UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Serendipity on March 06, 2014, 06:37:45 PM
-
Interestingly, Terfenadine the 'named patient basis only'drug that neither of GM's doctors arranged for him to have was withdrawn in 1999 because "...second-generation antihistamines mizolastine and terfenadine are particularly prone to cause ventricular arrhythmias"
If Madeleine had very mild CHARGE syndrome and accidentally took some of daddies withdrawn tablets thinking they were sweeties, the effects would be fatal.
C - Coloboma of the eye, central nervous system anomalies
H - Heart defects
A - Atresia of the choanae
R - Retardation of growth and/or development
G - Genital and/or urinary defects (Hypogonadism)
E - Ear anomalies and/or deafness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHARGE_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terfenadine
"Terfenadine-containing drugs were subsequently removed from the Canadian market in 1999,[4] and are no longer available for prescription in the UK.[5]
Source for [5] Terfenadine- General Practice notebook from GPnotebook.co.uk"
------------------------------------
http://www.drugs.com/sfx/terfenadine-side-effects.html
Side effects of Terfenadine include drowsiness
----------------------------------
http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Antihistamines.htm Last Checked: 19/01/2012
"...second-generation antihistamines mizolastine and terfenadine are particularly prone to cause ventricular arrhythmias (predominantly ventricular tachycardia and torsades de pointes).[4] This is more likely to occur where a relatively high dose is being taken or where there is hepatic cytochrome P450 impairment, both of which raise the plasma concentration of the drug. Of the first-generation drugs, alimemazine, hydroxyzine and promethazine have been implicated as causing this complication. For this reason, terfenadine and astemizole have been WITHDRAWN."
Original Author: Dr Gurvinder Rull Current Version: Dr Gurvinder Rull Peer Reviewer: Prof Cathy Jackson
Last Checked: 19/01/2012
--------------------------------------
Terfenadine is not found in Mims Prescribery which is used by medical practitioners and is classed as their bible http://www.mims.co.uk/
It can be given to patients but only on a Named Patient Basis/Named Patient supply and the GP has certain liabilities as detailed further down.
http://www.gpnotebook.com/simplepage.cfm?ID=-1603600346
"Notes:
terfenadine is only available in the UK on a named-patient basis through specialist importers. There are no longer any licensed preparations containing terfenadine available in the UK (November 2005)"
-------------------------------------
"Procedures for Named Patient Supply
There are a number of regulatory processes that need to be adhered to:
• An unlicensed medicine can only be requested by a doctor, (SI 2005
No. 765 allows supplementary prescribers to prescribe unlicensed
medicines) on a named patient basis. The pharmacist must ensure
the prescribing clinician is aware that the medicine is unlicensed.
Legally, if there is another licensed preparation available, then this
should be offered and used."
Source: http://www.oncologynews.biz/pdf/oct_nov/ON_ON06_08.pdf (used for definition)
“Named patient basis prescribing is a scheme which allows a doctor to prescribe an unlicensed drug to a particular `named patient'. It is only an option for drugs whose manufacturer is prepared to release it on this basis, and has to be arranged by the doctor on an individual basis. Some companies are unwilling to release unapproved drugs in this way.
The next step is for your doctor to find out what conditions are attached to the use of the drug. The drug company may require you to have passed certain medical tests before providing the drug, in order to avoid damaging side-effects."
"The doctor must inform the patient that the drug has unproven benefits and that there are unknown risks attached to the use of the drug. This protects a doctor against liability. A GP can only be proved liable if he/she has not taken reasonable steps to treat you according to his/her experience and knowledge of the particular illness. This distributes the responsibility between you and your doctor when choosing an experimental therapy, but doesn't protect you against incompetence."
Source http://tripanswers.tripdatabase.co.uk/Answer.aspx?qid=1390
Note
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
-
I was researching the allegations surrounding Calpol when I came across this post by Serendipity which opens up a whole new perspective on the question of could Madeleine have taken non prescription drugs? What I would like to know however is why a cardiologist had these drugs and was using them routinely for hay fever when there were serious side effects detected in their usage? Drugs which by the way had to be specially imported from abroad?
Did Madeleine get her hands on these drugs, did she succumb to their effects, did her parents panic ??? Is this one myth too far for the myth busters?
-
I don't know the answer to the questions you pose Insider, but I would like to pose another question - why, if your child accidentally took your hayfever medicine thinking it was sweeties, would you concoct an elaborate plot to cover up her death and involve most of your friends in the cover-up? And why would you agree to cover-up for a friend in such a heinous lie?
-
I don't know the answer to the questions you pose Insider, but I would like to pose another question - why, if your child accidentally took your hayfever medicine thinking it was sweeties, would you concoct an elaborate plot to cover up her death and involve most of your friends in the cover-up? And why would you agree to cover-up for a friend in such a heinous lie?
Fear of the consequences would be the natural response. Everything to lose makes people do some strange things and the friends need never have known.
-
Fear of the consequences would be the natural response. Everything to lose makes people do some strange things and the friends need never have known.
I don't think the "McCanns cover-up" theory works without at least a couple of the friends' involvement. One would have to question why they would agree to it.
-
I was researching the allegations surrounding Calpol when I came across this post by Serendipity which opens up a whole new perspective on the question of could Madeleine have taken non prescription drugs? What I would like to know however is why a cardiologist had these drugs and was using them routinely for hay fever when there were serious side effects detected in their usage? Drugs which by the way had to be specially imported from abroad?
Did Madeleine get her hands on these drugs, did she succumb to their effects, did her parents panic ??? Is this one myth too far for the myth busters?
If Madeleine had taken Gerry's drugs - don't you think they would have been the first thing they got rid of - if they intended to cover up what had happened? Surely the drugs would have been taken away along with the body to this 'unfindable' place which the McCanns miraculously knew about - within walking distance of 5A - but which the biggest search in the history of Portugal couldn't find. Or ......simply flushed down the loo?
-
If Madeleine had taken Gerry's drugs - don't you think they would have been the first thing they got rid of - if they intended to cover up what had happened? Surely the drugs would have been taken away along with the body to this 'unfindable' place which the McCanns miraculously knew about - within walking distance of 5A - but which the biggest search in the history of Portugal couldn't find. Or ......simply flushed down the loo?
Of course the drugs would have been quickly disposed of if this was the case...a non starter
-
Of course the drugs would have been quickly disposed of if this was the case...a non starter
Likewise the non-independent drug testing carried out a few months later was irrelevant.
-
I was researching the allegations surrounding Calpol when I came across this post by Serendipity which opens up a whole new perspective on the question of could Madeleine have taken non prescription drugs? What I would like to know however is why a cardiologist had these drugs and was using them routinely for hay fever when there were serious side effects detected in their usage? Drugs which by the way had to be specially imported from abroad?
Did Madeleine get her hands on these drugs, did she succumb to their effects, did her parents panic ??? Is this one myth too far for the myth busters?
Welcome back Insider.
When you departed on Nov 24th, never to be seen again, I wondered if as an Insider, you were working with the Porto team of the PJ?
...... cos PT re-opened the case that day, did they not?.
Insider, have you any news for us?
-
IIRC medicines were in a clasp bag in the south bedroom either in the wardrobe or in the chest of drawers.
-
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
Both GPs said they had never prescribed any medication that could alter the parents behaviour or demeanour/that could alter the psychological state of them. In this line of questioning why would a GP have to mention prescribing a medicine for hayfever if they are being asked about medicines which could alter the parents psychological state.
-
Interestingly, Terfenadine the 'named patient basis only'drug that neither of GM's doctors arranged for him to have was withdrawn in 1999 because "...second-generation antihistamines mizolastine and terfenadine are particularly prone to cause ventricular arrhythmias"
If Madeleine had very mild CHARGE syndrome and accidentally took some of daddies withdrawn tablets thinking they were sweeties, the effects would be fatal.
C - Coloboma of the eye, central nervous system anomalies
H - Heart defects
A - Atresia of the choanae
R - Retardation of growth and/or development
G - Genital and/or urinary defects (Hypogonadism)
E - Ear anomalies and/or deafness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHARGE_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terfenadine
"Terfenadine-containing drugs were subsequently removed from the Canadian market in 1999,[4] and are no longer available for prescription in the UK.[5]
Source for [5] Terfenadine- General Practice notebook from GPnotebook.co.uk"
------------------------------------
http://www.drugs.com/sfx/terfenadine-side-effects.html
Side effects of Terfenadine include drowsiness
----------------------------------
http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Antihistamines.htm Last Checked: 19/01/2012
"...second-generation antihistamines mizolastine and terfenadine are particularly prone to cause ventricular arrhythmias (predominantly ventricular tachycardia and torsades de pointes).[4] This is more likely to occur where a relatively high dose is being taken or where there is hepatic cytochrome P450 impairment, both of which raise the plasma concentration of the drug. Of the first-generation drugs, alimemazine, hydroxyzine and promethazine have been implicated as causing this complication. For this reason, terfenadine and astemizole have been WITHDRAWN."
Original Author: Dr Gurvinder Rull Current Version: Dr Gurvinder Rull Peer Reviewer: Prof Cathy Jackson
Last Checked: 19/01/2012
--------------------------------------
Terfenadine is not found in Mims Prescribery which is used by medical practitioners and is classed as their bible http://www.mims.co.uk/
It can be given to patients but only on a Named Patient Basis/Named Patient supply and the GP has certain liabilities as detailed further down.
http://www.gpnotebook.com/simplepage.cfm?ID=-1603600346
"Notes:
terfenadine is only available in the UK on a named-patient basis through specialist importers. There are no longer any licensed preparations containing terfenadine available in the UK (November 2005)"
-------------------------------------
"Procedures for Named Patient Supply
There are a number of regulatory processes that need to be adhered to:
• An unlicensed medicine can only be requested by a doctor, (SI 2005
No. 765 allows supplementary prescribers to prescribe unlicensed
medicines) on a named patient basis. The pharmacist must ensure
the prescribing clinician is aware that the medicine is unlicensed.
Legally, if there is another licensed preparation available, then this
should be offered and used."
