and those with sensitive skin', failed to meet minimum UVA protection levels in two separate tests by Which?. Ultrasun passed the UVB SPF part of the test but failed on UVA testing, scoring 9.1 and then 9.5 in a retest. Which? required a score of 10 or more for a pass. Morrisons Moisturising Sun Spray SPF30 also failed to meet minimum SPF protection levels in two tests. The product passed UVA tests but failed the UVB/SPF tests with scores of 25.7 and then 20.7 – short of the 30 or more needed to pass. UVA and UVB rays both cause different types of damage, and not all sun creams protect against them in the same way. UVA rays penetrate the skin more deeply than UVB to cause long-term damage, including all types of skin cancer, and play a role in the ageing process, such as causing wrinkles, sun spots and leathery skin. UVB rays are mostly responsible for sunburn and skin reddening. They do not penetrate as deeply as UVA rays but they are just as damaging, and can play a large part in the development of skin cancers including melanoma. SPF stands for 'sun protection factor', and indicates the level of protection a sun cream provides against burning rays. SPFs range from 2 to 50+, with 50+ offering the most protection against UVB. Which? tested 15 popular sun creams this year, including Boots, Garnier and Nivea as well as supermarket own-brand products. Aldi's Lacura Sensitive Sun Lotion SPF50+, which costs £2.99 for 200ml, was found to protect the skin from both UVA and UVB rays. Cien Sun Spray 30 SPF High (£3.79/200ml), from fellow discounter Lidl, also passed all SPF and UVA testing, with Which? describing it as a 'solid option for affordable and reliable sun protection'. Some 11 other products, including Boots Soltan Protect & Moisturise Suncare Spray SPF30 (£5.50 for 200ml), Nivea Sun Protect & Moisture Lotion SPF30 (£7.90 for 200ml) and Sainsbury's Sun Protect Moisturising Lotion SPF30 (£5.50 for 200ml) passed SPF and UVA safety tests. Natalie Hitchins, Which? head of home products and services, said: 'It's really concerning that widely available sunscreens could be putting families at risk by failing to offer the level of sun protection claimed on the packaging. 'While shoppers should avoid buying our 'don't buys', our results prove that there's no need to splash out to keep you and your loved ones safe in the sun as we've found cheap reliable options at Aldi and Lidl.' A spokeswoman for Ultrasun said: 'Ultrasun is fully confident in our testing protocols. As an independent brand delivering very high UVB and UVA protection options for over 30 years, our detailed testing processes, independent and peer reviewed, continue to not only meet but surpass industry standards. 'Our chosen testing protocol is one of the strictest available. Further detail and clarification from Which? on their testing protocols would also be helpful, particularly on how these resulted in two different results from the same sample.' Morrisons told Which? that it was looking closely at the data and working with its supplier to carry out additional independent testing. A Morrisons spokeswoman added: 'We work closely with our supplier and conduct extensive efficacy and safety testing during product development. As such, all our sun care products are tested to the relevant industry test standards and are not approved for launch until they meet these standards. During development and production all tested variants consistently achieved an SPF of 30. 'In direct response to this report from Which? we have retested the SPF against the British and International Standard BS EN ISO 24444:2020 and can confirm the product has achieved an SPF value of 34.5 and can therefore be labelled as SPF 30.'
