The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 08-13-2007, 02:56 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 14,225
About the heamophelia, I once read that Princess Sybilla of Luxembourg has a brother who suffers from it,. Is there any truth in this? Her mother is a direct descendant (female line) of Queen Ena of Spain, so she could be a carrier, as could Princess Sybilla herself.
__________________

__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 08-13-2007, 03:17 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
I thought that any female related to Queen Victoria could potentially carry the disease? So in effect, Prince Charles could have had it?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 08-13-2007, 03:32 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 14,225
One can only inherit threw the female line. Prince Charles doesnt descend through females only from Queen Victoria, Princess Sybilla does however:

Queen Victoria -- Princess Beatrice -- Queen Ena of Spain, nee Pss Battenberg -- Infanta Beatriz of Spain, Pss Torlonia -- Dona OlympiaTolornia, mrs Weiller -- Princess Sybilla of Luxembourg, nee Weiller.
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 08-13-2007, 03:39 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Of course! Queen Sofia also could be a carrier couldn't she?

Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld>Princess Feodora of Leiningen>Princess Augusta of Schleswig-Holstein>Queen Frederike>Queen Sofia
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 08-15-2007, 02:26 AM
morhange's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Springfield, United States
Posts: 570
Well, there wasn't any evidence that any of Princess Feodora's children suffered from it, I think it was solely Victoria, because their brother Carl didn't suffer from it.
__________________
His sense of responsibility is not less than yours or mine. How could we tell right from wrong as simple people in any kind of situation? How could we know that our courage, loyalty and lives were not misused for evil purposes?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 10-30-2007, 08:14 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by lashinka2002 View Post
I picked up an interesting book last week on blood types.
In one of the chapters it says that Queen Elizabeth II & Prince Charles are Type O blood types & suggests a type O bleeding disorder blood connection in regards to thier family history. Type O's have naturally thin blood, hence the bleeding suggestion of a possible hemophelia connection.
The Romanovs were type A. And the girls (OTMA) were known to have thin blood and were "bleeders" but not full blown haemophilia. I think I read that in Massie's N & A. But I distinctly remember that they had type A.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 10-31-2007, 03:30 PM
iowabelle's Avatar
Royal Highness
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymoose View Post
Porphyria seems more likely though, because many of George III's children suffered from strange illnesses through out their lives, particularly George IV. The Duke of Kent doesn't seem to have had it, in fact he was considered the healtiest of his brothers and his death was very unexpected, so it's possible he didn't have the gene and so didn't pass it on Victoria, so it died out in the British Royal family.
I have read that as recently as Prince William of Gloucester and his father, the late Duke of Gloucester, both had porphyria. (I have also read that Princess Margaret suffered from it, but I am skeptical of that information.) So porphyria may not have died out as completely as we have been led to believe.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 10-31-2007, 03:48 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,232
That may also have came through Queen Mary's genetics. She descended from George III through Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-31-2008, 03:38 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 130
Forget claimants. This is not about claimants.

This is entirely about the fact that the popular story of hemophilia in the Royal family line is clearly flawed from the very start, as was so accurately pointed out by the professors Malcolm and William Potts in their book "Queen Victoria's Gene". The Potts brothers had even gone so far as to try and explain away the most obvious of all the flaws in the haemophilia story by questioning the identity of Queen Victoria's father and claiming in their 1995 book that she may have been illegitimate.

Recent DNA research into the question of how haemophilia starts -- research that is completely unrelated to the Romanov investigation -- has now raised even more serious doubt about the story that the disease had started with Alexei's great-grandmother Victoria.

Just two weeks ago (Dec. 18th, 2008), the following article was published on the Philadelphia Inquirer website:
Beginning to crack the code of 'junk DNA' | Philadelphia Inquirer | 12/18/2008

The key part of this article is found in the following paragraphs, which very neatly explain just how a "spontaneous mutation" can happen in the Factor VIII Gene... not first in the mother ... but in the birth of the first son to carry the disease. This explanation and others like it stemming from the same research would pretty much put the crimp on any of those now popular but totally unproven claims that the suspected "spontaneous mutation" that started it all had happened first in Victoria and not in her son.