Source: http://www.oncologynews.biz/pdf/oct_nov/ON_ON06_08.pdf (used for definition)
“Named patient basis prescribing is a scheme which allows a doctor to prescribe an unlicensed drug to a particular `named patient'. It is only an option for drugs whose manufacturer is prepared to release it on this basis, and has to be arranged by the doctor on an individual basis. Some companies are unwilling to release unapproved drugs in this way.
The next step is for your doctor to find out what conditions are attached to the use of the drug. The drug company may require you to have passed certain medical tests before providing the drug, in order to avoid damaging side-effects."
"The doctor must inform the patient that the drug has unproven benefits and that there are unknown risks attached to the use of the drug. This protects a doctor against liability. A GP can only be proved liable if he/she has not taken reasonable steps to treat you according to his/her experience and knowledge of the particular illness. This distributes the responsibility between you and your doctor when choosing an experimental therapy, but doesn't protect you against incompetence."
Source http://tripanswers.tripdatabase.co.uk/Answer.aspx?qid=1390
Note
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
Thank you for all your sources Serendipity, but I cant find any similar statements in any totally bonafide well respected drug/medical websites.
The internet is sodden with reports on the a.nti Mccann forums, but many of us feel that we cannot trust them because so many myths have come from them
We all know that we cant trust Wikipaedias because they can be easily altered by any Tom, Dick or Harry
Do you have any bona fide reports by any truly reputable agencies such as the NHS ? Please.
-
Thank you for all your sources Serendipity, but I cant find any similar statements in any totally bonafide well respected drug/medical websites.
The internet is sodden with reports on the a.nti Mccann forums, but many of us feel that we cannot trust them because so many myths have come from them
We all know that we cant trust Wikipaedias because they can be easily altered by any Tom, Dick or Harry
Do you have any bona fide reports by any truly reputable agencies such as the NHS ? Please.
Who do you think uses Mims?
-
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
Both GPs said they had never prescribed any medication that could alter the parents behaviour or demeanour/that could alter the psychological state of them. In this line of questioning why would a GP have to mention prescribing a medicine for hayfever if they are being asked about medicines which could alter the parents psychological state.
Search for Terfenadine in here, you will find that it could affect the users psychological state:
http://www.healthcentral.com/static/pp/pdf_guides/psych65.pdf
Regardless of what either of the doctors was asked, they are duty bound to report any named patient basis medications. They didn't, so where did Gerry Mccann get them from?
-
Thank you for all your sources Serendipity, but I cant find any similar statements in any totally bonafide well respected drug/medical websites.
The internet is sodden with reports on the a.nti Mccann forums, but many of us feel that we cannot trust them because so many myths have come from them
We all know that we cant trust Wikipaedias because they can be easily altered by any Tom, Dick or Harry
Do you have any bona fide reports by any truly reputable agencies such as the NHS ? Please.
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/long-QT-syndrome/Documents/Acquired-LQT-Brochure06.pdf
-
Three questions:
1. In Gerry's statement all references to medication are in bold
Why?
2. In Kate's statement references to drugs are not in bold
Why?
3 In Kate's statement there is reference to a medication taken by Gerry, omeprozle, a completely different drug, but no reference to terfenadine
Could there have been a confusion somewhere?
Before they left she took some precautions: put the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser. These were Calpol (paracetamol) and Nurofen (Ibuprofen), for fevers and pains, both for adults and children (liquid form for children). In this bag there was also a small pair of scissors. In the kitchen were cutting elements used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight. During their trips it was normal for them to take these medicines. During these holidays she never gave any medicine to her children, nor did Gerry. She now says that Gerry took medicine for acidity called Losec (omeprozole) which they also possessed.
*My emphasis
(Kate McCann)
-
Thank you for all your sources Serendipity, but I cant find any similar statements in any totally bonafide well respected drug/medical websites.
The internet is sodden with reports on the a.nti Mccann forums, but many of us feel that we cannot trust them because so many myths have come from them
We all know that we cant trust Wikipaedias because they can be easily altered by any Tom, Dick or Harry
Do you have any bona fide reports by any truly reputable agencies such as the NHS ? Please.
From articles from the British journal of Medical Practitioners 2004
Br J Gen Pract. Jun 1, 2004; 54(503): 412–414.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1266197/
"Recent examples of serious problems with treatments should not be forgotten; terfenadine and astemizole were withdrawn because of concerns regarding cardiac arrhythmia, in particular torsade de pointes, which is potentially fatal"
-
From articles from the British journal of Medical Practitioners 2004
Br J Gen Pract. Jun 1, 2004; 54(503): 412–414.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1266197/
"Recent examples of serious problems with treatments should not be forgotten; terfenadine and astemizole were withdrawn because of concerns regarding cardiac arrhythmia, in particular torsade de pointes, which is potentially fatal"
so that we can be sure...where is the information that Gerry had this drug
-
Three questions:
1. In Gerry's statement all references to medication are in bold
Why?
2. In Kate's statement references to drugs are not in bold
Why?
3 In Kate's statement there is reference to a medication taken by Gerry, omeprozle, a completely different drug, but no reference to terfenadine
Could there have been a confusion somewhere?
Before they left she took some precautions: put the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser. These were Calpol (paracetamol) and Nurofen (Ibuprofen), for fevers and pains, both for adults and children (liquid form for children). In this bag there was also a small pair of scissors. In the kitchen were cutting elements used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight. During their trips it was normal for them to take these medicines. During these holidays she never gave any medicine to her children, nor did Gerry. She now says that Gerry took medicine for acidity called Losec (omeprozole) which they also possessed.
*My emphasis
(Kate McCann)
What confusion could there have been? Terfenadine is clearly mentioned in the arguido statement here http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2572.jpg. If it had been me and I spotted something erroneous in the statement I was about to sign, I certainly would not have signed it. Gerry signed it all off of, yes?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2576.jpg
-
so that we can be sure...where is the information that Gerry had this drug
In his arguido statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
which he signed here http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2576.jpg
-
so that we can be sure...where is the information that Gerry had this drug
The reference to terfenadine is in Gerry's arguido statement:
When questioned, he states that none of his children takes any kind of medication regularly in England.
--- When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losec for gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever. He did not give any of these medicines or any others to the children while on holiday in Portugal.
But how trustworthy are the statements we read on line?
-
Search for Terfenadine in here, you will find that it could affect the users psychological state:
http://www.healthcentral.com/static/pp/pdf_guides/psych65.pdf
Regardless of what either of the doctors was asked, they are duty bound to report any named patient basis medications. They didn't, so where did Gerry Mccann get them from?
Well I have gone thru that and I can find no mention of Terfenadine
There are some fairly similar sounding medicines but I can find no mention at all of Terfenadine as having problems. The names of drugs are very long and complex ...
... and I wonder if you have misread?
Neither can I find any reference to Colobomas.
Please correct me if I have missed the words.
-
Its in GM arguido statement.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm)
Is it possible the GP's did not disclose the drug because it was prescribed once, 2,3,4 or so years previously? The arguido statement says occasionally suffers from.
If a doctor has prescribed something on a named patient basis he is duty bound to disclose it as well as it being in his own best interests to as he is liable for anything that goes wrong.
-
What confusion could there have been? Terfenadine is clearly mentioned in the arguido statement here http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2572.jpg. If it had been me and I spotted something erroneous in the statement I was about to sign, I certainly would not have signed it. Gerry signed it all off of, yes?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2576.jpg
"Confusion" introduced by fraudster Levy?
-
Well I have gone thru that and I can find no mention of Terfenadine
There are some fairly similar sounding medicines but I can find no mention at all of Terfenadine as having problems. The names of drugs are very long and complex ...
... and I wonder if you have misread?
Neither can I find any reference to Colobomas.
Please correct me if I have missed the words.
If you open the pdf and then hit F3 on your keyboard and type in terfenadine in the search box and hit return, you will find it.
The reference to colobomas is not directly related to terfenadine but to which conditions have a a coloboma as part of the symptoms.
Taking terfenadine could kill anyone taking it by causing heart arrhythmia but if Madeleine did have CHARGE syndrome of which heart problems can be an issue then if she did take them accidentally then it was doubly dangerous.
-
"Confusion" introduced by fraudster Levy?
What? Oh do be serious lol. Talk about straw clutching.
-
From articles from the British journal of Medical Practitioners 2004
Br J Gen Pract. Jun 1, 2004; 54(503): 412–414.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1266197/
"Recent examples of serious problems with treatments should not be forgotten; terfenadine and astemizole were withdrawn because of concerns regarding cardiac arrhythmia, in particular torsade de pointes, which is potentially fatal"
Once agin
I have gone thru that and I can find NO mention of Terfenadine nor colobomas.
Please correct me if I have missed them
-
I just wondered how far back in time the list of drugs went? Is it 1 year, 2, a decade, a lifetime or at the GP's descretion? The timescale could help to answer the question.
As far as I know it will be for anything that has been prescribed at any time by a practitioner.
-
Once agin
I have gone thru that and I can find NO mention of Terfenadine nor colobomas.
Please correct me if I have missed them
I have answered your question a couple of posts up Sadie
-
If you open the pdf and then hit F3 on your keyboard and type in terfenadine in the search box and hit return, you will find it.
The reference to colobomas is not directly related to terfenadine but to which conditions have a a coloboma as part of the symptoms.
Taking terfenadine could kill anyone taking it by causing heart arrhythmia but if Madeleine did have CHARGE syndrome of which heart problems can be an issue then if she did take them accidentally then it was doubly dangerous.
I can find NO reference to this except on A,nti forums which I dont trust, possibly dodgy Wikis or other possibly dodgy websites ... so far
Please name bona fide websites, such as the NHS, which state what you are stating.
-
I have answered your question a couple of posts up Sadie
Not to my satisfaction. You must have the origins of what you state. Please show us that website, then we can judge if we think it bona fide or not.
-
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
Both GPs said they had never prescribed any medication that could alter the parents behaviour or demeanour/that could alter the psychological state of them. In this line of questioning why would a GP have to mention prescribing a medicine for hayfever if they are being asked about medicines which could alter the parents psychological state.
Sharp spot, Drummer.
Ally that to Kate's reference to Losec (omeprozole), a completely different drug, and ...
-
Not to my satisfaction. You must have the origins of what you state. Please show us that website, then we can judge if we think it bona fide or not.
