Author Topic: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?  (Read 95868 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #150 on: June 14, 2005, 10:58:59 AM »
The best doctors in the land, back in the early 1900s, were very limited in their knowledge.    So, they were only as good as the knowledge they had at the time.  

Anyone ever taken a look at an old medcial book?

The medical schools were stealing bodies out of cemetaries and the best way to treat the wounded at the battle front was to cut off a limb......  Dark age stuff.

And, when did they start using transfusions...?  At the end of WW I....   Remember, they killed a lot of people because they didn't know there were different types of blood....

So, what did these doctors know about hemophilia or other blood dieases that had the same symptoms?  

Since I'm not familar with the various diseases that do have the same symptoms,  can anyone give us a short list?

Thanks.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline etonexile

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1231
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #151 on: June 14, 2005, 12:30:41 PM »
Quote
Just to throw in my 2 cents worth, I believe Alexei suffered from haemophilia as it was private knowledge through the entire descendants of Queen Victoria, starting with the Queen's son Leopold. Leopold suffered constantly from joint pains which is a symptom of haemophilia. Leopold's daughter Alice was a carrier of the disease which she inherited from her father, it did not affect her but she passed it on to her son (Leopold's grandson) Rupert, and there is some speculation Alice's younger son Maurice who died when an infant may also have had the disease.
Moving onto one of Queen Victoria's daughters, (Princess Alice)we know she was a carrier of the disease, her own son Frittie had it, Alice passed it onto 2 daughters (one being Alix) and bingo, poor Alexei is a haemophiliac, just like numerous of his cousins. Just before Alexei was born in 1904, Alix sister Irene's 4 year old son died of the disease, and Alix was distraught to lose her nephew to the dreaded bleeding disease.
Even Queen Victoria stated in one of her letters  " Our whole family seems afflicted with this terrible disease" or something very along those lines.
And remember, Alix and Nicholas had the best Doctors in the land, they were after all Royalty. They could afford the best care, and Alexei was attended by the "sailor nannies" who monitored all his movements to protect him as he was the Heir to the Throne, he was also forbidden to ride an ordinary bicycle and he led a restricted life, he was no "ordinary boy".
I read somewhere that Queen Ena of Spain padded all the trees in the palace grounds whenever her haemaphiliac sons went out to play, and her sons also had to wear padded protective suits as well whilst playing. Her husband blamed her for the children's illness which she had inherited from Queen Victoria. Poor Ena did not have a supportive husband like Alix did. I dont think Nicholas ever blamed Alix for Alexei's condition, but Alix herself suffered and felt guilty from the time he was born. Poor woman.


I too honestly believe that Alexei N. had haemophilia like his other royal uncles,cousins,and other relations descended from Queen Victoria...I wonder if there are males in descent from QV today with this disease...?

Offline J_Kendrick

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #152 on: June 14, 2005, 05:25:39 PM »
Quote

I too honestly believe that Alexei N. had haemophilia like his other royal uncles,cousins,and other relations descended from Queen Victoria...

I wonder if there are males in descent from QV today with this disease...?


The simple answer is NO.

Of the 950 known descendents of Queen Victoria, there are only seven suspected hemophiliacs, another three highly questionable possibilities, and only six suspected female carriers.  In a family that has often been claimed to be plagued by the disease, that's barely just one percent of the entire family line.

The suspected disease is confined to just three generations, starting with Leopold and ending with Alexei and Waldemar. There are no known hemophiliacs in Victoria's family line in any of the generations after Alexei. There are no hemophiliacs at all among any of the more than seven hundred descendants of Victoria and Albert now living today.

JK

Lizameridox

  • Guest
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #153 on: June 14, 2005, 07:46:43 PM »
Being a recessive trait carried on the X-chromosome originally supplied, after all, by a hemophiliac father to any of his daughters, the disease delimits itself in the families in which it appears, gradually petering out because not all a carrier's sons will necessarily have the disease, nor will all her daughters be carriers themselves.   Also, in the Tsarevich's time, boys with the disease tended to die young rather than to marry.   Any daughters of Alexei Nikolaevich, of course, would have carried on his disease all over again.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Lizameridox »

Offline pinklady

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 317
  • Imagine being the person your dog thinks you are..
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #154 on: June 15, 2005, 05:37:53 AM »
Lizameridox, that is true, the children with the disease tended to die young before they have a chance to have children themselves. And out of every family there might only be one or two sufferers of the illness, ( as an example, out of Queen Victoria's large family, one son suffered and 2 daughters were carriers) So in that ratio it does not strike everybody of course.
Robert K Massie says  " Hemophilaia is as old as man. It has come down through the centuries, misted in legend, shrouded with the dark dread of a hereditary curse. In the Egypt of the Pharoahs, a woman was forbidden to bear further children if her firstborn son bled to death from a minor wound. The ancient Talmud barred circumcision in a family if two successive male children had suffered fatal hemorhages."

