One thing I find odd

[J_Kendrick]

And, by the way . . . you say you have stated no personal beliefs about any of this evidence.  You are just neutrally reporting all the facts.  But didn't you earlier make the categorical statement that Alexei did not have hemophilia? 

There is a very big difference between what one may choose to believe... and what one actually knows to be fact.

What I have said on this board is that these are actual facts:

Fact 1:  Alexei's popular diagnosis has never been confirmed by any form of laboratory medical testing.
Fact 2:  Alexei's popular diagnosis does not adequately explain all of the symptoms that are found in the historical record.
Fact 3:  No one can prove otherwise without any solid scientific evidence, which does not exist.
 

So set us straight.  Did Alexei have hemophilia or didn't he?  And, if not, what was the correct diagnosis?

As I have said ever so many, many times before...

My answer can be found in the September 2004 edition of the American Journal of Hematology.

I am not going to repeat it again here, merely for your amusement.

jk

[Belochka]

The fact that a telegram sent by the Palace is actually addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich"... 55 years after his disappearance... is the key issue that the Palace still needs to explain -- not what the telegram says.

jk

It is you who prefers to dismiss how those palace responses are manufactured.  The "key" has turned but it is you who have failed to see what is in front of you.

As I have pointed out to you, Tammet's incorrect self designation has revealed his deception. Everything else becomes meaningless.

Margarita

[J_Kendrick]

The fact that a telegram sent by the Palace is actually addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich"... 55 years after his disappearance... is the key issue that the Palace still needs to explain -- not what the telegram says.

jk

It is you who prefers to dismiss how those palace responses are manufactured.  The "key" has turned but it is you who have failed to see what is in front of you.

As I have pointed out to you, Tammet's incorrect self designation has revealed his deception. Everything else becomes meaningless.

Margarita

.... and you all speak of logic?

Believe what you want...

But the world will not stop turning on a simple question of semantics.

jk

[Belochka]

There is a very big difference between what one may choose to believe... and what one actually knows to be fact.

What I have said on this board is that these are actual facts:

Fact 1:  Alexei's popular diagnosis has never been confirmed by any form of laboratory medical testing.

It is highly presumptious on your part to suggest that in the absence of laboratory evaluations, the physicians of the day were professionally inadequate to make an educated evaluation.

Strange that when laboratory analyses are conducted on tissue samples on other pretenders such as AA, there are those who cry foul!

Fact 2:  Alexei's popular diagnosis does not adequately explain all of the symptoms that are found in the historical record.

You are the only one who challenges the wisdom of a panel of international physicians of that era. You as a journalist, untrained in hematology, are unusually desperate to come up with your own alternative unsupported hypotheses, if only to explain why Tammet survived into his mature years without suffering the dehabilitating condition that Alexei endured during his short life.

Fact 3:  No one can prove otherwise without any solid scientific evidence, which does not exist..

Observing the long-term pattern of symptomologies that presented was sufficient to confirm that Alexei suffered from hemophilia. That sir WAS the medical evidence.

Margarita

[Tsarfan]

I have only told you that Buckingham Palace had sent Tammet a thank you telegram.. which it did... and that the Palace had addressed that same telegram with the name and title of "Alexei Nicolaievich"... which it had also done.  This is entirely factual documented evidence.

No, Mr. Kendrick.  You have not "only told" us that a telegram was sent and that it was addressed to Alexei Nicolaievich.

In a post on November 2, you wrote:

The text of a single sentence thank you telegram that says his message "has given us great pleasure" isn't going to tell you a great deal.  Again, it is the Russian name and Imperial Title that was used by the Palace to address the intended recipient that is the ONLY issue here.

Then today you wrote:

"The fact that a telegram sent by the Palace is actually addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich"... 55 years after his disappearance... is the key issue that the Palace still needs to explain -- not what the telegram says."

You are not just presenting evidence here.  You are telling us what part of that evidence is probative and what part of it is not.  You are telling us what needs explaining and what does not.  You are trying to impose your judgment of the evidence on the reader.

And your pretense that you are an unbiased observer and neutral reporter of Tammet's claim is so patently ridiculous as to be insulting.

[lexi4]

Isn't is possible that Alexei's doctors made the best diagnosis for their time and knowledge? Today, we know a lot more about blood disorders than they did then. We have more sophisticated testing etc. Our doctors are more specialized. Knowledge of medicine has increased greatly over the last 100 years. For example, today we know that there are differences between bleeding disorders and clotting disorders.
The tests we use to diagnosis bleeding/clotting disorders are much more sophisticated and advanced than they were during the Romanov era.

