Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Facing Brutal Claim 'Linking' Them to Prince Philip's Death

OK! can reveal Prince Philip's final weeks have been thrust back into the spotlight amid explosive claims Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal exit and subsequent interview turmoil may have helped kill off the frail 99-year-old royal following his near-fatal health crisis.

Philip, who died in April 2021 at age 99, had been hospitalized earlier that year after falling ill and was later transferred for heart surgery, according to royal historian Hugo Vickers.

Writing in his book Queen Elizabeth II, Vickers detailed the severity of the Duke of Edinburgh's condition, placing the medical emergency just days before Harry, 41, and Meghan, 44, aired their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021.

Vickers wrote: "The Duke of Edinburgh, then aged 99, was admitted to the Edward VII Hospital in London for tests."

On March 1, he was moved to St Bartholomew's Hospital, where he had an operation on his heart. His medical team nearly lost him twice."

Sources now claim the timing of the Sussexes' public revelations intensified pressure around the royal family during Philip's fragile recovery.

One insider told us: "There is a growing view in some circles that the situation surrounding Harry and Meghan – their exit and the Oprah interview – literally helped kill off Prince Philip with stress. It's not being suggested as a direct cause, but the impact on Philip of the stress and upheaval they caused at such a critical moment for his health cannot be ignored."

Philip had already been in declining health, and while he survived his heart operation, Vickers' account suggests he never fully recovered.

Harry and Meghan's interview with Winfrey, broadcast in the U.S. on March 6, 2021, came just days after Philip's surgery, fueling debate over whether the timing compounded existing strain within the royal household.

A second source said: "The family was dealing with an extremely serious medical situation behind closed doors, and then suddenly the most personal and damaging allegations were playing out on a global stage. For some, that overlap is deeply uncomfortable and has led to these kinds of claims."

Further controversy has emerged from Vickers' claim Philip may have lived for eight years with a form of pancreatic cancer — a claim that has sparked significant medical skepticism.

Experts have questioned whether such long-term survival would be possible given the aggressive nature of most pancreatic cancers.

A medical expert familiar with pancreatic cancer outcomes said: "An eight-year survival in what is described as inoperable pancreatic cancer would be considered highly unusual - it immediately raises questions about the specific type of tumor involved and whether it behaved differently from the most common forms."

Another specialist added: "When you see survival on that scale, clinicians would typically consider whether it was a less aggressive subtype, rather than the more typical and fast-progressing cancers associated with the pancreas. Pancreatic cancer is widely regarded as one of the most aggressive forms of the disease, often diagnosed at an advanced stage and associated with low survival rates. However, rarer forms, such as neuroendocrine tumors, can progress more slowly and allow for longer survival in some cases."

A third source said: "The renewed focus on Philip's health has reopened a lot of questions - not just about his condition, but about the wider circumstances surrounding his final months. The overlap between a life-threatening illness and a period of intense public scrutiny has inevitably fueled speculation about what really saw him off."

While no official confirmation of Philip's medical history has been released, insiders suggest the lack of clarity has contributed to ongoing debate.

One source said: "Without definitive answers, people are left to connect the dots themselves - and that's why these claims continue to resurface."