Michael & the term: "Drug Addict"

His face was to enhance his appearance . Restylyn firms your skin and fiils in fine lines wrinkles etc. Botox will firm and fill lines also. It was used in the groin and arm pits according to the records to block exessive sweating. MJ was preparing for his upcoming concerts and wanted to look his very best. the workd he had done was visibly evident - his nose was much fuller. Dr Klien says he was using several injections to repair the appearance of the nose due to the loss of cartlilage. He said this was much better than Michael having to do any plastic surgery proceedures.

Wow, didn't know MJ wanted botox injected for making his face better looking (it's not a horrible thing, though). However, his face and his nose in 2009 didn't look any different to me than in 2008 or 07...

However, sorry for going off topic, don't want to turn this tread into a "Face - appearance" thread...
 
First of all you mistated by saying Michael was going to Dr Klein's office to get Demoral. That is not why he went Michael was going to Dr Kleins office to get proceedures done that required demoral for the painful injections of
Rystyln and Botox in sensitive areas around his eyes nose and mouth neck etc etc ..


20 visit in 3 months = aprox 7 visits a month or averages 2 or 3 vists a week for proceedures. So that amount is decieving made to look exessive which is was not

The doses Dr Klien gave Michael for proceedures was within the guidlines of the AMA and he did not over dose Michael .. Now they may have been more that some or less than some other patients get. but Klien stated Michael was very sensitive to pain and needle phopic so its nothing odd or innapropriate about the amounts he recieved.

The Dr who testified about MJs drug use and possible addiction or dependency in the end admitted that based on Dr Kleins record he would probably not diagnose MJ as an addict

The media doesnt report that the Expert stated he could not diagnose MJ as an addict based on the records of meds Klein administered MJ becuase that is not sensational enough to put that in their headlines

I hope that helps

Yes, qbee - that was helpful, thank you. But the reason why Michael got Demerol is still unclear - last night JVM had a dermatologist on her show and he stated that Demerol injections are not needed - in fact, they are basically never given, when a patient receives Botox...transcript:

[THIS PART OF THE TRANSCRIPT COMES RIGHT AFTER THE ONE POSTED FURTHER BELOW IN THIS POST]
VELEZ-MITCHELL: "Very high use," according to an addiction specialist for the defense, of Demerol by Michael Jackson, administered in the office of Dr. Arnie Klein.

We just talked to the attorney for Dr. Arnie Klein, who -- you just heard him. He was defending Dr. Arnie Klein`s records. But the records speak for themselves. Michael Jackson got 900 milligrams of Demerol, which has been compared in strength to morphine, in three days.

I`m here with an esteemed panel. Dr. Daniel Taheri, you are a dermatologist based out of Los Angeles.

Dr. Arnie Klein`s office gave Michael Jackson 200 plus 100 -- 300 Demerol within an hour. OK, 300 milligrams of Demerol. We`re also going to talk to addiction specialist Howard Samuels in a second. As a dermatologist, what do you make of this administration of Demerol for Botox and Restylane, which are basically injections to the face?


DR. DANIEL TAHERI, DERMATOLOGIST: Well, my opinion is, that`s unacceptable. I mean, I`ve never encountered anything of the sort. You know, I`ve given Botox, Restylane on a daily basis to thousands of patients. As you stated, millions of people get it on a daily basis, and I don`t think I`ve ever encountered anybody who was actually receiving an injection of Demerol to require the treatment.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Never -- you`ve never had -- you`ve never given anybody Demerol for Botox or Restylane?

TAHERI: No. Not even close.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Never?

TAHERI: Never.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What would -- if you had to give somebody a Demerol injection for some kind of a plastic surgery facial procedure that`s not plastic surgery, what would the maximum dose that you consider acceptable?

TAHERI: In 15 years of practice, I`ve given Demerol twice, and both were for large-volume liposuction cases and both were 25 milligrams I.M.

So why was Michael getting Demerol injections if they were not needed/used for Botox?


I watched Waldman's testimony and the headlines that you posted are misleading. What else do you expect though with media headlines about Michael Jackson? Waldman admitted that based on Klein's records that Michael was probably not addicted to Demerol. Medical guidelines are a maximum of 600 mg in 24 hours. The highest Michael received at Klein's office was 375 mg, and he usually received less than that. Michael's visits were less often in June and his dosage was smaller. There is no evidence that Michael was receiving Demerol anywhere else. The prosecution also pointed out that there were times that Michael would go 6 or 7 days without an injection of Demerol. The defense's addiction expert admitted that an addict would start feeling ill 8 to 10 hours after their last dose, and would be in withdrawal after one day. I've never heard of an addict that could go a week without their fix and did not have whatever they were addicted to at home. You really can't rely on media reports to give you an accurate indication of what happened in court. It's best to watch the trial for yourself or if that's not possible watch the trial videos on youtube when you have time.

