In a statement that has stirred considerable controversy, former Vanity Fair travel editor and royal correspondent Victoria Mather has implicated Prince Harry in contributing to King Charles III's recent cancer diagnosis, citing the stress from the events following "Megxit" as a potential factor.

Mather, speaking from her own experience as a cancer survivor, emphasized the role of stress in the development of the disease during an interview with LBC. "What I do know and what is a fact, is that stress is a huge cause of cancer. It's the cause that's never talked about," she asserted, suggesting that the Duke of Sussex should reflect on his possible contribution to his father's health issues.

This bold assertion has sparked a wide array of reactions, including sharp criticism from royal author Omid Scobie, who condemned Mather's comments as "the lowest of the low." Scobie's rebuke was particularly poignant given Mather's previous controversial remarks about Meghan Markle on MSNBC, which resulted in her being cut off air after referring to the Duchess of Sussex in derogatory terms.

Mather's stance on stress and cancer, however, clashes with established medical opinions, including those of Cancer Research U.K., which clearly states on its website that "stress does not directly increase cancer risk." This position is supported by extensive studies indicating no direct correlation between stress levels and cancer incidence, challenging the foundation of Mather's claims.

The online community has also voiced its disapproval, with some labeling Mather as an opportunist targeting Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, while others pointed to the broader historical context of cancer within the royal family, suggesting a genetic predisposition. Notable cases include King George VI's death from carcinoma, possibly hinting at hereditary factors influencing the royal family's health.

Further speculation about Queen Elizabeth II's health prior to her passing and the recent revelation of Crown Prince Alexander of Serbia's battle with prostate cancer have added depth to the discussion, highlighting the complex interplay of genetics and health in the royal lineage.

Buckingham Palace has remained discreet about the specifics of King Charles III's diagnosis, following his recent treatment for an enlarged prostate deemed benign. Amidst the ongoing debate and speculation, the King has maintained a positive outlook, continuing his public engagements and receiving widespread support from the public and royal family alike.

As the conversation unfolds, the controversy surrounding Mather's comments serves as a poignant reminder of the sensitivity required in discussing health issues, particularly within the public eye, and the importance of grounding such discussions in factual, medically supported information.