The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > British Royal History

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 06-12-2014, 08:11 PM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 1,407
There also would have been no Princess Patricia and in turn, no Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. Also the Province of Alberta and Lake Louise would have different names today.

Amazing all the "What if...!?!" That come up, huh?
__________________

__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 06-13-2014, 12:13 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
You know what I think, from previous posts. Many on this royal line had porphyria. Charlotte's death may have been brought about by the doctor treating her wrong for a porphyria patient. The strict diet contributed. Then the alcohol during her long delivery. I forget what drugs she had during delivery, if any, which were very likely to have triggered porphyria too. But the doctor's ignorance on this subject really was not his sole fault. The whole medical profession was grossly ignorant of what triggers porphyria attacks, what makes a porphyria patient sicker in a situation like pregnancy and delivery. With proper modern knowledge (which admittedly is hard to find, but perhaps not hard for the royals to find it they need it) Charlotte almost certainly could have had a successful pregnancy and delivery. It was possibly ignorance that killed her, but the ignorance was not unique to her physician.
50% of children of porphyria patients have porphyria. 75% of children whose parents BOTH have porphyria have the tendency. It sometimes does not show itself if it is not triggered. Diet, drugs, and alcohol are all important triggers.
Charlotte's apparent good health before pregnancy is quite common among people who have porphyria, if they have not been triggered into active illness. Charlotte's austere diet was probably the first big trigger.
That's what I think and I know not everyone will agree.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 06-13-2014, 12:54 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,055
I thought that the labor was to blame, which was allowed to go on for a shockingly long time without intervention, which could have brought about septicemia?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 06-13-2014, 01:57 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Yes, Casualfan, the reported too long delivery could have contributed to her demise. All factors contributed. As an example of co-morbidity, bad infections also trigger porphyria attacks.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 06-13-2014, 04:39 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
You know what I think, from previous posts. Many on this royal line had porphyria. Charlotte's death may have been brought about by the doctor treating her wrong for a porphyria patient. The strict diet contributed. Then the alcohol during her long delivery. I forget what drugs she had during delivery, if any, which were very likely to have triggered porphyria too. But the doctor's ignorance on this subject really was not his sole fault. The whole medical profession was grossly ignorant of what triggers porphyria attacks, what makes a porphyria patient sicker in a situation like pregnancy and delivery. With proper modern knowledge (which admittedly is hard to find, but perhaps not hard for the royals to find it they need it) Charlotte almost certainly could have had a successful pregnancy and delivery. It was possibly ignorance that killed her, but the ignorance was not unique to her physician.
50% of children of porphyria patients have porphyria. 75% of children whose parents BOTH have porphyria have the tendency. It sometimes does not show itself if it is not triggered. Diet, drugs, and alcohol are all important triggers.
Charlotte's apparent good health before pregnancy is quite common among people who have porphyria, if they have not been triggered into active illness. Charlotte's austere diet was probably the first big trigger.
That's what I think and I know not everyone will agree.
You're making a few huge errors here.

First of all, your statistics are being misrepresented. If a trait is determined by one gene (G being the dominant and g being the recessive) and a person has parents who are Gg (having it) and gg (not having it) then they have a 50% change of displaying the trait; however if the parents are GG and gg then there is a 100% chance of the child having the trait. Similarly, if both parents are Gg then there is a 75% chance of a child having it, but if one is GG and the other Gg (or both are GG) there is a 100% chance of the child displaying it. However, these statistics are for each individual child; if a Gg and gg couple have 4 children, probability says that 2 of their children will be Gg and 2 will be gg, (if the couple is Gg and Gg then 1 child will be GG, 2 Gg, and 1 gg), but it is entirely possible for other outcomes to happen. While the probability may say one thing, the actual outcome may be entirely different. The genes aren't going "oh, well, the last 2 kids didn't display the trait, so this one needs to." The slate is wiped clean each time.

Therefore, assuming that George III had porphyria and was Gg for it, then each of his children had a 50% chance of getting it. That does not mean that 50% of his children had it, just that they had the chance of having it. Hemophilia is similar, and we can see how that works in Queen Victoria's sons - as Victoria was a carrier and the trait is passed on using the X chromosome it means that each of her sons had a 50% chance of getting the disease - so, according to probability, of her 4 sons, 2 of them should have had hemophilia. Except, only one of her sons had it. Probability isn't always what happens.