The reason Alexei appeared so well ( and remember "appeared") is because he was Heir to the throne of Russia and a hemophiliac and so  because of these 2 reasons he was pampered and protected like no other child, when you think about it, a very over protective environment designed to keep him healthy and safe.
When he was a baby and toddler nurses surrounded him,when he turned 5 he was assigned the 2 sailors who doubled as bodyguards and nurses and were there to keep him from all harm.

Massie also says " Hemophilia is a fickle disease, and for weeks and sometimes months, Alexei seemed as well as any child. By nature he was as noisy, lively and mischevious as Anastasia."

Unfortunately poor Alexei had accidents from time to time in spite of the lavish care that surrounded everything he did.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by pinklady »

Offline J_Kendrick

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #155 on: June 15, 2005, 12:32:51 PM »
Quote
Being a recessive trait carried on the X-chromosome originally supplied, after all, by a hemophiliac father to any of his daughters, the disease limits itself in the families in which it appears, gradually petering out because not all a carrier's sons will necessarily have the disease, nor will all her daughters be carriers themselves.


That's a very convenient explanation for the unusually sudden disappearance of an X-linked recessive inherited blood disorder... for those who want to believe it...

But...

The suspected disease did not just "gradually peter out".  It had vanished just as suddenly as it had appeared... with the suspected carriers disappearing after only two generations and the suspected sufferers disappearing after only three.

There are only two suspected carriers and just one suspected sufferer in the first generation, only four suspected carriers and just three suspected sufferers (all dying violently) in the second generation. There are no known carriers at all and just four suspected sufferers other than Alexei in the third and final generation, three of those four dying violent deaths in motor vehicle accidents.  

After the death of Alexei's cousin Waldemar of Prussia in his 56th year in 1945, this suspected X-linked recessive blood disorder did not just "gradually peter out".  It had vanished completely.  In fact, the faulty gene that's suspected to have been responsible for the disease had actually vanished in just two generations... the generation before Alexei... because there are no known carriers at all in Alexei's own generation.

The births of the suspected carriers all occur within the very short span of just 44 years in only two generations.  The births of the suspected sufferers all occur within the very short span of just 61 years in only three generations.  The last suspected sufferer was born in 1914, just two years after the episode at Spala.  

At the very same instant that the requirement to explain away Alexei's suspected inheritance of a recessive X-Linked disorder has conveniently disappeared with Alexei's own disappearance in 1918.. that same suspected faulty X-linked gene then also completely vanishes into thin air.. as if it had never been there in the first place.

What's even worse, now we're all being expected to believe that lighting strikes twice in the very same place in that same family line.  We're all expected to believe that there's not just one, but two, equally rare blood diseases.. both haemophilia and porphyria.. existing in the same Royal family line at the very same time.  

Not only that.. but we're also expected to accept that both of those same equally rare genetically inherited diseases had been passed down the same family line through the very same person, Victoria,... and that Victoria and both her parents were all completely unaffected by either disease. The mathematical odds of these two equally rare genetically inherited blood diseases actually managing to pass down the same family line through that same one person and her unaffected parents are absolutely astronomical.

You're all quite free to believe whatever you like, but it defies all logic... and I, for one, just don't buy it.

JK

Offline Elisabeth

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2131
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #156 on: June 15, 2005, 12:46:21 PM »
Quote
What's even worse, now we're all being expected to believe that lighting strikes twice in the very same place in that same family line.  We're all expected to believe that there's not just one, but two, equally rare blood diseases.. both haemophilia and porphyria.. existing in the same Royal family line at the very same time.  

Not only that.. but we're also expected to accept that both of those same equally rare genetically inherited diseases had been passed down the same family line through the very same person, Victoria,... and that Victoria and both her parents were all completely unaffected by either disease. The mathematical odds of these two equally rare genetically inherited blood diseases actually managing to pass down the same family line through that same one person and her unaffected parents are absolutely astronomical.

You're all quite free to believe whatever you like, but it defies all logic... and I, for one, just don't buy it.

JK


But what about that singular element in Victoria's family, the unusually high - indeed, uniquely high - degree of intermarriage among her family and the other royal families of Europe? Not just in one generation but over countless generations. Look at the Habsburg jaw and tell me that you don't get some incredibly bizarre results with such high and prolonged rates of endogamy!
... I love my poor earth
because I have seen no other

-- Osip Mandelshtam

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #157 on: June 15, 2005, 01:46:39 PM »
I suppose this has been asked before, so forgive me for asking this again, but, then maybe it has not, anyway the question is:

Since there are samples of bone from which DNA can be taken, can a test to show Alexandra was a carrier of hemophilia?