[Tsarfan]

Don't forget that at least nine other male descendants of Queen Victoria were also diagnosed with hemophilia.  The last to die was Prince Waldemar of Prussia in 1945.  Is the suggestion being made that all of these people were misdiagnosed as late as 1945 . . . or that there were two different rare blood disorders running through Victoria's progeny?

But what is the point of trying to prove that Alexei had some blood-clotting deficiency other than hemophilia?  Whatever he had, slight injuries generated life-threatening episodes of bleeding, even with the best of medical care.  He was unable to make the trip from Tobolsk to Ekaterinburg with his parents three months before the massacre, because a bump while riding a sled down a stairwell had left him bedridden.  When he was finally moved to Ekaterinburg, he was reported as being largely bed-ridden.  Those who were able to take reports of his condition out of the house said he was extremely thin, listless, disinterested in his surroundings.  Some thought he gave the appearance of having already largely departed this life.  Eyewitnesses said he had to be carried to the cellar of the Ipatiev house on the night of the massacre.

Such was the condition of the boy who was said to have survived a hail of gunfire, bludgeoning, and bayonet thrusts in that cellar.  To have escaped.  To have survived into old age.  And never to have had symptoms of uncontrolled bleeding the rest of his life.  (If Tammet had, in fact, exhibited signs of such bleeding, you can be sure this would have been hyped to the rafters as further "proof" he was Alexei.)

[AGRBear]

Some time ago,  there was a good discussion about Alexis diagnosis of hempohila by the doctors. 

If I recall there was a host of blood dieases which are similar to hemophila which had been discovered since 1918.

Just because members of the family had hemophila does not mean Alexis had hemophila.

Since I can't find the thread,  perhaps someone can remember the list given.

Also noted was the original doctor diagnosis of Alexis which couldn't be found since done of the actual records of Alexis medical history was or has been found.  Now, this may have changed and something has been found since that discussion,  I don't know.  If someone knows that it has, let us know and where it can be found or a copy of it brought here for all of us to see along with translation.  There may have been a letter from one doctor to another or some newspaper article mentioned about Alexis'  condition.

As for any claimants having hemophilia,  I think there was one  but I don't recall his name at the moment.  I probably have it mention in the claimant section.  It wasn't  the fellow  Tammet  being mention here. Although Temmet claimed to have had some kind of blood disorder.

Remember,  I'm not around any books so this is all off the top of my very tired head.

AGRBear

[Elisabeth]

Aaaargh, what difference does it make if the blood disorder was hemophilia or something slightly different but closely related to hemophilia? The fact is that all the male descendants of Victoria who suffered from this ailment died at an unusually young age, of injuries closely related to their blood disorder. And Alexei, according to every contemporary eyewitness (including his own parents, in their diary accounts) was extremely frail due to this disorder during his last months on this earth - to the point that it was considered nothing short of a miracle when he could stand on his own two feet for a few seconds. (But his father had to carry him to the murder chamber nonetheless.)

All this hemming and hawing about what specific blood disorder Alexei suffered from is beside the point. Whatever it was - and his entire symptomology points to hemophilia - it was extremely debilitating and potentially fatal. No one who saw Alexei during his last months thought he had much time left to live. He's described as tall, paper-thin to the point of translucency, fragile, exhausted, depressed, for the most part uninterested in his surroundings... In short, someone who had already faced death at close quarters and was likely to face it again in the very near future. Even without the bullets of the Bolsheviks, he hadn't much time left to live.

[Tania]

Lexi4,

I have to agree with you on this point, as well that it did not necessarily mean he had this major disease.
I think there needs to be found actual records of his medical history. I dont think that all records have been destroyed.
The Kremlin holds many secrets, and I am sure that this record lives somewhere. Now, whether it is wished to be brought
to light is another thing entirely, but I'm sure it exists. But perhaps next best solution is finding a list of blood diseases which
are similar to hemophilia that can be gone over.

Tatiana+

[J_Kendrick]

I have only told you that Buckingham Palace had sent Tammet a thank you telegram.. which it did... and that the Palace had addressed that same telegram with the name and title of "Alexei Nicolaievich"... which it had also done.  This is entirely factual documented evidence.