Secondly, and this is the biggie to me, it's not actually 100% that George III himself had porphyria, let alone any of his children or grandchildren. There was a hypothesis postulated in 1966 that George III's madness was caused by porphyria. The idea has gained a lot of popularity causing people to beleive that he did in fact have porphyria, but it's still just one theory about the cause of his madness, and not one that's always accepted as valid by historians and psychiatrists. Recently it's been argued that the claim is based on a very selective reading of the sources - as if the people who put the claim forward only looked at evidence that would support their claim.

Now, regardless of whether or not her grandfather did in fact have porphyria it's entirely possible that Charlotte had it... although there doesn't seem to be much evidence of it. Further, the account of her labour is enough to suggest that it really was just the labour that killed her - she went into labour on the 3rd, and didn't deliver until the 5th. Even a less problematic labour would have had a chance of killing her in those days. If memory serves, she hemorrhaged after the birth and they couldn't get the bleeding to stop - which is to this day still a serious threat to women when they give birth and can often require blood transfusions (which they wouldn't have had at the time). Saying that Charlotte died of anything other than complications due to labour is a stretch.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 06-13-2014, 07:32 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,730
Back in 1817 women died in childbirth - strong, healthy women.

I agree that Charlotte suffered a post-partum hemorrhage, something which is treated very easily today. The baby was too large for her, and the poor thing bled out. Not a pleasant end.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 06-13-2014, 10:50 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
Yes, Casualfan, the reported too long delivery could have contributed to her demise. All factors contributed. As an example of co-morbidity, bad infections also trigger porphyria attacks.

Very interesting! Thanks for educating us!! 💐💐
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 06-14-2014, 09:56 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 1,553
Before her marriage to Prince Leopold, Parliament voted that Princess Charlotte was to have 10,000 pounds a year pin money to cover the cost of her clothes and the payment of her ladies and her personal maids.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 07-08-2014, 09:04 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 1,553
In Charlotte & Leopold, James Chambers wrote:

Charlotte went to a musical evening at Windsor Castle. When the music was over, one of her aunts, Princess Mary, took her aside and expressed concern for her future.
'I see no chance for you of comfort,' said Princess Mary, 'and certainly not at present as things are, without your marrying.'
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07-08-2014, 11:34 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla View Post
Before her marriage to Prince Leopold, Parliament voted that Princess Charlotte was to have 10,000 pounds a year pin money to cover the cost of her clothes and the payment of her ladies and her personal maids.
Not sure what that is in today's money, but as I recall, at about the same time, Mrs. Bennett was quite pleased that Elizabeth was marrying a man with 10,000 a year, no matter how unpleasant she thought him.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 07-09-2014, 03:31 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,261
I couldn't find a conversion that would go back far enough for the pound, but I did find a convertor that put 10,000 US$ in 1820 as equal to 164,132.22 US$ in 2013.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 10-12-2014, 07:47 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 1,553
In Charlotte & Leopold, James Chambers wrote:

The Grand Duchess Catherine did not like the Prince Regent. But she liked very much his daughter, who was also present. In a letter to her brother the Tsar she described Charlotte as 'the most interesting member of the family'.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
biography, british history, george iv, line of succession, princess charlotte


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
George III (1738-1820) and Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (1744-1818) Lady Jennifer British Royal History 101 09-14-2014 06:33 AM
Marina Mowatt (1966- ) and Family [daughter of Princess Alexandra] iowabelle British Royals 86 08-04-2010 07:33 AM
Princess Marie (1876-1940), later Grand Duchess Maria Georgievna of Russia George Greek Royal History 22 07-22-2010 11:29 AM
Princess Helen of Greece, daughter of Constantine I (1896-1982) geli Greek Royal History 21 01-29-2010 11:56 PM
A daughter for princess Märtha Louise and Ari Behn tiger Princess Märtha Louise and Ari Behn and family 35 04-14-2005 05:48 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:29 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]