Both of you have stated that Waldman, in his responses, leaned towards saying that Michael was not an addict... But here he says:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALDMAN: I believe there`s evidence that he was dependent upon Demerol.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about addicted?

WALDMAN: Possibly.


(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ED CHERNOFF, CONRAD MURRAY`S LAWYER: Have you formed an opinion about whether or not by May 4, at least, or even earlier, that

Michael Jackson was dependent on Demerol?

WALDMAN: Yes.

CHERNOFF: What is that opinion?

WALDMAN: I believe there is evidence that he was dependent upon Demerol.


CHERNOFF: What about addicted?

WALDMAN: Possibly.
That he was probably addicted to opioids. Six weeks of very frequent high-dose use, I believe, would result in opioid dependence in any of us.

CHERNOFF: And you would consider this very high use?

WALDMAN: Very high.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Okay, so did he say "possibly" or "probably not"? Those are two very different things. Again, I haven't had the chance to watch all of his testimony yet, but either way, if he said BOTH of these things ("possibly" & "probably not") in response to the defense's question of whether or not Michael was an addict, wouldn't that be contradictory?

Although I dislike Dr. Drew very much, he kinda sorta actually made a little sense yesterday in his explanation (he's still a loon no matter what & his buddy Smith too) --
SMITH (on-camera): Tonight in the Michael Jackson death trial, explosive testimony from defense witness, Dr. Robert Waldman. Now, he is an addiction specialist who testified that Jackson was dependent and possibly addicted to Demerol, a pain killer so strong that it`s often compared to morphine.

Now, the defense used Jackson`s own medical records from his dermatologist, Dr. Arthur Klein`s office, to prove that he had a growing dependency. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHERNOFF: Dr. Waldman, as you see, his days progress, we go from 200 to 300. Is that significant to you as an addiction medicine specialist?

WALDMAN: Yes.

CHERNOFF: Of what significance is that to you?

WALDMAN: It implies that he`s no longer getting a therapeutic effect from the prior dosage, and this is consistent with the development of tolerance.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: Was Jackson`s possible addiction to Demerol so strong that he would do anything to get his fix, including self medicate behind Dr. Murray`s back? That`s what the defense tried to show today. And joining us right now, by the way, Dr. Klein`s attorney, Garo Ghazarian. Did I say that right?

GARO GHAZARIAN, ATTORNEY FOR DR. ARNOLD KLEIN: Ghazarian.

SMITH: Ghazarian, I`m sorry. And on the phone right now is the host of the show, board certified physician and addiction specialist, Dr. Drew. All right. Dr. Drew, thank you for being a guest on your own show.

VOICE OF DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST: Ryan, I appreciate you covering me there, but this was a story I just couldn`t resist ringing in on. I must tell you that Dr. Klein`s records of the spectacular doses of Demerol given as an outpatient are as wild as Dr. Murray having given him propofol. An addict, given an opiate on a single occasion, and especially multiple occasions, is on his way to addiction.

And in this case, clearly addicted. And by the way, they`re splitting hairs about dependency versus addiction. Dependency is what happens with addicts late in the game. So, not only is this opiate addict back on his drug of choice, he is now, in fact, as the witness suggested dependent on the drug.

And Ryan, I`ve been saying all along, this insomnia nonsense is exactly that, nonsense. Insomnia due to acute and persistent recurrent drug withdrawal. That`s why he couldn`t sleep, for sure.


SMITH: Yes. You know, Drew, I hear you, and I was stunned by all of this, because all of this comes from Botox treatments, I guess, is what they testified about today. And we`re talking about March 12th, 200 milligrams of Demerol, March 17th, another 200, April 2nd, another 200 --

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Eighteen different appearances.

PINSKY: Giving Michael Jackson Demerol for discomfort because of Botox injections is as wild as giving him propofol for insomnia. These are outlandish, outlandish things to give a patient, A, in the outpatient setting, B, on a recurrent basis, and C, for an addict. He was treated for opiate addiction which a lifelong condition that when re-exposed to opiates, reignites.

And nobody was -- everyone was asleep at the wheel. And that Dr. Murray allowed Dr. Klein to do that without calling Dr. Klein, questioning Dr. Klein, and by the way, in Dr. Murray`s interrogation with the police, he states he was aware that he was going to Klein and coming back, quote, "wasted," totally wasted were his words.