It is 6 pages long, if you can't spell then have a look through it.
-
I can find NO reference to this except on A,nti forums which I dont trust, possibly dodgy Wikis or other possibly dodgy websites ... so far
Please name bona fide websites, such as the NHS, which state what you are stating.
No reference to what? and I have posted from bona fide websites, including the NHS. I fail to see what you are struggling with here Sadie.
In it's simplest terms, Gerry McCann had a drug with him that was only available via import on a named patient basis via a doctor. That drug was withdrawn as it was causing deaths due to heart arrhythmias. Neither of his doctors arranged for him to have it. Where did he get it from and being a cardiologist aware of the risk surely, why did he have it when there were plenty of 2nd generation antihistamines about far safe than Terfenadine.
We never got to see Madeleine's medical data as the request was refused AFAIK but what we do know is that Madeleine had a coloboma which is very often associated with heart problems, as is CHARGE. We also know she had oddly shaped ears, again another symptom of CHARGE. Kate's emphasis on Madeleine's perfect genitals has always been odd for me as again, problem in that area are a symptom of CHARGE. And then we have Gerry's comment on Crimewatch about her being 'almost' perfect' when she was born.
A child who possibly already had heart problems finds daddy's dangerous tablets that he should not have had as no-one arranged for him to have them according to his GPs, mistakes them for sweeties and a terrible accident occurs. It is not beyond the realms of possibility.
-
Sharp spot, Drummer.
Ally that to Kate's reference to Losec (omeprozole), a completely different drug, and ...
You must have missed this earlier Ferryman:
Search for Terfenadine in here, you will find that it could affect the users psychological state:
http://www.healthcentral.com/static/pp/pdf_guides/psych65.pdf
Regardless of what either of the doctors was asked, they are duty bound to report any named patient basis medications. They didn't, so where did Gerry Mccann get them from?
BTW Gerry had Losec and Terfenadine with him or did you miss the reference to it in his (signed by him) Arguido statement?
-
You must have missed this earlier Ferryman:
Search for Terfenadine in here, you will find that it could affect the users psychological state:
http://www.healthcentral.com/static/pp/pdf_guides/psych65.pdf
Regardless of what either of the doctors was asked, they are duty bound to report any named patient basis medications. They didn't, so where did Gerry Mccann get them from?
BTW Gerry had Losec and Terfenadine with him or did you miss the reference to it in his (signed by him) Arguido statement?
The dispute is not about the property of the drug.
The dispute is around evidence that Gerry ever took it or had it with him on that holiday.
At most charitable, the evidence is shaky and unconvincing ...
-
The dispute is not about the property of the drug.
The dispute is around evidence that Gerry ever took it or had it with him on that holiday.
At most charitable, the evidence is shaky and unconvincing ...
How is it shaky and unconvincing? He signed a statement which contained these facts. Are you saying that the PJ made it all up pmsl? They knew all about the cardiac issues with Terfenadine and decided to plant it in his statement? Give me a break lol
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2576.jpg
'When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losec for gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever.'
He had an interpreter from the British Consulate who would surely have alerted him to anything erroneous in the statement he was about to sign? He will have read it himself before signing and whilst not understanding the Portuguese he would have surely have recognised the words Losec and Terfenadine and if he had not said that he had them with him, he surely would have kicked up a fuss with his Attorney?
Sheesh, you really are a worried man, aren't you, to even question that he had them with him, when it is all there in black and white lol.
And don't give me any Levy crap again as that is a conspiracy too far off the scale lol. You can be certain that if there was anything in those published files that was the slightest bit iffy, they would have been whooshed by Carter Ruck a long time ago.
-
Thank you for all your sources Serendipity, but I cant find any similar statements in any totally bonafide well respected drug/medical websites.
The internet is sodden with reports on the a.nti Mccann forums, but many of us feel that we cannot trust them because so many myths have come from them
We all know that we cant trust Wikipedia because they can be easily altered by any Tom, Dick or Harry
Do you have any bona fide reports by any truly reputable agencies such as the NHS ? Please.
Sadie, this is a myth but I am prepared to overlook your comment on the basis that you are unfamiliar with the way Wikipedia works. Anything altered in error or by malice on Wikipedia is corrected soon after. Tom, Dick and Harry included!
My own experience of Wikipedia goes back many years, I have made thousands of contributions to it. Wikipedia works on the basis of pooled knowledge and almost everything has to be backed up by corroboration. I would therefore accept what is stated on Wikipedia as being correct in as much as anyone can determine anything is correct. That said however, I do accept that mistakes can happen even on Wikipedia.
So please lets not knock a valuable resource which is free to all to use.
-
How is it shaky and unconvincing? He signed a statement which contained these facts. Are you saying that the PJ made it all up pmsl? They knew all about the cardiac issues with Terfenadine and decided to plant it in his statement? Give me a break lol
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2576.jpg
'When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losec for gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever.'
He had an interpreter from the British Consulate who would surely have alerted him to anything erroneous in the statement he was about to sign? He will have read it himself before signing and whilst not understanding the Portuguese he would have surely have recognised the words Losec and Terfenadine and if he had not said that he had them with him, he surely would have kicked up a fuss with his Attorney?
Sheesh, you really are a worried man, aren't you, to even question that he had them with him, when it is all there in black and white lol.
And don't give me any Levy crap again as that is a conspiracy too far off the scale lol. You can be certain that if there was anything in those published files that was the slightest bit iffy, they would have been whooshed by Carter Ruck a long time ago.
1. Why did Gerry's gp say nothing about prescribing it?
2 Why does Kate say nothing about it at all?
3. Why is reference to drugs boldened only in Gerry's statement?
4. Why is there reference to a completely different additional drug only in Kate's statement?
-
And your point is what exactly?
That this has the paws of fraudster Levy all over it.
-
Try re-reading the thread.
-
1. Why did Gerry's gp say nothing about prescribing it?
Maybe because neither of them prescribed it for him on a named patient basis, which begs the question, where did he get it from?
Their GP at the time said that he had never attended Gerry at all.
"I had only consulted Kate McCann once and never had assisted Gerry, nor ever had reason to deal with the twins Sean and Amelie and only saw them once after the disappearance of Madeleine."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
and their previous GP suggests that he last attended any of the McCann family in 2006
"The last time I saw Kate as a patient was on March 10, 2006."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PH-HU.htm
2 Why does Kate say nothing about it at all?
You'd have to ask her. Maybe she forgot Gerry had them or maybe if Madeleine had taken them thinking they were sweeties, mentioning Terfenadine would be the last thing she would want to draw attention to?
3. Why is reference to drugs boldened only in Gerry's statement?
No idea, the words are not boldened in the original statement so whoever translated the files before loading must have done so for reason known to them that I am not privy to. I fail to see anything sinister in bolding some words.
4. Why is there reference to a completely different additional drug only in Kate's statement?
What completely different drug? Losec (omeprozole) is mentioned in both their statements as it's the same thing. In Gerry's he refers to it as Losec, whereas Kate gives it it's full clinical title of Losec (Omeprozole)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
"Before they left she took some precautions: put the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser. These were Calpol (paracetamol) and Nurofen (Ibuprofen), for fevers and pains, both for adults and children (liquid form for children). In this bag there was also a small pair of scissors. In the kitchen were cutting elements used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight. During their trips it was normal for them to take these medicines. During these holidays she never gave any medicine to her children, nor did Gerry. She now says that Gerry took medicine for acidity called Losec (omeprozole) which they also possessed."
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/digestive-health/medicines/losec.html
and Gerry's
"When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losec for gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever."
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/digestive-health/medicines/losec.html
PS this thread is about Terfenadine by the way and not Losec
-
Is a GP duty bound to report to a police investigation if a patient is taking a named basis medication or even a normally prescribed drug for hayfever. I presume the questioning was along the lines of their mental states not their runny noses.
-
Is a GP duty bound to report to a police investigation if a patient is taking a named basis medication or even a normally prescribed drug for hayfever. I presume the questioning was along the lines of their mental states not their runny noses.
Yes, they would both be duty bound to report anything they had prescribed on a named patient basis. Also, given that Terfenadine has been shown to affect a patient's mental state, if prescribed it should have been mentioned on that basis too.
-
Yes, they would both be duty bound to report anything they had prescribed on a named patient basis. Also, given that Terfenadine has been shown to affect a patient's mental state, if prescribed it should have been mentioned on that basis too.
Perhaps the reason it is not mentioned is that Gerry never took it?
-
Perhaps the reason it is not mentioned is that Gerry never took it?
Of course he had it with him. It's all there in black and white! Why did he mention it in his Arguido statement if it was not something he had with him and took for hay-fever? Why did he not shout from the rooftops upon noticing the word Terfenadine in his statement before signing it if he had not said anything about it? He had an interpreter from the British Consulate who will have read the statement to him as well remember. You are now getting beyond ridiculous in your efforts to make out that the official PJ files cannot be relied upon.
Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess.
-
Try re-applying logic to your argument.
My quote.
Your quote........same words but you chose to embolden them. Do they now mean anything different because you chose to embolden them? Does it now have the paws of fraudster ferryman all over it? Or is it simply the same as the original but emboldened?
8@??)(
-
Of course he had it with him. It's all there in black and white! Why did he mention it in his Arguido statement if it was not something he had with him and took for hay-fever? Why did he not shout from the rooftops upon noticing the word Terfenadine in his statement before signing it if he had not said anything about it? He had an interpreter from the British Consulate who will have read the statement to him as well remember. You are now getting beyond ridiculous in your efforts to make out that the official PJ files cannot be relied upon.
Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess.
Some bedtime reading for you:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.0
-
Try re-applying logic to your argument.
My quote.
Your quote........same words but you chose to embolden them. Do they now mean anything different because you chose to embolden them? Does it now have the paws of fraudster ferryman all over it? Or is it simply the same as the original but emboldened?
Highlighting as a tool of debate is fair enough.
Police files are supposed to be an objective record of a police investigation, available for people to read and interpret as they will.
