Latest on MJJC

Propofol: Acute toxicity

"acute propofol toxicity"
Click to expand...
so what your saying william because the corroner used this wording it means he actually gave mj a huge dose of diprivan rather than a normal one so it shows intent?

it wasnt listed as"adverse effects"because of what ive said above?
 
that's exactly what I understand from the "acute toxicity" of propofol .

both "normal dose" and "acute toxicity" could kill someone whithout monitoring :

Overdosage of propofol would be expected to produce manifestations that principally are extensions of the drug’s pharmacologic and adverse effects. At least 2 fatalities have been reported following intentional self-administration of a 400- or 1600-mg dose of propofol.
Click to expand...

but what was found in mj's body was "acute toxicity" not simple "normal dose" .




I don't now why people are not understanding what I'm trying to say. I always believed that "acute toxicity" meant what you guys are saying , a normal dose killed mj because murray was not monitoring him properly , but the words" acute toxicity" of propofol from this article suggets something different .
 
This mess just keep getting worst and worst. Michael did NOt have to die.
 
elusive:

a lethal amount definitely shows intent , but at the same time I don't believe Murray's intentions that night were to kill MJ , but it seems something went terribly wrong and instead of trying to help , he decided to finish MJ .

lorazepam of all the other benzos found in mj's body was a contributing factor and murray had the drug to reverse its effect in his bag but he did not use it although he told investigators he did , why?

why he did not use it if indeed he was trying to help mj .
 
Thanks for posting, you make a lot of sense and I believe you could be right.
 
from the search warrant :

"DEA also checked all available computer systems to determine whether DR. MURRAY had prescribed PROPOFOL (DIPRIVAN) toJACKSON and how much of the drug he had purchased and/or ordered. DEA was unable to find a recordof DR. MURRAY purchasing, ordered or obtaining any PROPOFOL (DIPRTVAN) under his medicallicense or DEA number."

so it was obtained illegally .



"The Los Angeles Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner, Dr. SATHYAV AGIS WARAN, indicated that hehad reviewed the preliminary toxicology results and his preliminary assessment of JACKSON's cause ofdeath was due to lethal levels of PROPOFOL (DIPRTVAN)."


lethal , not normal . it seems there is a difference i did not understand first .
 
" MURRAY had been treating JACKSON for insomnia for approximately the past six weeks. He had been giving JACKSON 50 mg of PROPOFOL (DIPRIVAN), diluted with LIDOCAINE (XYLOCAINE), every night via intravenous drip(IV) to assist JACKSON in sleeping.MURRAY felt that JACKSON may have been forming an addiction to PROPOFOL (DIPRIVAN),and tried to wean JACKSON off of the drug."


his lawyer words AFTER the interview with detectives:


"Murray stayed at his own place in Los Angeles on most nights. But when asked, and only on occasion, he spent the night at Jackson’s rented Holmby Hills home, one of the doctor’s attorneys, Matt Alford, told FOXNews.com in an earlier interview."

his attorney story is more logical .

administring propofol for more than a week would cause some sort of damage to the liver and heart , i mean there would have been signs . this whole lie about "everyday" is to say mj was "addicted" to prpofol .
 
"MURRAY stated he was continuously at JACKSON's bedside and was monitoring him with a pulseoximeter. According to DR. MURRAY, the pulse oximeter was connected to JACKS ON's finger andmeasured his pulse and oxygen statistics."


when the time of death will be revealed to be way before murray's stupid timeline , how is he gonna explan to the jurors that his pulse oximeter was telling him mj was alive ?
 
williamorange1 said:
elusive:

a lethal amount definitely shows intent , but at the same time I don't believe Murray's intentions that night were to kill MJ , but it seems something went terribly wrong and instead of trying to help , he decided to finish MJ .

lorazepam of all the other benzos found in mj's body was a contributing factor and murray had the drug to reverse its effect in his bag but he did not use it although he told investigators he did , why?

why he did not use it if indeed he was trying to help mj .
Click to expand...

yeah i agree. idont believe there was some plan to get mj but like u say.why all the lies and cover up.there was no reason for him to dig such a deep hole unless there was a reason and what u state sounds logical
 
"At one time MURRAYnoticed and inquired about injection marks on JACKSON's hands and feet. JACKSON stated that DoctorCHERILYN LEE had been giving him a "cocktail" to help him. "

Lee said MJ did not allow her to see his feet , so Murray that's another lie . at leats we know from this half truth that the injections on mj's ARMS were caused by murray .
 
williamorange1 said:
no , it started as accident , mj suffered from a " adverse effect" of administering a normal dosage of propofol , but such an "adverse effect" would not caused MJ's death in a medical facility or if the medical equipment necessary were available at hand .