No, Mr. Kendrick.  You have not "only told" us that a telegram was sent and that it was addressed to Alexei Nicolaievich.

In a post on November 2, you wrote:

The text of a single sentence thank you telegram that says his message "has given us great pleasure" isn't going to tell you a great deal.  Again, it is the Russian name and Imperial Title that was used by the Palace to address the intended recipient that is the ONLY issue here.

Then today you wrote:

"The fact that a telegram sent by the Palace is actually addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich"... 55 years after his disappearance... is the key issue that the Palace still needs to explain -- not what the telegram says."

You are not just presenting evidence here.  You are telling us what part of that evidence is probative and what part of it is not.  You are telling us what needs explaining and what does not.  You are trying to impose your judgment of the evidence on the reader.

And your pretense that you are an unbiased observer and neutral reporter of Tammet's claim is so patently ridiculous as to be insulting.

Learn a little something about what does and does not make something newsworthy.

The content of the telegram in question does not make it newsworthy.  The Palace does not need to explain anything about the wording of the telegram.

The Palace does have to explain why their telegram was addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich" -- 55 years after his disappearance in Ekaterinburg.  That is what makes the telegram newsworthy.  Not its content.

Your argument is nothing more than a weak attempt to avoid this fact.

[grandduchessella]

Some time ago,  there was a good discussion about Alexis diagnosis of hempohila by the doctors. 

If I recall there was a host of blood dieases which are similar to hemophila which had been discovered since 1918.

Just because members of the family had hemophila does not mean Alexis had hemophila.

Since I can't find the thread,  perhaps someone can remember the list given.

Alexei and Hemophilia
http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php/topic,1196.0.html

[Elisabeth]

Learn a little something about what does and does not make something newsworthy.

The content of the telegram in question does not make it newsworthy.  The Palace does not need to explain anything about the wording of the telegram.

The Palace does have to explain why their telegram was addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich" -- 55 years after his disappearance in Ekaterinburg.  That is what makes the telegram newsworthy.  Not its content.

Your argument is nothing more than a weak attempt to avoid this fact.

And might I presume to suggest, Mr. Kendrick, that your argument is a weak attempt to avoid the fact that "Alexei Nikolaevich" has always been a very common name in Russia. It's the equivalent in English of addressing someone as James, the son of Michael (I'm choosing these names because "James" and "Michael" are as common in English usage as "Alexei" and "Nikolai" are in Russian usage). In other words, there would be thousands, no doubt even tens of thousands of Russian men answering to this same name and patronymic. In other words, I would suggest that the Palace was simply being extraordinarily polite in assuming that this particular Alexei Nikolaevich was one of thousands tendering his best wishes to the Windsor dynasty. And no more than that.

[J_Kendrick]

As for any claimants having hemophilia,  I think there was one  but I don't recall his name at the moment.  I probably have it mention in the claimant section.  It wasn't  the fellow  Tammet  being mention here. Although Temmet claimed to have had some kind of blood disorder.

Remember,  I'm not around any books so this is all off the top of my very tired head.

AGRBear

Tammet did not claim to have any kind of blood disorder. 

Tammet is, however, the only claimant actually to have been treated in hospital by a hematologist. 
Tammet is the only claimant who actually did die of a blood disorder.

[J_Kendrick]

Learn a little something about what does and does not make something newsworthy.

The content of the telegram in question does not make it newsworthy.  The Palace does not need to explain anything about the wording of the telegram.

The Palace does have to explain why their telegram was addressed to "Alexei Nicolaievich" -- 55 years after his disappearance in Ekaterinburg.  That is what makes the telegram newsworthy.  Not its content.

Your argument is nothing more than a weak attempt to avoid this fact.

And might I presume to suggest, Mr. Kendrick, that your argument is a weak attempt to avoid the fact that "Alexei Nikolaevich" has always been a very common name in Russia. It's the equivalent in English of addressing someone as James, the son of Michael (I'm choosing these names because "James" and "Michael" are as common in English usage as "Alexei" and "Nikolai" are in Russian usage). In other words, there would be thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands of Russian men answering to this same name and patronymic. In other words, I would suggest that the Palace was simply being extraordinarily polite in assuming that this particular Alexei Nikolaevich was one of thousands tendering his best wishes to the Windsor dynasty. And no more than that.

Give it up.  There is only one "Alexei Nicolaievich, Sovereign Heir, Tsarevich, Grand Duke of Russia."