"(Prof.) Kazazian had come across three genetically unusual cases - boys with haemophilia whose Factor VIII gene was disabled by an invading piece of stray DNA. The invading DNA belonged to a specific category of the junk DNA called a transposable element. These had been observed in plants, where they had the power to act like a virus, copying themselves and jumping to new parts of the genetic code."

"Using what is called a genetic probe, he was able to find the same sequence in a line1 element in the boy's mother, but it was in a different place, on Chromosome 22. (Human chromosomes are all assigned a number except the sex chromosomes, which are labelled X and Y.) In her case, it caused no problem. Kazazian said he suspected that the line1 element jumped from her Chromosome 22 to the X chromosome either in the mother's egg cell or during an early stage in the development of the embryo that became the boy."

There is even more similar evidence from the same researchers in a paper from 1994 titled "Factor VIII gene inversions causing severe haemophilia A originate almost exclusively in male germ cells": Factor VIII gene inversions causing severe hemophilia A originate almost exclusively in male germ cells -- Rosslter et al. 3 (7): 1035 -- Human Molecular Genetics

... the key words there being... of course... "originate almost exclusively in male germ cells" which, for all intents and purposes, would practically rule out any likelihood that the "spontaneous mutation" had happened first in Victoria... or that she was ever a carrier... even if her fourth son Leopold was a sufferer of the disease.

... and if Victoria could not be a carrier... because Leopold's disease would have been caused by either a gene inversion or the phenomenon now known as "jumping DNA"... which "originate almost exclusively in *male* germ cells"... then his sisters and nieces -- including Alexandra -- could *not* have been carriers either.

Therefore, Alexei could not have been a haemophiliac.. and if they have now found Alexei, as they now claim, then they must also now follow through and test those same remains for that same genetic evidence that will now settle those still unresolved questions once and for all.

The truth about the long-suspected blood disease is now there just waiting to be found in that "New Information on Two Pits Found July 2007"... and the leading investigator from Ekaterinburg, Nikolai Nevolin, has now publicly committed the researchers to completing all of the tests that are now necessary to uncover that same truth.

Happy New Year! ;-)

JK
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 01-01-2009, 11:23 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by J Kendrick View Post

... the key words there being... of course... "originate almost exclusively in male germ cells" which, for all intents and purposes, would practically rule out any likelihood that the "spontaneous mutation" had happened first in Victoria... or that she was ever a carrier... even if her fourth son Leopold was a sufferer of the disease.
Why would it rule out that she was a carrier? If the mutation could have happened in her son, why could it not have happened in her father? As well as the Russian royal family, haemophilia seems to have afflicted the Spanish royal family, and Leopold wasn't an ancestor of that family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 01-02-2009, 02:56 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
Why would it rule out that she was a carrier? If the mutation could have happened in her son, why could it not have happened in her father? As well as the Russian royal family, haemophilia seems to have afflicted the Spanish royal family, and Leopold wasn't an ancestor of that family.
Those same questions are precisely why the hemophilia story is flawed.

Victoria's father was not a hemophiliac... and that was the whole point of the 1995 book "Queen Victoria's Gene', in which the authors had questioned Victoria's parentage and suggested that she may have been illegitimately fathered by another man who must have been a hemophiliac... as the only way to explain how Victoria could have passed on the gene (as has been popularly claimed but has still not been scientifically proved).

Recent research shows how hemophilia starts in a family by either a gene inversion or the phenomenon now known as "jumping DNA" in the first boy to have the disease... not in the mother... which in Victoria's case was her fourth of four sons. If the disease can only start in the first son to have it... which in Victoria's case is Leopold... and not in his mother... then she cannot be a carrier and cannot pass on the faulty gene to her daughters because she does not have the faulty gene. She cannot be the first to have the faulty gene if the recent research shows that the DNA flaws that initially cause the disease originate almost "exclusively in male germ cells"

For this reason, among numerous others, somewhere in Queen Victoria's line the disease must have been misdiagnosed... because the currently known facts of recent DNA research into the way that hemophilia starts do not fit well at all with the way that the story has always been told.