SMITH: Yes. I can`t believe he didn`t account for all that, but Garo, talk to us about your client, Dr. Klein. You heard what Dr. Drew just said. Why give all of this? Why all this Demerol? It doesn`t sound right for somebody getting Botox.

GHAZARIAN: Certainly, everyone seems to try and make it as though it doesn`t sound right. I`m not a doctor, I`m an attorney. But I have spoken to many other physicians, anesthesiologists, dermatologist, and other practitioners.

SMITH: Wait. Hold on. Let me let Drew jump in here.

PINSKY: I am a physician, and I`m an addictionologist and I treat addicts every day, and I am telling you, this is outlandish treatment of a patient with a history of addiction. I am a physician. I`m board certified in both internal medicine and addiction medicine. And this record was as astonishing to me as Dr. Murray giving the propofol to the patient.

GHAZARIAN: If I may respond, Dr. Drew.

SMITH: Go ahead.

GHAZARIAN: That is your opinion and you`re entitled to it. And let me respond as follows. If he was an addict, Michael Jackson that is, then explain to me how is it that if he is receiving 200 or 300 milligrams at particular visits in March or April, when we take a look at June, we have him getting 100 milligrams, not increasing from the 200 and 300 upwards, but rather decreasing down to 100 milligram. And also if you are an addiction --

(CROSSTALK)

GHAZARIAN: Let me finish, doctor.

PINSKY: Yes.

GHAZARIAN: No, let me finish.

PINSKY: Go ahead.

GHAZARIAN: If you are a doctor who knows about addiction, let me just ask you this. Then, how is it that half life of two and a half to four hours, this man doesn`t go to the doctor for seven days from June 9 to June 16. How is he addicted to Demerol? Where is he getting his Demerol in that seven days period of time? He`s not addicted to Demerol, I disagree.

PINSKY: Because I have an absolutely categorical explanation for that. That is, as I said, what you see is that as Dr. Klein or somebody in his office, who knows who it was, by the way, I`m not specifically saying it even is Dr. Klein, we don`t know that, but somebody in his office realized evidently they were in trouble and began tapering him down.

And what do you see in response to that is massive increase in his withdrawal symptoms. He starts having severe insomnia, feeling hot and cold, and what do you see in response to that? He gets a cross tolerant substance.

He starts getting midazolam, Ativan, propofol, all things that will suppress opiate withdrawal to one degree or another and help him with his sleep, but there was a marked increase in his withdrawal symptoms as they attempted to reduce his Demerol, very clearly. That`s all clear in the records.


GHAZARIAN: Well --

SMITH: Wait. Why wouldn`t your client see this? Why would your client keep him on this pattern? Because, look, the increase is taking place under your client`s watch.

GHAZARIAN: You know what, you guys have it all wrong.

SMITH: OK.

GHAZARIAN: Because my client didn`t have to see anything. My client is treating a patient for particular procedures. Injections to the lip, injections under the eyelids. Have you ever had a needle stuck under your eyelid? I beg to differ that you don`t need anything or you don`t need Demerol --

SMITH: But it`s not need anything, it`s 200, and Drew, maybe you can put this into perspective for us --

PINSKY: Let me put in perspective for you.

SMITH: 200, 300 mg of Demerol. What`s that like?

(CROSSTALK)

GHAZARIAN: Let me respond. Go ahead.

PINSKY: Go ahead.

SMITH: Go ahead, Drew.

GHAZARIAN: Well, you know -- well, no, because you should know and you do know that people have different pain threshold. They have a certain tolerance for pain and other people have certain tolerance for medications, regardless, of whether or not they`re addicted.

SMITH: All right. Now, let me let Drew respond. And Drew, can you put this into perspective for us, this 200, 300 mg of Demerol?

PINSKY: Two things. Let`s -- if you were going to have a really significant surgical procedure, really maximum pain control achieved at 100 milligrams of Demerol, it really is. That`s a massive, massive dose of Demerol.

An opiate addict who receives 100 mg a Demerol, somebody with any history of opiate addiction is in harm`s way the moment they`re exposed to that drug once. Exposed to it repeatedly in escalating doses, now we have a full blown reigniting of the addictive process.

GHAZARIAN: Well, but you never answered my remarks about seven-day gap in between, Dr. Drew.

