I would think that testing for this particular defect would be not only double confirmation but of the utmost historical value.
Too bad.
Testing for the suspected defective gene most certainly would double the confirmation of the identification of the bones of Body No. 7 as Alexandra... presuming, of course, that the suspected defective gene is actually there.
But...
What if it isn't there? What if a test of the bones of Body No. 7 for the suspected faulty gene had actually proved to be negative? Knowing the controversy that a negative result would inevitably provoke, would any brave scientist who had actually discovered through laboratory testing that the bones of Body No. 7 showed no evidence at all of the suspected haemophilia gene ever even dare to publish the results?
What would happen next if a negative test result really had been published? Would everyone here suddenly turn against the original Peter Gill/Pavel Ivanov 1993 DNA identification of the Ekaterinburg remains? Would there be a sudden onslaught of calls for the removal of those bones now buried at the Fortress of Peter and Paul?
... even if the bones of Body No. 7 really are the mortal remains of Alexandra?
In preparation for his latest book on Alexandra's cousin Kaiser Wilhelm II, University of Sussex Professor John C.G. Röhl had managed to obtain permission to exhume the remains of the last Kaiser's sister Charlotte to test her bones for evidence of Porphyria. Prof. Röhl now reports that the results of those tests on Charlotte's remains were shown to be positive.
Professor Röhl is also claimed to have asked for a similar test for evidence of Porphyria to be done on the samples from Wilhelm II's cousin Alexandra that are still in the possession of one of Dr. Peter Gill's original Romanov DNA team. Prof. Röhl has been quoted as claiming that the tests performed at his request on known samples from the bones of Body No. 7 of the Ekaterinburg remains were shown (in unpublished results) to be negative for evidence of Porphyria.
So...
If samples from the bones of Alexandra are still known to be available for testing... and if those very same samples and samples from the remains of Alexandra's cousin Charlotte have both been tested successfully to search for evidence... or the lack of evidence.. of the suspected "Royal Purple" disease of Porphyria...
... and if all of this could be done at the simple request of a University Professor who was only gathering evidence to finish his book...
Then why is it that... whenever the suggestion is made that those very same samples from the bones of Alexandra should be tested for evidence of the suspected hemophilia gene... all we ever hear from anyone is all of the reasons why it can't be done?
Any claims of cost coming from the investigating authorities are only an excuse. The samples are known to be available for testing. The equipment and the necessary lab supplies are also known to be available for testing. The only true cost to those same investigating authorities who have all the necessary supplies at their immediate disposal is to pay for the scientist's time to actually do the tests. The potential political costs, however, are enormous... if the tests don't go their way.
If tests can be done for the suspected evidence of Porphyria... tests which certainly have been done... then tests can most certainly be done for the suspected evidence of haemophilia as well....
That is... if the tests haven't been done already...
... and the results are being withheld....
... only because they don't like the answer.