-
I don't think Gerry had this drug.... it makes no sense...perhaps the statement was taken incorrectly.
if you google fibre dos fenos...hay fever in Portuguese.....and look at Portuguese wikipaedia terfenadina is the first drug that comes up as a treatment for hay fever...
terfenadine is the generic name so it may be that this is term used for hayfever medicines...like calling all pens biro's
-
Some bedtime reading for you:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.0
All absolute tosh. If there was anything even remotely iffy about those files Carter Ruck would have had them whooshed a very long time ago.
-
I don't think Gerry had this drug.... it makes no sense...perhaps the statement was taken incorrectly.
if you google fibre dos fenos...hay fever in Portuguese.....and look at Portuguese wikipaedia terfenadina is the first drug that comes up as a treatment for hay fever...
terfenadine is the generic name so it may be that this is term used for hayfever medicines...like calling all pens biro's
Utter twaddle lol! It's there, clear as day in his arguido statement that he had Terfenadine. He signed that statement did he not? Are you trying to tell me that he did not read it before signing it? That he did not get the interpreter from the British Consulate to read it to him before he signed it?
Strawclutching to the extreme lol
-
All absolute tosh. If there was anything even remotely iffy about those files Carter Ruck would have had them whooshed a very long time ago.
Now there's a reasoned and rational response ...
-
Now there's a reasoned and rational response ...
One based on common sense. Do you really think that if there was the remotest chance someone had messed with those files that the Mccann's would not have engaged Carter Ruck quicksmart? Pullease!
-
One based on common sense. Do you really think that if there was the remotest chance someone had messed with those files that the Mccann's would not have engaged Carter Ruck quicksmart? Pullease!
Remotest chance?
You really should read the thread:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.0
I would be astounded if the files had not been tampered with ...
-
Remotest chance?
You really should read the thread:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.0
I would be astounded if the files had not been tampered with ...
I repeat, do you really think that if there was the remotest chance someone had messed with those files that the Mccann's would not have engaged Carter Ruck quicksmart?
-
I repeat, do you really think that if there was the remotest chance someone had messed with those files that the Mccann's would not have engaged Carter Ruck quicksmart?
Doubt if the McCanns have read the files on line.
Why would they?
They have their own.
-
Doubt if the McCanns have read the files on line.
Why would they?
They have their own.
Really lol? They have people who monitor the interwebs for them (as testified by Michael Wright) and have sued various newspapers, issued takedown notices to various forums, have tried to silence individuals who have posted on said forums and twitter with cease and desist letters etc but they have never had anyone take a look at the online PJ files to ensure that they are true and correct representation of the files that they have themselves?
Your hands must be so sore now from all this strawclutching :)
-
Read it. It's you and your mates uttering shite that's you have no means of backing up.
How do you explain each original document being presented alongside the translation? Are you claiming the original has been tampered with...........just because YOU wouldn't be surprised? PMSL! @)(++(*
8((()*/
-
So let's see.
Gerry was on a (fairly major) drug Kate just clean forgot all about. And Kate is the one with the outstanding memory.
Gerry's GP never prescribed him terfenadine. Or he just forgot
The part of Gerry's arguido interview is highlighted in the main files. But Kate's isn't. And no one can offer a rational explanation why.
-
There are a number of problems with the premise on which this thread is based.
Three general problems which are at the heart of this thread and then those more directly related to terfenadine in particular.
1. We are asked to believe that the Portuguese authorities after reviewing all the evidence (including the statement made by Gerry McCann on 7th September, 2007 between 4.05pm and 22.50pm) were so incompetent that they missed what Serendipity is now proclaiming as some kind of evidence against Gerry. We should remember that the Portuguese authorities were explicit in stating that there was NO evidence of any crime on the part of either Gerry or Kate.
2. Whether some people choose to dismiss the facts about the Pamalam/McCannfiles version of the PJ files, there is no actual proof that these files are identical to those which were released by the Portuguese Ministry. No-one can provide an actual evidential chain which would permit someone to be certain that there was no opportunity to alter these files. And no-one can possibly suggest that the one person who chose to distribute these files to the public was either unbiased or honest in his general online and personal behaviour.
3. The files have been largely read by English readers only through amateur translation, most of which was done by people whose allegiance as clearly expressed in their other posting was to Amaral and who were extremely critical of the McCanns. In this instance the Gerry McCann translation has been altered and the casual reader who did not bother to check the original would be misled into believing that some kind of emphasis has been added to small sections of the document which actually exists only in the translator's mind. Coincidentally perhaps, the items emphasised both relate to aspects of the case which are at the heart of the Amaral thesis.
That said, the files are the best documentation that the public have for looking at the various aspects of the case. And as such should be used to help us understand what was taking place at the time of the disappearance of Madeleine. At all times though, it is wise to be aware that making definitive statements based on such statements is unwise as their provenance, translation and completeness are all open to challenge.
More specifically related to the terfenadine issue.
4. I don't think there is any doubt that in Gerry's statement that he said that he had Terfenadine with him. It is in paragraph 25 in both the PT and English versions.
5. The problem arises in the first line of Serendipity's opening post where she makes the following claim:
Interestingly, Terfenadine the 'named patient basis only'drug that neither of GM's doctors arranged for him to have...
But there is nothing in the post or in the supporting material which actually substantiates that claim.
She goes on to say:
Neither of G McCann's GPs mentioned that they arranged for him to have Terfenadine in their statements but as a named patient basis oly drug, they would be required to declare that they had done.
Serendipity is simply posting an unsubstantiated supposition about this matter. The statements of the two GPs make for interesting reading. This is ALL the two doctors have to say regarding Kate and Gerry and the prescription of medicines for them.
Dr. S******** says:
I am currently, and have been for 14 months, the GP of the McCann family. Before Madeleine's disappearance, I had only consulted Kate McCann once and never had assisted Gerry, nor ever had reason to deal with the twins Sean and Amelie and only saw them once after the disappearance of Madeleine.
As Kate and Gerry are general practitioners I never had any doubt about their capacity or mental abilities as individuals or as parents to their three children.
I never prescribed Kate or Gerry any medication that could alter their behaviour or demeanour.
And Dr. H***** says:
Kate's first consultation was on 20 October 2000, and Gerry on 19 December 2000, Madeleine was included since birth...
...
I never had any doubts about the state of mental health of Kate and Gerry and I never prescribed them sedatives or any medication that could alter the psychological state of Kate or Gerry.
Dr. S******** has never treated Gerry and will therefore not have provided him with any medication at all. But he is asked slightly later in the interview to clarify specifically whether he has prescribed anything which could alter either Kate or Gerry's behaviour or demeanour.
Dr. H***** has clearly seen Gerry in the past. No illnesses are specified however. But like Dr. Schofield, when pressed further on whether he had prescribed anything which could alter Kate or Gerry's psychological state he replies in the negative.
It is perfectly clear from the interviews, if they are read carefully, that there were two questions posed. Whether the doctors had treated Gerry and Kate and whether they had prescribed anything which could specifically alter their demeanour or psychological state.
There is no indication in either interview that either doctor was ever asked to list everything they had prescribed to the McCanns. There was a specific request only regarding a certain type of drug.
If these doctors were not asked to list medications, then they would NOT, as Serendipity, so blithely claims have been obliged to do so. Until she explains this serious flaw in her claim, then the post is rather pointless.
6. Serendipity states that neither of Gerry's doctors arranged for him to take Terfenadine. But there is absolutely nothing in the statements which says that. Were there a question about general medication and no mention of Terfenadine had been made then there would be a problem. But Serendipity is posing a problem that simply does not exist. The question (as we can see from the responses) posed to the doctors related only to drugs which specifically affect their wakefulness or psychological state. As Terfenadine does not do either, then there was no reason why the doctors would have felt obliged to mention it.
Here is the US MIMS reference page in full - membership is needed to see the information. (It was a shame that Serendipity rather disingenuously provided a link to the MIMS UK page where Terfenadine/Triludan is not even listed).
(http://i1296.photobucket.com/albums/ag1/gilet2013/TER2a_zpsa0283558.png)
7. A futher completely false premise in the opening post by Serendipity is that this drug would necessarily have had to have been prescribed by Gerry's General Practitioner. It would not. There is no reason, for example, why Gerry's GP may have referred him to a specialist ENT practitioner who would have been able to discuss with him the best remedy for his problem. Being a professional cardiologist, Gerry was in a better position than most to understand the potential arrythmia which was a known side effect and may after discussing it with the specialist have decided to proceed with the treatment.
So what do we have?
Serendipity asks us to be concerned. Why? Well, Gerry's doctors didn't say that he had a drug which he was perfectly legally entitled to have. And why did they not tell us that? Well, because they were apparently not asked to do so. And Serendipity tells us that it is illegal for doctors to not tell us the answers to questions that they were apparently not asked.
And Serendipity completely ignores the fact that the drug could easily have been prescribed perfectly legally by a hospital specialist anyway.
So what's left?
Well, Gerry had a perfectly legal drug with him in PDL. And he owned up to that perfectly legal drug when asked about his medication by the PJ. Oh, and that Kate who was five hours into an interview, shortly before a break for necessary food and rest, forgot to mention the Terfenadine when listing all the medications they had with them in PDL.
And on that basis, and that basis alone, it seems, we are to consider the McCanns likely to have covered up the alleged death of their child and got the whole Tapas group to cover up same alleged death. Personally, I'll trust the Police of Portugal (those not thrown off the case for their behaviour, of course) and the Police of the UK rather than someone on a forum.
-
I have been following this thread with some puzzlement.
I read Serendipity’s opening post as something designed for “shock – horror”.
I am a newbie not only to this forum and posting, but to Madeleine’s case having only started reading when the case was re-opened.
I soon discovered there are a lot of forums no reasonable person would associate themselves with.
Of course I had read of the Calpol misinformation which did the rounds but Terfenadine was new to me.
After doing some reading on it, it seems that it is indeed banned in America, but is still prescribed by the NHS.
So what is the problem with what is prescribed medicine? I see nothing sinister.
My reading informed me it has also featured on some web sites where it and the now discredited Calpol theory were highlighted.
Is there any good reason to resurrect myths which have been done to death in previous years and on other forums on what, in my opinion, must be the most even handed forum on the internet?