(CROSSTALK)

PINSKY: I did explain it. That those are the days in which Michael was having severe withdrawal symptoms. He is hot, he`s cold, he`s agitated, and getting large doses of propofol and benzodiazepines which will suppress those in opiate withdrawal. We actually use those kinds of things in the hospital to suppress opiate withdrawal symptoms sometimes.

GHAZARIAN: You use what, propofol to suppress opiate withdrawal?

PINSKY: I`ve actually seen propofol suppress withdrawal, but no, we use things like Ativan. We use a midazolam. Those kinds of -- those classes of medications that he was getting in massive dosage.

GHAZARIAN: Let`s assume --

SMITH: Let me jump in for a second, because your client did speak about this. He spoke about it long time ago, and let`s get his word for it. You can talk to us a little bit about this. This is Dr. Arnold Klein appearing on "Larry King Live" back in 2009, and he talked about drugs prescribed to Michael Jackson.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LARRY KING, CNN ANCHOR: Did you ever give him drugs?

DR. ARNOLD KLEIN, MICHAEL JACKSON`S DERMATOLOGIST: Did I ever give him medication? I used to do surgical procedures, I gave him medication. I once gave him muscle relaxant in the last seven (ph) years and that was about it.

I never gave him anything to take home that was addicting. I mean, I was aware that he used propofol, a drug we talked about a lot before which is a drug of addiction, people don`t know, and it`s very poorly controlled by the government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: Now, can I step away from, and I get your point, Garo, about those seven-day period where he wasn`t taking the drug. But what I`m looking at here is May 12th, May 17th, August 2nd, August 15th, August 17th, August 25th, August 27th, August 30th, 100, 200, -- I`m sorry, April, excuse me, March and April, on through may.

I just -- look, we`re talking hundreds of milligrams of a drug that drew says for a major surgical procedure maybe 100 and even that`s extreme.

GHAZARIAN: Well, I think Dr. Drew is opining without knowing Michael Jackson`s predicament. It gives syncrisis (ph), tolerance for pain, tolerance medication, and --

PINSKY: Let me just say, I`ve studied this case top to bottom. I`ve looked at all his medical records. I`ve looked at all the interrogations and the reports of what happened to Michael Jackson, and I would say roughly two weeks into those procedures where he was receiving Demerol, if that were my patient with history of opiate addiction even in the distant past, I would hospitalize him immediately, for treatment of their addiction, because that`s out of control addiction now.

(CROSSTALK)

PINSKY: He is going in. He`s motivated by his addiction.

SMITH: I see. I see. One more question for you, Garo.

GHAZARIAN: Go ahead.

SMITH: You`re saying Dr. Klein in his treatment of Michael Jackson never noticed any kind of addiction, never noticed any kind of addictive behavior, did not worry about high levels of Demerol and other drugs?

GHAZARIAN: What none of you seemed to know --

SMITH: OK.

GHAZARIAN: Michael Jackson did not go in there asking for Demerol. Michael Jackson did not specify what he would like to receive so that he can be put in a comfortable state so that this procedures on his face could be undertaken. Furthermore, I`ve seen video surveillance of him coming in and coming out and he is not staggering like others have suggested. And furthermore, who are we talking about here?

All of the medication was sitting in Michael Jackson`s bedroom with Conrad Murray there seeing all of this medication. Who should have hospitalized this man, if anybody? My client should hospitalize him?

PINSKY: Can I ring in here? Because I absolutely agree with what you`re saying.

GHAZARIAN: Sure.

PINSKY: You are categorically correct on that point. And here is where it really broke down, and actually, I feel sorry for Dr. Klein is why didn`t Dr. Murray contact Dr. Klein. Why didn`t he pick up the phone and call him and go, you know what, I think we have a problem here. That, to me, is unconscionable. And I feel bad for Dr. Klein that that did not happen.

SMITH: And you know what, not only that, didn`t contact Dr. Metzger, other people could have been contacted. And all along, part of what came out in a case today, when you have a situation like this, and Drew, I know you`ve said this many times, you bring in a team for help.

You try to get that personnel if they do have that addiction. Dr. Murray took that all on himself. Dr. Drew, thank you so much for joining us. Garo, thank you, as well. We appreciate your time.

GHAZARIAN: All right.

Soooo...he's saying that Michael's insomnia was a result of his dependence on Demerol...that he was going through withdrawal symptoms (insomnia, anxiety, central nervous system imbalance) during the period of time he didn't recieve it for a full week...

Garo is just trying to defend his client; as you can see by the very end, when Drew concedes a little to his argument by saying he "felt sorry for Klein", Garo settles, even though Drew sticks to his drug addict theory, wording it in a different way to appear sympathetic to Klein.

