Re: Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG (daily threads merged)
Now I know that some of you will say, that he underused his prescribed tablets. What you forget to mention however is that the sedavites were more and less likely used through IV. Now I can tell you, that this makes benzo's a) more powerful (which makes the tables useless) and b) harder to find in the body due to the way liquid forms (which are btw more addictive and heightens dependency than tablets) distribute itself throughout the body. Therefore the underuse of tablets can actually point to an increase of IV use and therefore, indirectlty, higher dependency. (Some "junkies", which I don't consider Michael to be, but I do consider him someone with a drug dependency that was in some cases destructive, actually rather have IV drips instead of tablets.) If you can't fall asleep after many lorazepam and dormicum drips, this indicates mostly an high tolerance. This tolerance does not come overnight, in the same way that the heighten insomnia doesn't come from thin air - these go hand in hand.
.
No flames from me either. But I'm tired of the addict talk on this thread really.
First let me say that I witnessed prescription medication addiction and abuse firsthand , in my family, for over 30 years. I have a very good idea of what it is.
On this board, we are ALL aware of Michael's past issues , and we all understand how it happened, that he did not choose to become dependant, and 99% of the posters don't blame Michael for it. The great majority of the fans here is well informed of how it happened, and why, and are more informed than the general public. The issue of certain fans being pro/anti Jacksons, pro/anti AEG has nothing to do with how the members of this forum see Michael's past addiction, or addiction in general.
The misunderstanding/disagreement comes from the way it is used in this trial, and more precisely saying that he was still an addict in 2009, before Murray came into the picture. I can understand that : it's not true, it's ignoring the efforts Michael made to overcome his addiction, it's downplaying Murray's role. So, in that sense, it is disrespectful to Michael.
You mention that addiction is a question of personality. It's not proven yet, addiction is not completely explained yet. It is clearly linked to stress /anxiety, but then it also depends on what amount of stress you are under. In MJ's case, I think no one will argue that in general, during his lifetime, he was under a huge amount of stress, that not many people , fortunately, have had to endure.
I agree with the part of your post I quoted. We are not forgetting the injectable benzos, that are, as you say
injectable. Michael was not injecting himself. So what is Murray's responsability about that, what was he doing with the benzos ?
Michael tried to avoid medication for 3 months with Nurse Lee, what does that tell you ? He specifically asked for propofol, not benzos, or not a vague medicine that would help him sleep, he specifically asked for propofol, why ? Was he aware that Murray was using strong addictive benzos instead of / with propofol ? I don't know, but it raises questions.
I have said that a 100 times here, I don't trust Murray AT ALL, I suspect there was a reason why he was using benzos, one of them, possibly, I have no proof at all, to create a withdrawal syndrome that would make Michael's insomnia worse. Withdrawal syndrome that he could have been trying to deal with with more benzos. A poster on this forum suggested that before CM's trial started. It seemed far fetched at the time, but after the trial it's a possibility that doesn't seem far fetch at all.
As for the reasons of his insomnia, the sleep specialist at CM's trial could not explain it. Medication may be a part of it, maybe not, if insomnia started before 84. it's more likely a combination of several reasons. And we learned during the trial that some insomnia cases can not be explained and treated.
I don't like the Jacksons either, but I understand SOME of the arguments they seem to have (AEG should have suspected something, given it happened in the past). I just want to see their arguments and AEG's before I make up my mind, BUT I would so much prefer the Jacksons to paint a realistic picture of the situation, as it was in 2009. It wouldn't change anything to the outcome of the trial, because addiction is not the core issue in itself. The issue is should AEG have uspected anything.
I hope this clears it up a little bit, and that we can leave the subject and concentrate on the trial.
, God speaking to him , ONE Bad day where MJ was not himself. 