IMO it does us no good to turn what is a reasonable and largely respected arena into a mimic of hives of misinformation by rehashing already discredited information substituting Terfenadine for Calpol.
-
I have been following this thread with some puzzlement.
I read Serendipity’s opening post as something designed for “shock – horror”.
I am a newbie not only to this forum and posting, but to Madeleine’s case having only started reading when the case was re-opened.
I soon discovered there are a lot of forums no reasonable person would associate themselves with.
Of course I had read of the Calpol misinformation which did the rounds but Terfenadine was new to me.
After doing some reading on it, it seems that it is indeed banned in America, but is still prescribed by the NHS.
So what is the problem with what is prescribed medicine? I see nothing sinister.
My reading informed me it has also featured on some web sites where it and the now discredited Calpol theory were highlighted.
Is there any good reason to resurrect myths which have been done to death in previous years and on other forums on what, in my opinion, must be the most even handed forum on the internet?
IMO it does us no good to turn what is a reasonable and largely respected arena into a mimic of hives of misinformation by rehashing already discredited information substituting Terfenadine for Calpol.
Whether Gerry had it with him, or whether he didn't, you are quite right that there's nothing sinister.
-
Focusing on where Gerry McCann did or did not get this hay fever medication from doesn't address the more important matter of why, if your friend's child had taken an accidental overdose of it, you would agree to covering up for your friend and go along with a plot to hide her body and blame it on an abductor. It's not remotely plausible. Nor is it even remotely plausible that the McCanns could have carried out this deception on their own.
-
I have been following this thread with some puzzlement.
I read Serendipity’s opening post as something designed for “shock – horror”.
I am a newbie not only to this forum and posting, but to Madeleine’s case having only started reading when the case was re-opened.
I soon discovered there are a lot of forums no reasonable person would associate themselves with.
Of course I had read of the Calpol misinformation which did the rounds but Terfenadine was new to me.
After doing some reading on it, it seems that it is indeed banned in America, but is still prescribed by the NHS.
So what is the problem with what is prescribed medicine? I see nothing sinister.
My reading informed me it has also featured on some web sites where it and the now discredited Calpol theory were highlighted.
Is there any good reason to resurrect myths which have been done to death in previous years and on other forums on what, in my opinion, must be the most even handed forum on the internet?
IMO it does us no good to turn what is a reasonable and largely respected arena into a mimic of hives of misinformation by rehashing already discredited information substituting Terfenadine for Calpol.
The origin of the Calpol myth was when a news reporter interviewed Kate's dad and was asked if she (or Gerry) could have given them sedatives that night. His reply was that they wouldn't, at the most they might have given them Calpol, ie. infant paracetamol. This then then got blown up into Calpol Night (which wasn't even on the market at the time) and is not what he said. And somehow this turned into a factoid, repeated by a Portuguese tabloid reporting on this which then ended up in the files.
If the original team had actually listened, and checked it out, as opposed to reading third-hand news, they might have noticed.
-
IMO Regardless of what drugs the McCanns did or didn't have with them - the glaring fact remains that if Madeleine had died as a result of taking her parents drugs and they decided to cover it up - the first thing they would have done would be to dispose of those drugs. Nothing could be more simple - and once they were disposed of no-one would ever know that those drugs had ever been in 5a. They would therefore not appear in any statements and this thread would not exist.
Anyone who thinks the McCanns would be stupid enough to decide to hang on to the 'cause' of their daughter's death for the police to find when all they had to do was flush them down the loo and no-one would be any the wiser - really is clutching at straws IMO.
-
IMO Regardless of what drugs the McCanns did or didn't have with them - the glaring fact remains that if Madeleine had died as a result of taking her parents drugs and they decided to cover it up - the first thing they would have done would be to dispose of those drugs. Nothing could be more simple - and once they were disposed of no-one would ever know that those drugs had ever been in 5a. They would therefore not appear in any statements and this thread would not exist.
Anyone who thinks the McCanns would be stupid enough to decide to hang on to the 'cause' of their daughter's death for the police to find when all they had to do was flush them down the loo and no-one would be any the wiser - really is clutching at straws IMO.
Excellent point!
-
Here we go. From the files... a Portuguese tabloid article, reinterpreted from the UK press, which is not what Kate's dad said in the first place.
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2585.jpg)
Is a PT tabloid interpretation of an article in the Sun, based on a quick interview with Kate's dad (Sky?), who was / is ill with Parkinson's and no doubt stressed), evidence?
Why is this third-hand PT tabloid article circled as being anything of importance in the investigation, with no back up?
What would police normally consider unsubstantiated tabloid articles, based on translated /summarised articles in another language/country's tabloids to be?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2585.jpg
-
The origin of the Calpol myth was when a news reporter interviewed Kate's dad and was asked if she (or Gerry) could have given them sedatives that night. His reply was that they wouldn't, at the most they might have given them Calpol, ie. infant paracetamol. This then then got blown up into Calpol Night (which wasn't even on the market at the time) and is not what he said. And somehow this turned into a factoid, repeated by a Portuguese tabloid reporting on this which then ended up in the files.
If the original team had actually listened, and checked it out, as opposed to reading third-hand news, they might have noticed.
Good post, Carana, but there's a crucial point you've missed.
The canard came about as a result of careless (but not malicious) journalism.
A journalist quoted Kate's father as saying that Kate and Gerry occasionally used calpol with the children (which is , or was, true)
But in the midst of that direct quote the journalist (not Kate's father!) had added something in parenthesis: to help her (Madeleine) sleep.
That was the journalist's (not Kate's father's!) ignorance, that Tavares Almedes seized on and used in his report.
-
IMO Regardless of what drugs the McCanns did or didn't have with them - the glaring fact remains that if Madeleine had died as a result of taking her parents drugs and they decided to cover it up - the first thing they would have done would be to dispose of those drugs. Nothing could be more simple - and once they were disposed of no-one would ever know that those drugs had ever been in 5a. They would therefore not appear in any statements and this thread would not exist.
Anyone who thinks the McCanns would be stupid enough to decide to hang on to the 'cause' of their daughter's death for the police to find when all they had to do was flush them down the loo and no-one would be any the wiser - really is clutching at straws IMO.
Perhaps they forgot, along with the incriminating outfit Gerry wore to dispose of the body, which was seen by the Smiths - the trousers of which he left on the bed to be photographed by the police? They do say the McCanns are not the sharpest knives in the drawer (despite having out-foxed the law enforcement agencies in 2 countries).
-
Par for the course that those of a certain persuasion would find fascinating, informative and erudite posts too much to take ...
-
Par for the course that those of a certain persuasion would find fascinating, informative and erudite posts too much to take ...
Fascinating ? You must be easily pleased.
-
I guess I'm just easily bored 8(0(*
Being bored is one thing.
Being not remotely interested in getting at the truth of what happened to Madeleine is another ...
-
Good post, Carana, but there's a crucial point you've missed.
The canard came about as a result of careless (but not malicious) journalism.
A journalist quoted Kate's father as saying that Kate and Gerry occasionally used calpol with the children (which is , or was, true)
But in the midst of that direct quote the journalist (not Kate's father!) had added something in parenthesis: to help her (Madeleine) sleep.
That was the journalist's (not Kate's father's!) ignorance, that Tavares Almedes seized on and used in his report.
That was the reinterpretation of the context. Kate's dad simply did not say that. All he was trying to say is that they might have given an infant medication to the kids if the need had arisen and nothing more. The issue was that they wouldn't have sedated them. What he actually said was reinterpreted and made headlines.
And the initial PJ team apparently considered the issue, with assumptions added by the Sun, based on a Sky interview, and summarised in a PT tabloid as fact.
Is it normal practice for a police force to rely on tabloid articles?
-
Buzz:
Do I think Madeleine took any? (No). I would imagine that keeping the medicine away from the children would have been a natural action for the McCanns.
Thank heaven for small mercies ...
-
Unless I'm mistaken the general consensus on here seems to be that this terfenadine issue is a bit of a red herring...?
-
Thanks for bumping this excellent post which I would have otherwise missed.
Oops, Alfred R Jones.........What a gaffe.
You actually missed all that effort from Gilet the first time around?
That won`t do !
-
Unless I'm mistaken the general consensus on here seems to be that this terfenadine issue is a bit of a red herring...?
Possibly mistaken. There appears to be proof that there was a sedative in the apartment
-
Possibly mistaken. There appears to be proof that there was a sedative in the apartment
Evidence, rather than proof...
-
Oops, Alfred R Jones.........What a gaffe.
You actually missed all that effort from Gilet the first time around?
That won`t do !
Not a gaffe really,more a lack of time available to me today to read every post made on the forum in the last 20 hours since I last looked.
-
Possibly mistaken. There appears to be proof that there was a sedative in the apartment
There may also have been toilet disinfectant in the bathroom.
Did the forensics show anything significant?
-
Possibly mistaken. There appears to be proof that there was a sedative in the apartment
And?
-
Gilet:
4. I don't think there is any doubt that in Gerry's statement that he said that he had Terfenadine with him. It is in paragraph 25 in both the PT and English versions.
Would it be out of the question for Levy to have corrupted the Portuguese original?
No. I have always wondered what his real motive for releasing the files was.
It is an odd coincidence that the translator of this document sought to enbolden two sections for unknown motives,. two sections which just happen to support Amaral's thesis.
-
Possibly mistaken. There appears to be proof that there was a sedative in the apartment
Which sedative would that be?
-
Possibly Calpol ? It does 'assuage' pain according to the Oxford English Dictionary definition of the word 'sedative' !!!
and a dog has four legs but that does not make it a horse...when I see posts like yours trying to describe calpol as a sedative it explains why you have got so much wrong
-
Which sedative would that be?
Terfenerdine.
-
Terfenerdine.
Terfenadine is not a sedative.
Anyone with a basic understanding of terfenadine will understand that it is not a sedative. Indeed it was one of a series of drugs introduced to replace previous anti-histamines which did have the potential side effect of causing drowsiness and sedation. Terfenadine was one of the earlier of the second generation of anti-histamines which are specifically known as non-sedative.
A couple of references which make the above very clear.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6147905
Comparative trial of two non-sedative H1 antihistamines, terfenadine and astemizole, for hay fever.
...