Anyway, I think Drew's explanation of why Michael was experiencing insomnia kind of makes sense...I think.
 
Yes, qbee - that was helpful, thank you. But the reason why Michael got Demerol is still unclear - last night JVM had a dermatologist on her show and he stated that Demerol injections are not needed - in fact, they are basically never given, when a patient receives Botox...transcript:

[THIS PART OF THE TRANSCRIPT COMES RIGHT AFTER THE ONE POSTED FURTHER BELOW IN THIS POST]


So why was Michael getting Demerol injections if they were not needed/used for Botox?




Both of you have stated that Waldman, in his responses, leaned towards saying that Michael was not an addict... But here he says:



Okay, so did he say "possibly" or "probably not"? Those are two very different things. Again, I haven't had the chance to watch all of his testimony yet, but either way, if he said BOTH of these things ("possibly" & "probably not") in response to the defense's question of whether or not Michael was an addict, wouldn't that be contradictory?

Although I dislike Dr. Drew very much, he kinda sorta actually made a little sense yesterday in his explanation (he's still a loon no matter what & his buddy Smith too) --


Soooo...he's saying that Michael's insomnia was a result of his dependence on Demerol...that he was going through withdrawal symptoms (insomnia, anxiety, central nervous system imbalance) during the period of time he didn't recieve it for a full week...

Garo is just trying to defend his client; as you can see by the very end, when Drew concedes a little to his argument by saying he "felt sorry for Klein", Garo settles, even though Drew sticks to his drug addict theory, wording it in a different way to appear sympathetic to Klein.

Anyway, I think Drew's explanation of why Michael was experiencing insomnia kind of makes sense...I think.
Waldman told Walgren (the prosecutor) that based on Klein's records Michael was probably not addicted to Demerol. I'm not surprised that JVM failed to show that clip on her show, it doesn't support her addiction theory. Personally, I don't understand why you are expecting to find the truth about whether Michael was addicted to Demerol by watching Dr. Drew and JVM sensationalistic and biased programs.
 
ForeverKOP, Waldman says "probably not" addicted to Demerol based on Klein's records in the last minute or so of this video.


 
Every last one of these people who is shameless enough to stick their MD behind their name and 'diagnose' someone from afar without having studied the complete records for themselves- is a joke. No self respecting Doctor would venture a diagnosis from afar the way these people do. I don't care what dermatologist is going on TV for some face time (no pun intended)- no self respecting physician is doing that, heck, it took someone on the witness stand 4 stern questions by a prosecutor that NO, based on these records alone the diagnosis of "addict" is not to be made. DONE!

I would not trust these TV diagnosing attention grabbers with my health. L.A. seems to be a hot bed of TV ready physicians. It took Walgreen four extremely direct question until someone on the witness stand would finally state that according to those records calling Michael addict to Demerol is nothing but hot air- and this guy supposedly had seen records- and even that person had to relent to common sense- Waldman was a perfect example of how TV physicians blow hot air. On the stand he did NOT call him an addict when it came down to it.
 
Last edited:
I feel like Michael will be stuck with this label "addict" and we can't change that. People in his own family contribute it. Joe's lawyer goes on tv and goes on and on about it. I find the people claiming these things have an agenda and most them freely admit they never saw or spoke to Michael in years. Not a lot of credibility for me. The ones that actually spent time with him say they say nothing wrong with him.
 
I feel like Michael will be stuck with this label "addict" and we can't change that. People in his own family contribute it. Joe's lawyer goes on tv and goes on and on about it. I find the people claiming these things have an agenda and most them freely admit they never saw or spoke to Michael in years. Not a lot of credibility for me. The ones that actually spent time with him say they say nothing wrong with him.
In my opinion, in the long run, Michael Jackson will be known as a creative genius. He will be known for his arts. No one will care what the TV talkheads and his family said now. These people come and go. But, Michael's arts will stay forever. That's why art is so powerful. Have faith. Don't be bothered by the trashy talks we hear now.
 
His face was to enhance his appearance . Restylyn firms your skin and fiils in fine lines wrinkles etc. Botox will firm and fill lines also. It was used in the groin and arm pits according to the records to block exessive sweating. MJ was preparing for his upcoming concerts and wanted to look his very best. the workd he had done was visibly evident - his nose was much fuller. Dr Klien says he was using several injections to repair the appearance of the nose due to the loss of cartlilage. He said this was much better than Michael having to do any plastic surgery proceedures.

