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).
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.