JK
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 01-02-2009, 05:51 AM
kell's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: toronto, Canada
Posts: 144
didnt like most of her daughters pass it on to their childern or grand childern add to that we have no account for the brit royal family from 8 generations before victoria medically speaking so who knows what they had in 1690 add to that doesnt it jump like 7 or so generations before it shows again in a family so victoria could very well have inherited it from her mother or father
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 01-02-2009, 06:12 AM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
Unfortunately in those days many children died young and would not have been diagnosed.
Queen Anne had 16 children and only one of these survived to about 9 years old, the others mainly died at birth or soon after, this happened so often in so many families that it is difficult to know if any of Victoria´s ancestors were carrying the gene or not. The same with RH negative, no one knew, all they knew that children died and often, and came to accept the fact without really wondering, at the time, what was causing this.
I read an autobiography of a person who spoke of an ancestress of his of whom he said her only claim to fame was the fact that she had had 16 children and they all survived until old age - it was something remarkable in those days.
I had never heard the theory of Queen Victoria not being the Duke of Kent´s biological daughter but that could be true as she was so different from her forbears in everything. This is all very interesting.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 01-02-2009, 10:43 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: -----------, United States
Posts: 467
I've also read that some of Queen Victoria's children did not carry the disease. It's also strange how Alice carried the disease, and her son Frederick suffered from it and Ernest didn't have hemophilia. Princess Beatrice also carried the disease too. The other sisters didn't carry the disease.

Maria herself reportedly hemorrhaged in December 1914 during an operation to remove her tonsils, Olga Alexandrovna also said that all four of the daughters were possible carriers of hemophilia.

Wasn't there a mutation in either Victoria's genes or in the sperm of her father, Edward Augustus, Duke of Kent?

Haemophilia, is a condition which is inherited from parents. Generally only males suffer from haemophilia, but both males and females can pass on the genetic defect.

The genes in our cells are arranged in long chains, called "chromosomes". Two chromosomes; in particular called "X" and "Y" determine the haemophilia condition. The "X" chromosome is indirectly responsible for the body to produce clotting factors.

Females have two "X" chromosomes whereas males have an "X" and a "Y" chromosome. This difference in genetic makeup accounts for females being carriers (and to a lesser extent, sufferers) and males being sufferers.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 01-02-2009, 11:00 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,299
There are links from previous posts that have excellent presentations of the haemophilia linkages:

The British Haemophilia Line

Haemophilia in Queen Victoria's Family:
Part 1
Part 2 - includes possible forebears and theory the gene may have passed from Karoline of Reuss-Ebersdorf, neé Erbach-Schönberg, QV's great-grandmother.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 01-02-2009, 11:20 AM
magnik's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,681
One more link
Haemophilia in Queen Victoria's Descendants
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 01-02-2009, 12:44 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by J Kendrick View Post
Those same questions are precisely why the hemophilia story is flawed.

Victoria's father was not a hemophiliac... and that was the whole point of the 1995 book "Queen Victoria's Gene', in which the authors had questioned Victoria's parentage and suggested that she may have been illegitimately fathered by another man who must have been a hemophiliac... as the only way to explain how Victoria could have passed on the gene (as has been popularly claimed but has still not been scientifically proved).

Recent research shows how hemophilia starts in a family by either a gene inversion or the phenomenon now known as "jumping DNA" in the first boy to have the disease... not in the mother... which in Victoria's case was her fourth of four sons. If the disease can only start in the first son to have it... which in Victoria's case is Leopold... and not in his mother... then she cannot be a carrier and cannot pass on the faulty gene to her daughters because she does not have the faulty gene. She cannot be the first to have the faulty gene if the recent research shows that the DNA flaws that initially cause the disease originate almost "exclusively in male germ cells"

For this reason, among numerous others, somewhere in Queen Victoria's line the disease must have been misdiagnosed... because the currently known facts of recent DNA research into the way that hemophilia starts do not fit well at all with the way that the story has always been told.

JK
So you're saying that the haemophilia in the Spanish royal family wasn't haemophilia regardless of the doctors who said it was, that the haemophilia in the Russian royal family wasn't haemophilia regardless of the doctors who said it was, and that the haemophilia in one of Princess Alice's sons wasn't haemophilia regardless of the doctors who said it was.