Thank you for this information! I'm so glad that people are willing to discuss Michael's appearance again, because for a long time I was met with a lot of negativity whenever I brought up his nose etc etc. I find the whole thing absolutely fascinating, and I could definitely tell before he passed that his nose was looking a lot fuller than it had during the Invincible era.
 
In my opinion, in the long run, Michael Jackson will be known as a creative genius. He will be known for his arts. No one will care what the TV talkheads and his family said now. These people come and go. But, Michael's arts will stay forever. That's why art is so powerful. Have faith. Don't be bothered by the trashy talks we hear now.

That's what I hope will happen.
 
^ you are totally right bout that and by watching lisa one could so see she was lying

Ummm, no she wasn't, there was no contradiction in the interviews, why? Because when someone lies, they lie the whole way through, and she clearly said he wasn't a pedophile, and that in itself is proof of her sincerity. Michael wanted kids, Lisa was taking her time in deciding what she wanted to do and Michael in pushing her to agree to having kids ended up making her feel worthless.
 
Ummm, no she wasn't, there was no contradiction in the interviews, why? Because when someone lies, they lie the whole way through, and she clearly said he wasn't a pedophile, and that in itself is proof of her sincerity. Michael wanted kids, Lisa was taking her time in deciding what she wanted to do and Michael in pushing her to agree to having kids ended up making her feel worthless.

.....Did I just find someone who actually makes SENSE on this board? LOL! I'm actually being 100 percent serious. It's so good to see someone talk about Lisa with their head on straight!

But let's not turn this into a Lisa thread....
 
Well Friday I was at lunch with fellow workers and one of them brought up, my boss to be be exact, that she was watching Oprah's channel and the LM interview replayed and that Lisa said she divorced Michael because he was on drugs.

These people have really hurt Michael's reputation with that addict crap including his family.
 
I thought they had an agreement to start a family right away when they got married and she changed her mind? I agree let's not talk about Lisa because I have feeling this thread will get closed or something.
 
Waldman told Walgren (the prosecutor) that based on Klein's records Michael was probably not addicted to Demerol. I'm not surprised that JVM failed to show that clip on her show, it doesn't support her addiction theory. Personally, I don't understand why you are expecting to find the truth about whether Michael was addicted to Demerol by watching Dr. Drew and JVM sensationalistic and biased programs.

Everything they're saying can't be 100% BS, can it? There's gotta be SOME facts hidden behind their gross agendas; they are, in most cases, using evidence shown in court to support their claims, however outlandish they may be. Basically, I'm trying to understand what they're saying by asking us to analyze what's being thrown out there and separating what's true from what's false. Like Drew's explanation, for example, is using Klein's medical records, which indicate many Demerol injections & the time/gaps between them, to show that dependency may have formed as well as the symptoms of withdrawal that corresponded with the symptoms Micheal experienced. Now, I am not saying this is accurate - I am simply stating what he said and am asking if his explanation is valid. He is using evidence that was presented in court - but is the conclusion he is deriving from it valid? And if not, then why? That's my question.

Drew continued his "debate" with Klein's attorney Friday night...he actually brought him back on the show because on Thursday he was speaking to him by phone (calling in on his own show), so I think he wanted speak with him in person to show what he was saying earlier. He basically just repeated what he said on Thursday with more emphasis & explanation. Transcript available here: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/28/ddhln.01.html
 


Everything they're saying can't be 100% BS, can it? There's gotta be SOME facts hidden behind their gross agendas; they are, in most cases, using evidence shown in court to support their claims, however outlandish they may be. Basically, I'm trying to understand what they're saying by asking us to analyze what's being thrown out there and separating what's true from what's false. Like Drew's explanation, for example, is using Klein's medical records, which indicate many Demerol injections & the time/gaps between them, to show that dependency may have formed as well as the symptoms of withdrawal that corresponded with the symptoms Micheal experienced. Now, I am not saying this is accurate - I am simply stating what he said and am asking if his explanation is valid. He is using evidence that was presented in court - but is the conclusion he is deriving from it valid? And if not, then why? That's my question.

Drew continued his "debate" with Klein's attorney Friday night...he actually brought him back on the show because on Thursday he was speaking to him by phone (calling in on his own show), so I think he wanted speak with him in person to show what he was saying earlier. He basically just repeated what he said on Thursday with more emphasis & explanation. Transcript available here: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/28/ddhln.01.html


Yes it is 100% BS. HLN is a joke. They agenda is embarassingly obvious. HLN is trying to build a network on MJ'S back. The Murray trial is their super bowl.
 


