Re: IVF Clinics 'are ripping off desperate couples'

**margaret** Tue 27 Dec - 18:49

Panda wrote:

What I was saying is that , even at 21 months, 9 months of those would have kate"s pregnancy for the twins.....actually, May 03 to Jan 05 IS 2o months.

So Kate hardly had time to get used to Madeleine before she became pregnant again.......why the rush?

I understand what you mean but the chances of success are still only 25-40% so there was no guarantee, and there does seem to be an age gap of around 2 years for most peoples children. I guess we'll have to take Kates word for it that she did want a big family, but then having twins, a hyperactive 2 year old and a less than helpful hubby was too much.....

**margaret** Tue 27 Dec - 18:54

ELI wrote:
Thanks for correcting the percentage margaret, I wonder if this is this due to regulating the risks of multiple embryo transfer or has it always been 25% ? i know the The Multiple Births Foundation was set up to reduce multiple births resulting from fertility treatment.

That's okay. IVF Clinics 'are ripping off desperate couples' - Page 2 25346

As far as l know it's always been around that % mark. There's a danger of putting too many embryos back if they all implant, that's why there are guidelines and NICE is another one who make guthidelines up. I think you can have a maximum of three embryos put back now - or at least there was talk of it, if you were over 40 and had had no previous success....

ELI Tue 27 Dec - 19:07

margaret wrote:
NoStone wrote:Would a 'chromosomal abnormality' make DNA testing more difficult??

Good question, that's one l don't know the answer to!

I think it's bound to make it more complex, the sample from Rothley - the saliva from the pillow case was found to have common / familial markers which meant it must have come from a child of the McCann's & didn't compare to all the genetic markers of the twins genetic profile.

However, there was no other genetic sample found when the analysis was being done to compare this sample to, by that I mean another biological / genetic sample belonging to Madeleine. It's not clear at all in the reports whether this saliva sample was used to compare against any samples found in the apartment or hire vehicle or whether a familial profile was used, in which case it could explain the results., bearing in mind the blood sample did not come along until later and after the analysis was done.

**AnnaEsse** Tue 27 Dec - 20:19

ELI wrote:
margaret wrote:
NoStone wrote:Would a 'chromosomal abnormality' make DNA testing more difficult??

Good question, that's one l don't know the answer to!

I think it's bound to make it more complex, the sample from Rothley - the saliva from the pillow case was found to have common / familial markers which meant it must have come from a child of the McCann's & didn't compare to all the genetic markers of the twins genetic profile.

However, there was no other genetic sample found when the analysis was being done to compare this sample to, by that I mean another biological / genetic sample belonging to Madeleine. It's not clear at all in the reports whether this saliva sample was used to compare against any samples found in the apartment or hire vehicle or whether a familial profile was used, in which case it could explain the results., bearing in mind the blood sample did not come along until later and after the analysis was done.

I thought it was a hair from the pillow case?

ELI Tue 27 Dec - 21:22

AnnaEsse wrote:
ELI wrote:
margaret wrote:
NoStone wrote:Would a 'chromosomal abnormality' make DNA testing more difficult??

Good question, that's one l don't know the answer to!

I think it's bound to make it more complex, the sample from Rothley - the saliva from the pillow case was found to have common / familial markers which meant it must have come from a child of the McCann's & didn't compare to all the genetic markers of the twins genetic profile.

However, there was no other genetic sample found when the analysis was being done to compare this sample to, by that I mean another biological / genetic sample belonging to Madeleine. It's not clear at all in the reports whether this saliva sample was used to compare against any samples found in the apartment or hire vehicle or whether a familial profile was used, in which case it could explain the results., bearing in mind the blood sample did not come along until later and after the analysis was done. , including 12 hairs taken specifically from tops belonging to her.

I thought it was a hair from the pillow case?

Hi AnnaEsse, no it was a saliva sample, there weren't any hairs at all anywhere either from PDL identified as belonging to Madeleine or Rothley that we know of except the supposed one given to Krugal, though how they could identify that one hair as being hers and no others out of over 200 hairs samples taken in PDL is another mystery., including 12 hairs taken from 3 tops specifically belonging to her.

**Panda** Tue 27 Dec - 23:52

Actually, there were hairs because they were sent to FSS and 15 of the 19 allelles were a match. Stuart Prior said these were enough to charge anyone in the U.K. Hair was also given to Krugel but I don"t remember a saliva. In fact they could find nothing else, not a toothbrush, hairbrush, article of clothing,
no evidence of Madeleine at all.

gillyspot Wed 28 Dec - 0:00

The saliva DNA of Madeleine was from the pillowcase from their Rothley home. As far as I can see there was no DNA evidence of Madeleine McCann found in PDL. Which ought to scream out to UK media - but didn't. Hmm

**Panda** Wed 28 Dec - 0:10

gillyspot wrote:The saliva DNA of Madeleine was from the pillowcase from their Rothley home. As far as I can see there was no DNA evidence of Madeleine McCann found in PDL. Which ought to scream out to UK media - but didn't. Hmm

So the hairs found were the ones in the Wheelbase? I remember reading that all Madeleiene"s clothes and sandals were washed and packed and taken
to the U,K. by a Relative. As Doctors, they should have realised the importance of isolating her DNA but yet again you have to wonder at the competence of the PJ when Forensics knew it was impossible to isolate Madeleiene"s from any in 5a. They should have used her sandals, the clothes she wore that dat,
her bedding etc.

**kitti** Wed 28 Dec - 7:53

They should off used cuddle cat......that would off had hair and saliva on it as she supposedly took it to bed .

ELI Wed 28 Dec - 12:54

Without a doubt one of the first things investigators should have done was get a biological sample in order to create a genetic profile. This is generally standard procedure in these types of cases.

I’m really suspicious about this though, because very early on a report in the media ( Daily Mirror I believe and I think I still have it ) stated that a soiled sock had been sent to the labs specifically for this purpose. Whether true or not this indicates to me that getting a sample was something that wasn’t overlooked and even the media had the idea of finding a sample in mind and saw the relevance of finding something which would provide a DNA profile.

Sponsored content