While I don't have a great deal of confidence in the "Queen Victoria's Gene" book (I was using it last year when I had to do some technical writing about major genetic and infectious diseases and I wasn't wildly impressed by it), I think the notion that Queen Victoria's actual father was an unknown haemophiliac is every bit as likely as the notion that haemophilia has been misdiagnosed in three royal families.

Oh, and by the way, when they say something happens almost excusively in male germ cells, the ethical way to do your highlighting is as follows:

"happens almost excusively in male germ cells" not "happens almost excusively in male germ cells."

Just sayin'...

However, if we're going to resort to argument based on trading quotes from newspaper articles, then I'll add some emphasis to a quote which you apparently thought wasn't worth emphasising.

"In her case, it caused no problem. Kazazian said he suspected that the line1 element jumped from her Chromosome 22 to the X chromosome either in the mother's egg cell or during an early stage in the development of the embryo that became the boy."

That, right there, ought to give a clue that "almost exclusively in male germ cells" (wherever you want to put your emphasis) is by no means the whole story.

First, the article which refers to it is nearly 15 years old, so if it was true that haemophilia in general only originates in men, I think it would have worked through to being common knowledge by now. However, that paper doesn't refer to haemophilia in general, it refers to the specific case of haemophilia caused by inversions in the Factor VIII gene. That's actually a different process from the one in the newspaper article, which is a migration of genetic material from one chromosome to another. Also, the paper states quite clearly that the gene inversion process accounts for only around half of all cases of this particular type of Factor VIII-related severe haemophilia; not only that, but Factor VIII isn't the only clotting factor whose defects result in haemophilia.

So what we have here is an example of inductive reasoning run wild - "this is how it is for a minority of cases so therefore this is how it must be for all cases and certainly for this case." Before falling back on the "almost exclusively" argument - or, in your case, the "almost exclusively" argument - you'd need to show that the haemophilia in Prince Leopold's family was due to this sort of inversion in the Factor VIII gene, which as far as I can tell, you haven't. And the supporting evidence for more widespread haemophilia in the Russian and Spanish royal families as well as in one of Princess Alice of Hesse's sons suggests that this particular piece of inductive reasoning is, to say the least, seriously flawed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 01-02-2009, 02:28 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plymouth, United States
Posts: 1,307
I don't know alot about the biological/scientific aspects of hemophilia but I do have first-hand experience with it. A man I used to work with had a son w hemophilia. The son got this from his mother (it was medically determined she was indeed a carrier). This condition ran throughout the mother's family and they had traced it back to a great great grandmother (somewhere in the mid 1800s) as the first documented case. In every generation since then someone had it. The son - and his siblings - were told they all could pass this along to their offspring. Indeed, a cousin of the son did pass it along to her son (born in 1992). So I do think that once it is in a family, it can pop up at any time. Thus, I believe any descendants of QV - Charles, Wm, etc. - has the potential to still carry the gene and pass it on to their children.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 01-03-2009, 02:10 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 488
I wish people would read up on how haemophilia is inherited before they make claims that Charles/William could have the haemophilia gene. If Charles had the gene he would be haemophiliac.
As for claims that QV was not her fathers daughter one only has to look at photos of her and of paintings of her Hanoverian ancestors. She is Hanoverian through and through.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 01-03-2009, 04:05 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plymouth, United States
Posts: 1,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
I wish people would read up on how haemophilia is inherited before they make claims that Charles/William could have the haemophilia gene. If Charles had the gene he would be haemophiliac.
As for claims that QV was not her fathers daughter one only has to look at photos of her and of paintings of her Hanoverian ancestors. She is Hanoverian through and through.
Sorry to so offend you fearghas with my ignorance of this disease as I clearly stated I had. I am just repeating what I was told by a family who actually has the disease.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british history, duke of kent, haemophilia, porphyria, queen victoria


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
Haemophilia In European Royalty kwanfan Royal Genealogy 134 05-23-2014 10:00 PM
Family ties through Queen Victoria SusanE Royal Genealogy 121 03-17-2012 02:48 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia 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 ottoman pieter van vollenhoven pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william winter olympics 2014


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 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]