Everything they're saying can't be 100% BS, can it? There's gotta be SOME facts hidden behind their gross agendas; they are, in most cases, using evidence shown in court to support their claims, however outlandish they may be. Basically, I'm trying to understand what they're saying by asking us to analyze what's being thrown out there and separating what's true from what's false. Like Drew's explanation, for example, is using Klein's medical records, which indicate many Demerol injections & the time/gaps between them, to show that dependency may have formed as well as the symptoms of withdrawal that corresponded with the symptoms Micheal experienced. Now, I am not saying this is accurate - I am simply stating what he said and am asking if his explanation is valid. He is using evidence that was presented in court - but is the conclusion he is deriving from it valid? And if not, then why? That's my question.

Drew continued his "debate" with Klein's attorney Friday night...he actually brought him back on the show because on Thursday he was speaking to him by phone (calling in on his own show), so I think he wanted speak with him in person to show what he was saying earlier. He basically just repeated what he said on Thursday with more emphasis & explanation. Transcript available here: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/28/ddhln.01.html
You have had several people try to answer your questions, however you keep going back to media speculation as if we are making everything that we say up. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but I have come to the conclusion that nothing that I or others say will be good enough. You seem to rather believe Dr. Drew, and JVM than anything that anyone here posts. I didn't click on the link because frankly I think that Dr. Drew is ill informed and has an obvious agenda.
 
I feel like the more the "addict" talk gets pushed on us the more I resist to it. I don't believe it. I have never heard one person in his family say he looked drugged up or anything. The only thing I heard was them say they heard stories and went to see him and he said no and that he actually looked fine. I guess I find it odd that you imply your son or brother was an addict yet they can't say they saw him like that. They never saw him for years at a time. People like Dr. Drew thinks he knows everything and he never saw Michael. Jane compares herself to Michael and she wasn't there. I can't say what the truth is but unless I see actual proof then I will give Michael the benefit of the doubt. People bring up that taped thing Murray did. Well Michael was like that because what Murray was giving him. He had the gall to tape him like that. All the rumors and speculations are being used against Michael to get Murray off and it makes me sick.

If Michael had so much problems then why was he always bothered to tour with the family? I am tired of the vague answers that people give. I am tired of people acting like they know what was going on when they never saw him. It's like everyone is being given credibility but Michael.
 
Last edited:
You have had several people try to answer your questions, however you keep going back to media speculation as if we are making everything that we say up. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but I have come to the conclusion that nothing that I or others say will be good enough. You seem to rather believe Dr. Drew, and JVM than anything that anyone here posts. I didn't click on the link because frankly I think that Dr. Drew is ill informed and has an obvious agenda.

About Drew, he really wants Michael to be an addict because he wants Michael to become his new poster child for drug abuse and addict. I know a couple years ago he was one of the man ones pushing that Heath Ledger was an addict, but no one really bit because the people who actually knew Ledger and worked with him said he wasn't an addict and just wanted to sleep. The man was practically forming at the mouth when Anna Smith died, but no one really took her death that serious, tragically, because of all the BS in her life and the stupid baby daddy's issue that drag on for weeks. Honestly, Drew has been pushing that Michael was an addict since the end on of the trial in 2005. I remember him being on talk shows saying that the trial showed Michael had an alcohol problem and mentioned his drug abuse back in the 90s.

The man makes his living treating addict celebrities and he thinks it will fill his door with new and even more important people, besides has beens, if Michael Jackson, the biggest star in the world, is known as an addict. He can use Michael's story to preach the dangers of addictions and celebrity hood. Think of the Rabbi when he used all of Michael's flaws and suppose flaws to push his viewpoint. The same thing with Deepak who use Michael as a tragic figure and preach his idea of natural medicines. It isn't what's best for Michael, it is about what Michael can achieve for them in his death.

Drew, like the Rabbi, is in many ways a hypocrite. They both preach about the dangers and evil of being a celebrity and how one should be happy with a normal life, but they obviously wants to be celebrities themselves. Drew has not one, not two, but three freaking shows. He recently has an Oprah like show on top of his rehab/somber house show on VH1, which I admit I like watching, and his show on HLN. This man wants to be famous and be doctor to the stars, but in that same breath goes on about how evil being famous can be and how the ultimate goal should be normalcy. I'm not saying that he shouldn't want to be successful, but it hard to take his message seriously.
 