Murray knew he could't revive mj , and instead of calling for help immediately he decided to finish him and since propofol was not detected in normal autopsies the chances he would get away with what he did were huge . he decided to increase the dose which caused the " acute toxicity" because he was afraid if mj survived he might go to jail .
Click to expand...

BINGO. IMO, that's it. I'd be surprised if that wasn't it.
 
williamorange1 said:
elusive:

a lethal amount definitely shows intent , but at the same time I don't believe Murray's intentions that night were to kill MJ , but it seems something went terribly wrong and instead of trying to help , he decided to finish MJ .

lorazepam of all the other benzos found in mj's body was a contributing factor and murray had the drug to reverse its effect in his bag but he did not use it although he told investigators he did , why?

why he did not use it if indeed he was trying to help mj .
Click to expand...

in other words, he did harm.
 
the thing is is he didnt intend to kill him why give him all those benzos aswell. we know as layppl that giving someone a mixture is gonna kill them. so hes as negligent as hell or wanted to do him in (not that i believe that)
 
elusive moonwalker said:
yeah i agree. idont believe there was some plan to get mj but like u say.why all the lies and cover up.there was no reason for him to dig such a deep hole unless there was a reason and what u state sounds logical
Click to expand...

because Murray knew what he was doing (illegally obtaining and administering Propofol in a home setting) was TROUBLE for him.

in other words, if the medtechs had been called and gotten there in time and Michael had been revived, Murray would have gone to jail.
 
you know I'm reading about midazolam (versed) and it is a drug that provides sedation without loss of consciousness. add to that it is one hell of an addictive drug , why would murray use such a drug to "wean mj off propofol" ?

I know benzo are used usually before administring propofol , that's maybe the case here .

all this story about weaning mj off propofol does not make any sense to me at all .

those drugs were not given the way murray said at all , it just does not make sense. 2mg of versed would not have lasted long and from reading in some people it does not really work at all . AT ALL .
 
I can understand that he used versed or lorazepam before administring propofol , because he administered propofol that NIGHT , not that morning as he claimed .

you use either one of them , why both ?

and no versed is not used to sleep, from reading about both versed and propofol, it seems to me administring versed is more absurd .
 
All he had to do was administer oxygen to Michael to bring him back. The timeline is shot, because in that length of time he said he stepped out of the room he could have possibly brought him back with oxygen but cardiac arrest had already set in and possibly death. In my opinion he was dead for a long time at least 8:00 Los Angeles time.
 
^^ I think what Murray meant by him 'weaning him off' propofol was that he didn't want to give it Michael anymore. Ie he was just trying other drugs that made more clinical sense ie benzodiazepines (BZDs) instead of propofol. Although the combo of BZDs he gave was not following protocol either. Murray, allegedly, had given Michael propofol on a number of nights before the 25th June since he was hired. He could have sensed it was wrong and risky to give propofol and wanted to stop so he tried BZDs instead.

Physical dependence on propofol does not occur like it does for opiates etc and Murray being a cardiologist would know this too. He probably said 'weaning' but chose the wrong word.
 
Last edited:
"A total dose of up to 5 mg generally is adequate for conscious sedation in an average healthy adult younger than 60 years of age, and a total dose of up to 3.5 mg usually is adequate for patients 60 years of age or older, chronically ill and/or debilitated patients, and patients with decreased pulmonary reserve."


first it is 5 mg , second it is enogh for CONSCIOUS sedation . why would MJ want to "sleep" that way ?
 
daisydaisy said:
^^ I think what Murray meant by him 'weaning him off' propofol was that he didn't want to give it Michael anymore. Ie he was just trying other drugs that made more clinical sense ie benzodiazepines (BZDs) instead of propofol. Although the combo of BZDs he gave was not following protocol either. Murray, allegedly, had given Michael propofol on a number of nights before the 25th June since he was hired. He could have sensed it was wrong and risky to give propofol and wanted to stop so he tried BZDs instead.
Physical dependence on propofol does not occur like it does for opiates etc and Murray being a cardiologist would know this too. He probably said 'weaning' but chose the wrong word.
Click to expand...

versed ? it is as risky as propofol and does not even have the propofol effect and on top of that VERY ADDICTIVE .

MJ calling Lee the person who refused to give him propofol five days before his death eventhough Murray was there for him , tells me it was MJ who realised taking that shit was not "as safe as he previously thought "
 
williamorange1 said:
sorry I can't explain it any more , I mean he was injected with much more than normal dose for the coroner to determine it was an "acute"
Click to expand...