Neither of these H1 antihistamine drugs was associated with sedative adverse effects.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=PaOhT_4zBL8C&pg=PA431&lpg=PA431&dq=is+terfenadine+a+sedative&source=bl&ots=94s2sG91ii&sig=rQFebN32VH7uh-nairctc8NODis&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GXNNU6aGH4iA7Qbzu4D4DQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=is%20terfenadine%20a%20sedative&f=false
http://www.gpnotebook.com/simplepage.cfm?ID=-1603600346
Terfenadine is a non-sedative antihistamine.
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=622985
This article evaluates and summarizes the results of studies investigating the central nervous system effects of second-generation antihistamines, with particular emphasis on psychomotor and cognitive effects...
Objective and subjective measures of sedation show that loratadine and terfenadine produce sedation at a rate comparable with placebo...
The absence of sedation and psychomotor or cognitive impairment in patients receiving loratadine or terfenadine justifies the cost of these agents, particularly for patients who drive, pilot aircraft, or operate machinery.
Of course, if someone was to take a serious overdose of terfenadine (or for that matter of Calpol, alcohol, Coca Cola, chocolate or a vast number of other substances) then a sedative effect might well be noticed. But this article is specifically about terfenadine and when used properly this drug is not as you claim a sedative.
-
Terfenadine wasn't banned for fun, it had serious side effects including heart attacks. The drug also had the potential to cause drowsiness in some patients.
-
Terfenadine wasn't banned for fun, it had serious side effects including heart attacks. The drug also had the potential to cause drowsiness in some patients.
It's not however the drug of choice for someone who wishes to sedate their children on a regular basis I would venture.
-
Has anybody said the children were sedated on a regular basis?
-
Until someone can come up with a credible reason why the McCanns did NOT dispose of any potentially incriminating drugs before the police arrived - then it's a non-starter IMO.
If they had been sedating Madeleine with them and had caused her death - then getting rid of them would be the first thing they would do. And what could have been more simple?
The fact that they didn't do that is the strongest 'evidence' IMO that they did not sedate their children.
-
Terfenadine wasn't banned for fun, it had serious side effects including heart attacks. The drug also had the potential to cause drowsiness in some patients.
A very good point. So we are expected to believe that Gerry McCann, an expert cardiologist would permit terfenadine to be administered as a sedative to his daughter when it is specifically prohibited from use by children and could cause her serious heart problems?
Mmmm.... I see a problem with that line of thinking.
And were it to have accidentally been ingested by Madeleine, then does anyone seriously (as Benice has pointed out) think that this cardiologist would have either openly admitted to having it in PDL or to leaving it around the apartments and villa for all to see?
Mmmmm... I see problems with that line of thinking too.
As for your comment that terfenadine (a specific non-sedative anti histamine) caused drowsiness, the only clinical trials I have seen which noted this showed that the report rate was exactly the same as with the placebo, ie one person reported that result when taking the placebo and one reported it when taking the terfenadine. There are a number of reports of other non trial material which showed that patients self-reported drowsiness to clinicians. Do you know of any clinical trials which refer to this drowsiness, please? I would be keen to see them to see what the findings were.
-
Has anybody said the children were sedated on a regular basis?
Would either a cardiologist or an anaesthetist even think of using an adult-only drug with such dangerous potential heart complications on a child even on a single occasion? Somehow I think the very idea is a perfect example of desperate straw-clutching. And another example of trying to lay blame for actions on the parents of Madeleine without any evidence and without the action even being remotely credible.
-
It's not however the drug of choice for someone who wishes to sedate their children on a regular basis I would venture.
In fact, given the reason for its original introduction "In the United States, Seldane was brought to market in 1985 as the first nonsedating antihistamine for the treatment of allergic rhinitis." it would seem to particularly inappropriate as a sedative.
Given that Madeleines parents were both qualified doctors, I am sure they could have come up with an alternative form of sedation had they been so minded. It follows that this discussion about Terfenadine is not really leading anywhere.
-
Would either a cardiologist or an anaesthetist even think of using an adult-only drug with such dangerous potential heart complications on a child even on a single occasion? Somehow I think the very idea is a perfect example of desperate straw-clutching. And another example of trying to lay blame for actions on the parents of Madeleine without any evidence and without the action even being remotely credible.
Nobody is laying any blame gilet, that is merely your own interpretation. Members are entitled to examine the evidence and come to their own conclusions about the use of a drug which has been withdrawn from general use by just about every clinical authority in the world.
-
I have doubts that Gerry had this drug with him. if you look at Portuguese wikipaedia and the treatment of hay fever this is what you get...
A medicação mais vezes utilizada nos casos leves a moderados são os anti-histamínicos orais que bloqueiam o receptor H1 da histamina, um dos principais mediadores responsável pelos sintomas. Alguns destes medicamentos são a terfenadina, astemizole, loratadina e fexofenadina.
So a drug that has been withdrawn throughout the world and is rarely used listed as the first drug to treat hayfever....then it appears in Gerry's Portuguese statement...what's the explanation
-
I have doubts that Gerry had this drug with him. if you look at Portuguese wikipaedia and the treatment of hay fever this is what you get...
A medicação mais vezes utilizada nos casos leves a moderados são os anti-histamínicos orais que bloqueiam o receptor H1 da histamina, um dos principais mediadores responsável pelos sintomas. Alguns destes medicamentos são a terfenadina, astemizole, loratadina e fexofenadina.
So a drug that has been withdrawn throughout the world and is rarely used listed as the first drug to treat hayfever....then it appears in Gerry's Portuguese statement...what's the explanation
There are several explanations as to that.
It is also known that Doctors are given samples of drugs to 'test'.
When was this drug withdrawn ?
-
There are several explanations as to that.
It is also known that Doctors are given samples of drugs to 'test'.
When was this drug withdrawn ?
perhaps you can give me one explanation as to why it appears as number one on the Portuguese list
doctors get new drugs to test not old ones
-
perhaps you can give me one explanation as to why it appears as number one on the Portuguese list
doctors get new drugs to test not old ones
How 'old' is this drug ?
and when was it withdrawn ?
-
How 'old' is this drug ?
and when was it withdrawn ?
removed from american market in 1997
-
removed from american market in 1997
and the UK ?
-
and the UK ?
I don't think its even available in the uk....a new form..fexofenadine is and is available on a normal prescription from a doctor...there is absolutely no reason to take terfenadine when fexofenadine is available without the side effects...now why is terfenadine the num 1 on portuguese wiki...something really doesn't add up
-
I don't think its even available in the uk....a new form..fexofenadine is and is available on a normal prescription from a doctor...there is absolutely no reason to take terfenadine when fexofenadine is available without the side effects...now why is terfenadine the num 1 on portuguese wiki...something really doesn't add up
I presume that would depend on the drug regulations in Portugal.
http://www.wddty.com/terfenadine.html
Apparently banned in the UK in 2007.
-
Three questions:
1. In Gerry's statement all references to medication are in bold
Why?
2. In Kate's statement references to drugs are not in bold
Why?
3 In Kate's statement there is reference to a medication taken by Gerry, omeprozle, a completely different drug, but no reference to terfenadine
Could there have been a confusion somewhere?
Before they left she took some precautions: put the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser. These were Calpol (paracetamol) and Nurofen (Ibuprofen), for fevers and pains, both for adults and children (liquid form for children). In this bag there was also a small pair of scissors. In the kitchen were cutting elements used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight. During their trips it was normal for them to take these medicines. During these holidays she never gave any medicine to her children, nor did Gerry. She now says that Gerry took medicine for acidity called Losec (omeprozole) which they also possessed.
*My emphasis
(Kate McCann)
Do you have a link to kate's statement...did kates say neurofen or ibuprofen
-
Do you have a link to kate's statement...did kates say neurofen or ibuprofen
Kate's pre-arguido statement
I think it's the 13th paragraph up from the bottom:
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
-
Imo drugs are unikely to be relevant in this case.
For those who think the opposite, perhaps the location were they were stored might be relevant?
AFAIK medicines were in a clasp bag in either (A) a drawer of the chest of drawers in south bedroom, or (B) in a wardrobe in south bedroom.
It is fairly obvious Imo they were not in north bedroom.
There is a PJ photo, which might be of a clasp bag, in a drawer of the chest of drawers in south bedroom: if that is it in the chest of drawers then Imo it is unlikely it is relevant as it seems Imo no child would in any circumstances no matter how unusual discover it in a chest of drawers.
-
I don't think Gerry had the drug with him for many reasons...and why is a drug that has been out of use for many years listed on Portuguese wiki as the number one treatment for hayfever and also comes up in Ggerry's statemnet
-
Until someone can come up with a credible reason why the McCanns did NOT dispose of any potentially incriminating drugs before the police arrived - then it's a non-starter IMO.
If they had been sedating Madeleine with them and had caused her death - then getting rid of them would be the first thing they would do. And what could have been more simple?
The fact that they didn't do that is the strongest 'evidence' IMO that they did not sedate their children.
[/b]
No, it isn`t.
If the McCanns ever did sedate their children it is unlikely that substances left around would be the method used.
That`s all..........
I`m sure they aren`t stupid.
How do we know what was disposed of?
-
[/b]
No, it isn`t.
If the McCanns ever did sedate their children it is unlikely that substances left around would be the method used.
That`s all..........
I`m sure they aren`t stupid.
How do we know what was disposed of?
but sedation is just speculation
-
but sedation is just speculation
Yes, I know...........
........but we can`t assume that simply because a substance was left in the apartment and not disposed of is "strong evidence" that sedation did not take place.
It isn`t.
-
[/b]
No, it isn`t.
If the McCanns ever did sedate their children it is unlikely that substances left around would be the method used.
That`s all..........
I`m sure they aren`t stupid.
How do we know what was disposed of?
If sedation had taken place and had caused their daughter's death the MCanns would have to be very stupid to leave ANY drugs around for the police to find - when all they had to do was flush the lot down the loo - and thereby remove the possibility of 'speculation' on the presence of drugs in 5A by the PJ.
Surely if they had sedated their children the last thing they would want is to draw attention to the fact that there were ANY drugs in the apartment. For the same reason neither would they have asked the PJ if they thought sedation was a possibility imo.
