Why go on about it, at all? It is NOT a sedative.
It just plants seeds of doubt in peoples minds, doesn't it ?
Is that what you want ?
You are going on about a point or question that I did not raise.
Establishing the source of this development happens to be important in establishing some clear idea of the truth. Slarti is interested in when it hit the forums and how major a topic it was.
It is clear from Alfie's Guardian link that the sedative idea was rattling around as early as mid-Sep 2007, so no doubt by then the Internet would have been abuzz with the misinformation the article contains.
I note also from Alfie's link that a split into the for and against camp had developed, and that the split seemed deeply entrenched by that time.
I remain interested in when the issue of Calpol hit the public domain, and how it became public. It is difficult to see it preceding the sedative issue, but not impossible. One route would be the 'unresponsive twins' idea became public, followed by the McCanns saying they only ever gave Madeleine Calpol. But until the source is identified, this part is speculation. Hence some evidence would clarify the events.