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline etonexile

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1231
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #158 on: June 15, 2005, 05:11:42 PM »
Quote

But what about that singular element in Victoria's family, the unusually high - indeed, uniquely high - degree of intermarriage among her family and the other royal families of Europe? Not just in one generation but over countless generations. Look at the Habsburg jaw and tell me that you don't get some incredibly bizarre results with such high and prolonged rates of endogamy!
 


Yes...try not to marry cousins,aunts,uncles,et al....Porphyria was a pre-Victoria disease....read "King George And The Mad Business"....

Offline Lass

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #159 on: June 15, 2005, 05:13:41 PM »
You mean that King George's illness was caused by inter-marrying?

Offline etonexile

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1231
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #160 on: June 15, 2005, 05:35:14 PM »
As I recall...Porphyria came down from Mary,Queen of Scots...to her Son,King James I and VI...and then into the royal families of Europe....King George's attacks were made worse by the drug given him...altimony....which contains arsenic....but then biology was not my favy subject in school...

Offline Lass

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #161 on: June 15, 2005, 05:47:52 PM »
Okay, I see. Didn't know Mary of Scots had anything to do with it. I'm going off topic anyways... ahem, the tsarevich's haemophilia.

EDIT: Or lack of it - how could I forget that bit?!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Lass »

Lizameridox

  • Guest
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #162 on: June 15, 2005, 09:29:49 PM »
I think it is only fair to give those who protest against the record of history and maintain that Alexei did not suffer from hemophilia a place to explain just what has convinced them that the Tsarevich did not have the disease.

It is obvious that given the overwhelming historical record any claimant without hemophilia simply had a lot of explaining to do.  It was a lot harder for anyone claiming to be Alexei to maintain this ruse because of his unique situation.  The only people that have come up with any definite theories about the boy's disease not being hemophilia so far are non-hemophiliac pretenders or their supporters.

Would anyone other than a claimant or a person involved with a claimant ever have grounds to question the nature of the child's illness in the first place, and if so, what specific grounds would they be?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Lizameridox »

Offline J_Kendrick

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #163 on: June 15, 2005, 09:40:19 PM »
Quote

Yes...try not to marry cousins,aunts,uncles,et al....Porphyria was a pre-Victoria disease....read "King George And The Mad Business"....


And Porphyria was a post-Victoria disease as well... suffered by Queen Victoria's granddaughter.. Kaiser Wilhelm II's sister Charlotte.  Read Professor John Röhl's latest book on Wilhelm II.

This means that we are now expected to accept that the Porphyria gene must have passed through Victoria from her grandfather George III through her eldest daughter The Princesss Royal to her granddaughter Charlotte... just as we are also expected to accept that a faulty Factor VIII gene that causes haemophilia must also have passed from the same Queen Victoria to her fourth son Leopold, her second daughter Alice, and her fifth daughter Beatrice.

Two quite different and equally rare blood diseases passing through the very same person in the same family line?

... and now you expect us all to believe that such a thing is even possible... without us ever daring to question the evidence even once?  

Yeah, right...

Not very likely....

JK

Lizameridox

  • Guest
Re: So WHY would it not have been hemophilia?
« Reply #164 on: June 15, 2005, 10:21:14 PM »
The filtering out of hemophilia from family trees is something Robert Massie would have backed up.  The violent deaths of some possible carriers and some of the sufferers is a function of the times in which they lived and brought things to a halt in their lines more suddenly than the gradual fade seen in most families.

For those that question whether the Tsarevich had this particular disease:  is it more logical to assume that he had a one-time episode of aplastic crisis, to underestimate the significance numerous bleeding and bruising episodes that left him bedridden throughout his childhood, and to believe that after a long period of remission the childhood bleeding disorder had metamorphosed into a form of blood cancer?  Is this dramatic scenario -- not seen to such a degree in any other male member of the royal families of Europe -- more realistic than to accept without any difficulty that more than one hereditary disease might run in a family prone to intermarriage?

Come on.  Claimants that didn't have hemophilia had a lot of explaining away to do.  But physiology does not share the properties of even the simplest mathematical processes.  An Estonian does not equal a Russian.  A Finno-Balt does not equal a virtual Anglo-Dane.  A doctored up photograph of a man's head on top of a body wearing a badge does not hearken back to the image of a boy playing with a King Charles spaniel in the snow at a Russian army headquarters.

Could Sandra Tammet ever face the Veerman family?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Lizameridox »