Yeah this is what I have thought since the Coroner's report was released.


The dose of propofol that Murray stated he gave Michael seems way off to me. Because Propofol has such a short half life a continous IV infusion is how it's normally used in clinical practice. So Murray saying he just gave 25mg seems kinda ridiculous to me.

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2155848

The following website is really good IMHO:

http://vam.anest.ufl.edu/simulations/propofolpharmacokinetics.php

It is a pharmacokinetic simulation of propofol in the human body. You have to register (free) before you can use it but is worth doing if you want to see estimates of what sorts of dosages of propofol are needed to give a blood level that are dangerous. IMO it is highly doubtful that 25mg can cause acute propofol toxicity.

Of course, 25mg could cause respiratory and cardiac problems which is why resus. and monitoring equipment should always be at hand. But, for the coroner to rule 'acute propofol toxicity' the levels must have been out of the normal blood range for this to be possible. If the blood level was within normal limits then how could this ruling be possible?

Hopefully the coroner has been able to estimate what dose was administered to Michael by working backwards from the blood levels.

I have thought for a long time that Murray may have set up the IV wrong, ie a whole large dose may have been administered in error due to setting the wrong flow rate or something.

The truth about what really happened when on that day needs to come out. I still can't believe all this happened with the hospital only minutes away-inexcusible.
 
williamorange1 said:
"A total dose of up to 5 mg generally is adequate for conscious sedation in an average healthy adult younger than 60 years of age, and a total dose of up to 3.5 mg usually is adequate for patients 60 years of age or older, chronically ill and/or debilitated patients, and patients with decreased pulmonary reserve."


first it is 5 mg , second it is enogh for CONSCIOUS sedation . why would MJ want to "sleep" that way ?
Click to expand...

What is the source of this info?

Normally the dose is mg/kg.
 
one thing also , according to Murray :

1: 30 10 m.g tab of valuim

2: 00 2 mg Lorazepam ( attivan)

3:00 2 mg Midazolam (versed)

5:00 2 mg Lorazepam (attivan)

7:30 2 mg Midazolam (versed)

10:40 25mg propofol

ok , the cause of death was " acute toxicity of propofol" and benzos as a contributing factor specifically Lorazepam according to the coroner .

BUT all the benzos act simirally to a large degree and Midazolam was the LAST benzo given to mj according to murray 3 hours before propofol , almost six hours between the last time murray administered lorazepam to mj and propofol . I'm just wondering if indeed that was the case , and since midazolam and lorazepam "adverese effect " are the same why did the coroner consider the lorazepam the contributing benzo factor and not midazolam ? just wondering .
 
This is why I think that, in addition to Murray's "negligence" for administering the lethal dose of Propofol in the first place, all of his subsequent actions (or lack thereof) and lies he told to investigators should add to his charges. His administration of Propofol was only a small part of what contributed to Michael's death, everything he didn't do after discovering Michael, allegedly still with a pulse, was imo what resulted in Michael's murder.
 
williamorange1 said:
versed ? it is as risky as propofol and does not even have the propofol effect and on top of that VERY ADDICTIVE .

MJ calling Lee the person who refused to give him propofol five days before his death eventhough Murray was there for him , tells me it was MJ who realised taking that shit was not "as safe as he previously thought "
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that it is as risky as propofol but the combination Murray says he gave I definitely do not get.

I know BZDs are addictive and they have a 'hang over effect' (which propofol apparently does not, and one of the reasons it has been abused by people in the past). But BZDs generally are safer in the short term than anaesthesia if they are prescribed correctly.
 
for murray to leave an empty pill bottle of lorazepam there in mj's bathroom , to leave lorazepam only out of all the drugs he administered to mj beside his bed that day AND HIDE THE REST , to only admit he gave him two seperate doses of 2mg lorazepam to the paramedics and UCLA , then to change the story and say you last gave lorazepam 5 hours before propofol and the cause of death comes with lorazepam as a "contributing factor" murray knew exactly that the amount of lorazepam in mj's body WAS ALSO HUGE .
 
TSCM said:
This is why I think that, in addition to Murray's "negligence" for administering the lethal dose of Propofol in the first place, all of his subsequent actions (or lack thereof) and lies he told to investigators should add to his charges. His administration of Propofol was only a small part of what contributed to Michael's death, everything he didn't do after discovering Michael, allegedly still with a pulse, was imo what resulted in Michael's murder.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I think too and it's so heartbreaking. I mean why not just call 911 straight away? Inexcusable and indefensible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top