But as you say - they are not stupid and obviously did not think there was any reason to hide the fact that they had brought certain medications on holiday with them.
-
I don't think Gerry had the drug with him for many reasons...and why is a drug that has been out of use for many years listed on Portuguese wiki as the number one treatment for hayfever and also comes up in Ggerry's statemnet
You're out of order Dave. It is clearly stated in G McCann's statement to police what medications he had with him. Your attempts to muddy the waters here are noted.
-
From video footage of the "inspection" in the villa, far the most disgraceful sequences are long, lingering, shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's terminally ill father.
Says it all, really ....
-
You're out of order Dave. It is clearly stated in G McCann's statement to police what medications he had with him. Your attempts to muddy the waters here are noted.
Noted as what...could you explain to me why terfenadine is listed as the number one drug to treat hayfever on Portuguese wiki when it has been out of use for years..something doesn't add up
-
You're out of order Dave. It is clearly stated in G McCann's statement to police what medications he had with him. Your attempts to muddy the waters here are noted.
Gerry didn't dictate the statement and it is doubtful he would have even tried to read it as it is portuguese
-
Nobody is laying any blame gilet, that is merely your own interpretation. Members are entitled to examine the evidence and come to their own conclusions about the use of a drug which has been withdrawn from general use by just about every clinical authority in the world.
It seems you don't agree with this statement John...I have examined the evidence and come to my own conclusion
-
Yes, I know...........
........but we can`t assume that simply because a substance was left in the apartment and not disposed of is "strong evidence" that sedation did not take place.
It isn`t.
of course it isn't...but there is no strong evidence that any sedation took place
-
Noted as what...could you explain to me why terfenadine is listed as the number one drug to treat hayfever on Portuguese wiki when it has been out of use for years..something doesn't add up
It hasn't been out of use for years so that premise is erroneous to begin with. The drug was widely available from foreign suppliers.
-
Gerry didn't dictate the statement and it is doubtful he would have even tried to read it as it is portuguese
Only those fluent in Portuguese got to read their statements.
Those not had their statements read back to them before signing.
-
Gerry didn't dictate the statement and it is doubtful he would have even tried to read it as it is portuguese
You obviously don't know how this works. He would had ample opportunity to confirm the contents of his statement and would have had it read back to him in English before signing it.
-
It hasn't been out of use for years so that premise is erroneous to begin with. The drug is widely available from foreign suppliers.
It has been out of use for many years...withdrawn from the us market in 1997....look at my post 133...why would any doctor want to get hold of it when there are better options easily available in stock at the local pharmacy...and why is it on the Portuguese wiki site...has it become a general word in Portuguese to describe hayfever medicines...
-
You obviously don't know how this works. He would had ample opportunity to confirm the contents of his statement and would have had it read back to him in English before signing it.
We all know how it works..Gerry didn't have a clue what was in that statement apart from what was read back to him and we have now idea how accurate that was ..and neither does Gerry...very poor policing ...should have been audiotaped...sloppy as hell
-
You obviously don't know how this works. He would had ample opportunity to confirm the contents of his statement and would have had it read back to him in English before signing it.
When Gerry made this statement he was regarded as a victim of a crime...not a suspect...he would not be concerned about every detail
-
We all know how it works..Gerry didn't have a clue what was in that statement apart from what was read back to him and we have now idea how accurate that was ..and neither does Gerry...very poor policing ...should have been audiotaped...sloppy as hell
Totally untrue and very disingenuous comment.
-
Totally untrue and very disingenuous comment.
I think its absolutely true...interviews not taped...Gerry signing a statemnent written in Portuguese..of course he wasn't cautioned...or the Portuguese equivalent of..... it didn't matter...to me that means non of the statements could never be used in evidence in court...perhaps you could point out where I am wrong
-
It hasn't been out of use for years so that premise is erroneous to begin with. The drug was widely available from foreign suppliers.
Taken from wiki...
Terfenadine was an antihistamine formerly used for the treatment of allergic conditions. It was brought to market by Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) and marketed under various brand names, including Seldane in the United States, Triludan in the United Kingdom, and Teldane in Australia. According to its manufacturer, terfenadine had been used by over 100 million patients worldwide as of 1990.[1] It was superseded by fexofenadine in the 1990s due to the risk of a particular type of disruption of the electrical rhythms of the heart (specifically cardiac arrhythmia caused by QT interval prolongation).
Read the post and take particular note of the words highlighted in red...out of use for many years seems pretty accurate to me
-
Taken from wiki...
Terfenadine was an antihistamine formerly used for the treatment of allergic conditions. It was brought to market by Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) and marketed under various brand names, including Seldane in the United States, Triludan in the United Kingdom, and Teldane in Australia. According to its manufacturer, terfenadine had been used by over 100 million patients worldwide as of 1990.[1] It was superseded by fexofenadine in the 1990s due to the risk of a particular type of disruption of the electrical rhythms of the heart (specifically cardiac arrhythmia caused by QT interval prolongation).
Read the post and take particular note of the words highlighted in red...out of use for many years seems pretty accurate to me
Banned in the UK in 2007.
-
We all know how it works..Gerry didn't have a clue what was in that statement apart from what was read back to him and we have now idea how accurate that was ..and neither does Gerry...very poor policing ...should have been audiotaped...sloppy as hell
Also highly suspicious that the relevant part of Gerry's statement has been highlighted and that Kate (with ithe encyclopaedic memory of the two) makes no mention of the drug in her list of drugs they took on holiday.
-
of course it isn't...but there is no strong evidence that any sedation took place
*TUTS!*
Well, why didn`t you attach your "of course it isn`t" to Benice in the first place who opined that not getting rid of potentially incriminating drugs is "the strongest evidence" that they didn`t sedate their children?
All I did was follow up the point to disagree with it !.....
-
Terfenadine withdrawn in 1997!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/hayfever-drug-taken-off-sale-1269259.html
Made prescription only.
-
*TUTS!*
Well, why didn`t you attach your "of course it isn`t" to Benice in the first place who opined that not getting rid of potentially incriminating drugs is "the strongest evidence" that they didn`t sedate their children?
All I did was follow up the point to disagree with it !.....
I think benice said that getting rid of the terfenidine was strong evidence IT wasn't used to sedate the children
-
Terfenadine withdrawn in 1997!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/hayfever-drug-taken-off-sale-1269259.html
Made prescription only.
Are you therefore saying people can't get hold of drugs after they become prescription only ?
8-)(--)
-
Sorry, think I have the wrong thread with my last post
People have been marched off and executed by firing squad for less ...
I digress.
Terfenadine was an antihistamine formerly used for the treatment of allergic conditions. It was brought to market by Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) and marketed under various brand names, including Seldane in the United States, Triludan in the United Kingdom, and Teldane in Australia. According to its manufacturer, terfenadine had been used by over 100 million patients worldwide as of 1990.[1] It was superseded by fexofenadine in the 1990s due to the risk of a particular type of disruption of the electrical rhythms of the heart (specifically cardiac arrhythmia caused by QT interval prolongation).
Terfenadine is a prodrug, generally completely metabolized to the active form fexofenadine in the liver by the enzyme cytochrome P450 CYP3A4 isoform. Due to its near complete metabolism by the liver immediately after leaving the gut, terfenadine normally is not measurable in the plasma. Terfenadine itself, however, is cardiotoxic at higher doses, while its major active metabolite is not. Toxicity is possible after years of continued use with no previous problems as a result of an interaction with other medications such as erythromycin, or foods such as grapefruit. The addition of, or dosage change in, these CYP3A4 inhibitors makes it harder for the body to metabolize and remove terfenadine. In larger plasma concentrations, it may lead to toxic effects on the heart's rhythm (e.g. ventricular tachycardia and torsades de pointes).
History
In the United States, Seldane was brought to market in 1985 as the first nonsedating antihistamine for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.[1][2] In June 1990, evidence of serious ventricular arrhythmias among those taking Seldane prompted the FDA to issue a report on the risk factors associated with concomitant use of the drug with macrolide antibiotics and ketoconazole.[1] Two months later, the FDA required the manufacturer to send a letter to all physicians, alerting them to the problem; in July 1992, the existing precautions were elevated to a black box warning[1] and the issue attracted mass media attention in reports that people with liver disease or who took ketoconazole, an antifungal agent, or the antibiotic erythromycin, could suffer cardiac arrhythmia if they also took Seldane.[2]
In January 1997, the same month when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had earlier approved a generic version of Seldane made by IVAX Corporation of Miami, the FDA recommended terfenadine-containing drugs be removed from the market and physicians consider alternative medications for their patients.[2] Seldane (and Seldane-D, terfenadine combined with the decongestant pseudoephedrine) were removed from the U.S. market by their manufacturer in late 1997 after the FDA approval of Allegra-D (fexofenadine/pseudoephedrine).[3] Terfenadine-containing drugs were subsequently removed from the Canadian market in 1999,[4] and are no longer available for prescription in the UK.[5]
I have checked the on-line BNF, and I cannot find it listed as a drug there.
erfenadine is a non-sedative antihistamine.
Dosage in adults is 60 mg twice daily.
It has the potential to induce ventricular arrhythmias so it is essential to check the contraindications and to take a careful drug history.
Terfenadine should not be used if a patient has heart or liver problems; a patient should not take terfenadine with grapefruit juice; and the recommended dose should never be exceeded.
Terfenadine interacts with some other medications e.g. erythromycin and clarithromycin. Possible interactions with terfenadine should be checked before prescribing terfenadine.
Terfenadine is now only available on prescription.
The summary of product characteristics must be consulted before prescribing terfenadine.
Notes:
terfenadine is only available in the UK on a named-patient basis through specialist importers. There are no longer any licensed preparations containing terfenadine available in the UK (November 2005)
-
People have been marched off and executed by firing squad for less ...
I digress.
Terfenadine was an antihistamine formerly used for the treatment of allergic conditions. It was brought to market by Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) and marketed under various brand names, including Seldane in the United States, Triludan in the United Kingdom, and Teldane in Australia. According to its manufacturer, terfenadine had been used by over 100 million patients worldwide as of 1990.[1] It was superseded by fexofenadine in the 1990s due to the risk of a particular type of disruption of the electrical rhythms of the heart (specifically cardiac arrhythmia caused by QT interval prolongation).