About Drew, he really wants Michael to be an addict because he wants Michael to become his new poster child for drug abuse and addict. I know a couple years ago he was one of the man ones pushing that Heath Ledger was an addict, but no one really bit because the people who actually knew Ledger and worked with him said he wasn't an addict and just wanted to sleep. The man was practically forming at the mouth when Anna Smith died, but no one really took her death that serious, tragically, because of all the BS in her life and the stupid baby daddy's issue that drag on for weeks. Honestly, Drew has been pushing that Michael was an addict since the end on of the trial in 2005. I remember him being on talk shows saying that the trial showed Michael had an alcohol problem and mentioned his drug abuse back in the 90s.

The man makes his living treating addict celebrities and he thinks it will fill his door with new and even more important people, besides has beens, if Michael Jackson, the biggest star in the world, is known as an addict. He can use Michael's story to preach the dangers of addictions and celebrity hood. Think of the Rabbi when he used all of Michael's flaws and suppose flaws to push his viewpoint. The same thing with Deepak who use Michael as a tragic figure and preach his idea of natural medicines. It isn't what's best for Michael, it is about what Michael can achieve for them in his death.
Drew, like the Rabbi, is in many ways a hypocrite. They both preach about the dangers and evil of being a celebrity and how one should be happy with a normal life, but they obviously wants to be celebrities themselves. Drew has not one, not two, but three freaking shows. He recently has an Oprah like show on top of his rehab/somber house show on VH1, which I admit I like watching, and his show on HLN. This man wants to be famous and be doctor to the stars, but in that same breath goes on about how evil being famous can be and how the ultimate goal should be normalcy. I'm not saying that he shouldn't want to be successful, but it hard to take his message seriously.
I agree with your entire post especially the bolded.
 
I never liked Dr. Drew. I remember him mostly from a show he did on MTV yrs ago. I just always took him as a guy who think he is a know it all smart ass. And JVM is a loud mouth who I still have no idea how she ended up having her own show? o_O

These people are trying to diagnose MJ through the damn TV screen with some not all of his medical records, that is impossible to do. No matter what certification Dr. Drew says he has and no matter what JVM says about her OWN addiction, every person/patient is different and they must be evaluated fully by a doctor/specialist in person to make a diagnoses and it shouldn't and can't be done on TV. Just like it couldn't be done in court when Dr. Waldren couldn't say for sure if MJ was an addict becuase he never had MJ as a patient and he sure as hell didn't have MJ's full medical history. That's why he made up some stuff as he went along. There's only so much of an opinion from these kinds of people can give in this kind of situation and case before it's time to rely on the facts for the real answers! And hopefully that's what the jury will do?!
 
Last edited:
Drew, like the Rabbi, is in many ways a hypocrite. They both preach about the dangers and evil of being a celebrity and how one should be happy with a normal life, but they obviously wants to be celebrities themselves. Drew has not one, not two, but three freaking shows. He recently has an Oprah like show on top of his rehab/somber house show on VH1, which I admit I like watching, and his show on HLN. This man wants to be famous and be doctor to the stars, but in that same breath goes on about how evil being famous can be and how the ultimate goal should be normalcy. I'm not saying that he shouldn't want to be successful, but it hard to take his message seriously.

Spot on. These people project their own issues onto Michael and criticize him instead of having to look into the mirror and criticize themselves.
 
I never liked Dr. Drew. I remember him mostly from a show he did on MTV yrs ago. I just always took him as a guy who think he is a know it all smart ass. And JVM is a loud mouth who I still have no idea how she ended up having her own show? o_O

What show on MTV? Do you mean his rehab/somber house show?
 
I think she's talking about Love Line with Dr. Drew and Adam Carolla.

Thank you.

I beginning to wonder with all the projects that Drew has been doing when does he have time to run his rehab and somber house. Does he only go back there when their a new season for his shows?
 
I am tired of the lies. I mean look at today? Dr. White said Michael had his own supply of propofol. I mean seriously? It's just too much garbage and it needs to stop.
 
Tito pushing this crap again in the uk to promote his dvd.
 
Thank you.

I beginning to wonder with all the projects that Drew has been doing when does he have time to run his rehab and somber house. Does he only go back there when their a new season for his shows?

Hehe he also has a daytime show (which I have never seen) called "Life Changers". So he's got like 4 shows.
 
Wow, okay...more "intervention" hoopla from the family was published today, Tito & Rebbie to be specific...or should I say it's the same story they've always told that's being recirculated because of their recent encounters with the media: http://www.washingtonpost.com/enter...kept-us-away/2011/11/01/gIQALGHscM_story.html

I seriously don't understand the Jackson family. I mean I try, but it doesn't work. You've got one side saying this and one side saying that. Can't they just pick a side & stick with it?
:blink:
 
Back
Top