Terfenadine is a prodrug, generally completely metabolized to the active form fexofenadine in the liver by the enzyme cytochrome P450 CYP3A4 isoform. Due to its near complete metabolism by the liver immediately after leaving the gut, terfenadine normally is not measurable in the plasma. Terfenadine itself, however, is cardiotoxic at higher doses, while its major active metabolite is not. Toxicity is possible after years of continued use with no previous problems as a result of an interaction with other medications such as erythromycin, or foods such as grapefruit. The addition of, or dosage change in, these CYP3A4 inhibitors makes it harder for the body to metabolize and remove terfenadine. In larger plasma concentrations, it may lead to toxic effects on the heart's rhythm (e.g. ventricular tachycardia and torsades de pointes).
History
In the United States, Seldane was brought to market in 1985 as the first nonsedating antihistamine for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.[1][2] In June 1990, evidence of serious ventricular arrhythmias among those taking Seldane prompted the FDA to issue a report on the risk factors associated with concomitant use of the drug with macrolide antibiotics and ketoconazole.[1] Two months later, the FDA required the manufacturer to send a letter to all physicians, alerting them to the problem; in July 1992, the existing precautions were elevated to a black box warning[1] and the issue attracted mass media attention in reports that people with liver disease or who took ketoconazole, an antifungal agent, or the antibiotic erythromycin, could suffer cardiac arrhythmia if they also took Seldane.[2]
In January 1997, the same month when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had earlier approved a generic version of Seldane made by IVAX Corporation of Miami, the FDA recommended terfenadine-containing drugs be removed from the market and physicians consider alternative medications for their patients.[2] Seldane (and Seldane-D, terfenadine combined with the decongestant pseudoephedrine) were removed from the U.S. market by their manufacturer in late 1997 after the FDA approval of Allegra-D (fexofenadine/pseudoephedrine).[3] Terfenadine-containing drugs were subsequently removed from the Canadian market in 1999,[4] and are no longer available for prescription in the UK.[5]
I have checked the on-line BNF, and I cannot find it listed as a drug there.
............and the point of this is ???
-
' terfenadine is only available in the UK on a named-patient basis through specialist importers. There are no longer any licensed preparations containing terfenadine available in the UK (November 2005)
Reference:
Committee on Safety of Medicines (21/4/1997). Terfenadine: proposed change to prescription use, letter from Professor M D Rawlins.
Current Issues in Pharmacovigilance (1997), 23, 9. '
>@@(*&)
-
Also highly suspicious that the relevant part of Gerry's statement has been highlighted and that Kate (with ithe encyclopaedic memory of the two) makes no mention of the drug in her list of drugs they took on holiday.
I agree, the translators job is to translate the documents, not to highlight supposedly interesting comments.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm#p10p2567
-
The bag with clasp which contained the medicines is JIMO likely to be one of the two multicolour fabric bags in the top drawer of the chest of drawers in the south bedroom as seen in police photographs 4th May. If so it seems unlikely IMO a child would have accessed them.
-
Banned in the UK in 2007.
Terfenadine was not banned in the UK in 2007. That is simply not true.
It isn't even banned today.
Its use is restricted but there is no ban and never has been a ban.
-
The bag with clasp in the adult bedroom which contained the medicines (source: book by KM), might possibly IMO be one of the two multicolour bags in the top drawer, as photographed by PJ early on 4th May, see lower photo at
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/foto17.jpg)
(BTW those are not blue pills on top of the chest of drawers those are corn plasters)
-
You do work hard Pegasus. I hope everyone appreciates you.
I keep wondering if you were Harmony on the 3A's. she was wonderful. In fact there were three really good sleuths that I noticed (I only came in occasionally to pinch ideas @)(++(* and see what the "enemy" was thinking 8(0(* ). Another was called Albym IIRC . Think he was good on boats. Cant remember the other name i noticed.
-
That evening the bag containing medicines was in the adult bedroom, either in that chest of drawers or in the built-in wardrobe (source KM book)
If it was in the chest of drawers, it's fairly obvious IMO it would be in the top drawer, same place as passports (in the photo the passports have been taken out of top drawer already IMO to show police and IMO thats why the top drawer is open). My guess is it's probably the multicolour bag on left in top drawer in "FOTO 18".
Alternatively if it was in the built-in wardrobe, again fairly obvious IMO it would be on a high shelf not a low shelf.
-
Terfenadine was not banned in the UK in 2007. That is simply not true.
It isn't even banned today.
Its use is restricted but there is no ban and never has been a ban.
Perhaps you should read other posts first.
'terfenadine is only available in the UK on a named-patient basis through specialist importers. There are no longer any licensed preparations containing terfenadine available in the UK (November 2005)'
Are you also implying therefore the mccanns had access to this drug ?
-
Terfenadine was not banned in the UK in 2007. That is simply not true.
It isn't even banned today.
Its use is restricted but there is no ban and never has been a ban.
It might be better to state that Terfenadine is a prescription only drug available on a named patients basis in the UK. The drug is no longer used in any other pharmaceutical preparations available in the UK and has to be imported from abroad.
What was then the UK Ministry of Heath made the decision followed evidence that Terfenadine, when used with some other drugs, could cause serious heart rhythm disorders which were linked to 15 deaths since the product was launched in 1982.
-
Sorry to question your hard work Pegasus but your opinion is based on the assumption that any tablets consumed would have to be taken from the clasp bag by Madeleine. An alternative theory, if one were to point fingers at the McCanns could just as easily involve tablets being left out or the bag being left open before the bag was placed in the chest of drawers.
It's not a theory that I subscribe to but it's possible.
Yes I see your valid point, however I still think it interesting to establish where in the north bedroom the medicine bag was safely stored that night, whether it was in the chest of drawers, or in the wardrobe.
Mr Amaral, in his book or an interview I forget which, stated that no medicines were found by PJ in apartment 5A. This is probably simply IMO because PJ did not look inside those small bags in top drawer?
(BTW I think the "found medicines" scenario is unlikely to be the cause in this case IMO).
-
This is an interesting thread.
Was the drug Terfenadine being used /stored in the apartment? As a CARDIOLOGIST, Gerry McCann would be well aware of the side effects, especially on the heart, as he would have received information as a high priority, from clinical reviews which take place regularly. He would have to advise his patients GP not to prescribe this if an allergy was diagnosed whilst being treated for a heart condition.
This drug is not in BNF.
If it is a 'named patient only', there is an understanding that the Prescribing GP has discussed the serious side effects to the patient. In some countries, you need to disclose certain prescribed drugs by carrying a GP letter- 'notery'.
I wonder why he didn't use a more user friendly antihistamine. Weird!
-
This is an interesting thread.
Was the drug Terfenadine being used /stored in the apartment? As a CARDIOLOGIST, Gerry McCann would be well aware of the side effects, especially on the heart, as he would have received information as a high priority, from clinical reviews which take place regularly. He would have to advise his patients GP not to prescribe this if an allergy was diagnosed whilst being treated for a heart condition.
This drug is not in BNF.
If it is a 'named patient only', there is an understanding that the Prescribing GP has discussed the serious side effects to the patient. In some countries, you need to disclose certain prescribed drugs by carrying a GP letter- 'notery'.
I wonder why he didn't use a more user friendly antihistamine. Weird!
Perhaps it was a free sample.
-
There are very strict rules and regulations with regards to pharma and doctors liaisons. That would be a serious breach and could lead to a disciplinary. Maybe the GMC should be notified if this was the case.
Gerry, more than anyone as a Cardiologist, would be aware of the dangers of the side affects.
-
This is an interesting thread.
Was the drug Terfenadine being used /stored in the apartment? As a CARDIOLOGIST, Gerry McCann would be well aware of the side effects, especially on the heart, as he would have received information as a high priority, from clinical reviews which take place regularly. He would have to advise his patients GP not to prescribe this if an allergy was diagnosed whilst being treated for a heart condition.
This drug is not in BNF.
If it is a 'named patient only', there is an understanding that the Prescribing GP has discussed the serious side effects to the patient. In some countries, you need to disclose certain prescribed drugs by carrying a GP letter- 'notery'.
I wonder why he didn't use a more user friendly antihistamine. Weird!
What is even more weird IMO - is why the McCanns wouldn't flush them (the evidence) down the loo before the police arrived if Madeleine had overdosed on them and they were going to cover up her death? Why would they hang on to the evidence for the police to find when it was so easy to get rid of it. That makes no sense.
-
Even more weird is why so many people would go along with the cover-up of the death of a child allegedly caused by an an accidental overdose of an antihistamine. And why two governments, Scotland Yard, the UK media, Clarence Mitchell etc would also go along with the cover-up. Hmm....most mysterious....
-
Yes, they would both be duty bound to report anything they had prescribed on a named patient basis. Also, given that Terfenadine has been shown to affect a patient's mental state, if prescribed it should have been mentioned on that basis too.
Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this but isn't Terfenadine an active ingredient in over the counter allergy remedies such as allereze? I believe it is. That means it doesn't require a prescription
-
I don't think Gerry had this drug.... it makes no sense...perhaps the statement was taken incorrectly.
if you google fibre dos fenos...hay fever in Portuguese.....and look at Portuguese wikipaedia terfenadina is the first drug that comes up as a treatment for hay fever...
terfenadine is the generic name so it may be that this is term used for hayfever medicines...like calling all pens biro's
That was my point....its an active ingredient in over the counter remedies. So in fact it would be correct to state Terfenadina but its not the brand name nor the only ingredient
-
That was my point....its an active ingredient in over the counter remedies. So in fact it would be correct to state Terfenadina but its not the brand name nor the only ingredient
In 2007 terfenadine was not an ingredient of any over-the-counter medicines in the UK or Portugal IMO
-
You obviously don't know how this works. He would had ample opportunity to confirm the contents of his statement and would have had it read back to him in English before signing it.
I thought there was an error in Cat Bakers statement that she had to correct in the rogatory interviews in Leicester. There will always been a chance of error when you have translators. Some of which were the likes of Murat....not exactly professional translators imo
-
Clarence Mitchel would go along with a cold to catch a flu.