0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: "GirlInTheMirror"Wow, great post. Good information.Just a little story from myself... two weeks ago I had to have surgery. The anaesthetic they gave me was Propofol (indeed looks like milk). Although I of course have to recover from surgery itself, I still feel tired; although I know the anaesthetic only stays in the system for a few hours, I guess if someone used it frequently, he/she would be dizzy/tired all the time...When I had my knee surgery they gave me propofol as well. I woke up very quick and I was clear and energetic immediately, I was also very hungry. I do remember being very tired at night though.
Wow, great post. Good information.Just a little story from myself... two weeks ago I had to have surgery. The anaesthetic they gave me was Propofol (indeed looks like milk). Although I of course have to recover from surgery itself, I still feel tired; although I know the anaesthetic only stays in the system for a few hours, I guess if someone used it frequently, he/she would be dizzy/tired all the time...
Quote from: "hesouttamylife" ...... There is no way his family had gone to his house to tidy up and left a bevy of ill gotten drugs for the drug enforcement team to find and blame on Michael. Just didn't happen.Totally agree with you! Unless it was all part of the script!
...... There is no way his family had gone to his house to tidy up and left a bevy of ill gotten drugs for the drug enforcement team to find and blame on Michael. Just didn't happen.
I was asking if this was an informative post before and I would like to explain why.Mo and I posted the "dog theory" a year ago. Many people were ridiculing us and a lot of people still try to discredit us by using this theory against us. I know now that the majority of the people clearly never read it, because this IS the "dog theory"... It's part 2, because part 1 was too obvious because the meds were explained in veterinary use. What I want to say with this is that, even if a theory is far fetched (and I am still convinced it's not that far-fetched at all), there can be lots of good and useful information in it. Yet sadly people decide to take someone else's word that it was all BS and ridiculous, without reading it themselves. I wanted to know if this theory was even read before it was bashed, and I have proven my point, since no one recognizes it. The dog theory is nothing more than an explanation of all the medications and it sums up the side effects, the dog is just a small part of the posts and not even present in part 2.In short: read before you judge.**note: I am not saying the people who replied in this thread all ridiculed the "dog theory", I am merely pointing out that it is very easy these days to discredit people and distract them by claiming something, hence no one took the effort reading part 2 amd a lot of people skipped part 1 as well because someone said it was all crap. Just food for thought...
Quote from: "~Souza~"I was asking if this was an informative post before and I would like to explain why.Mo and I posted the "dog theory" a year ago. Many people were ridiculing us and a lot of people still try to discredit us by using this theory against us. I know now that the majority of the people clearly never read it, because this IS the "dog theory"... It's part 2, because part 1 was too obvious because the meds were explained in veterinary use. What I want to say with this is that, even if a theory is far fetched (and I am still convinced it's not that far-fetched at all), there can be lots of good and useful information in it. Yet sadly people decide to take someone else's word that it was all BS and ridiculous, without reading it themselves. I wanted to know if this theory was even read before it was bashed, and I have proven my point, since no one recognizes it. The dog theory is nothing more than an explanation of all the medications and it sums up the side effects, the dog is just a small part of the posts and not even present in part 2.In short: read before you judge.**note: I am not saying the people who replied in this thread all ridiculed the "dog theory", I am merely pointing out that it is very easy these days to discredit people and distract them by claiming something, hence no one took the effort reading part 2 amd a lot of people skipped part 1 as well because someone said it was all crap. Just food for thought...Did you read my reply to you about the use of drugs during Euthanasia?? I even asked you if you knew what I was meaning
Great information Souza!There has always been many 'versions' of MJ over the years....some media created, some 'fan'/'non-fan' created, some MJ created, etc. For me, the drug issue since June 25th has, in essence, boiled all those 'versions' of MJ into only two. (I would not be surprised if, over the years, he did have dependency issues with pain killers or other meds...that's not what I'm addressing here). The laundry list of meds, including the propofol, that the media (and perhaps MJ himself) would have us believe, paints a very distinct 'version' of MJ.If we are to believe that he was as addicted, as they claim, then it would probably not be a far stretch to suggest that he had lost all self-control (as many drug addicts do). Much can be inferred from that alone. He would not have been able to focus on his work, while in this condition, let alone co-ordinate, manage, produce, and engineer the top selling music documentary of all time....let alone finish the ever so 'top-secret' Dome project (which we have not yet been fully privy to) just two weeks before his 'death'. It probably wouldn't be a far stretch, either, to say that if true, his drug addiction would have caused a loss of control over his finances as well (money or fame or recogintion would have taken a backseat to the drugs). And, by extension, a loss over his professional and personal relationships as well (how many times have we heard that MJ surrounded himself with enablers?). So, not only would he have been a walking zombie incapable of putting in a regular 8-hour shift (or a coherent sentence), let alone a grueling rehearsal schedule, but he would have lost the ability to control his finances...and most importantly, he would have distanced himself from everyone (except those that supported his habit), instead of embarking on an 'adventure' to touch people's lives and hearts (even if it that adventure was simply the This Is It concerts....which we can safely guess is SOOOO much more).The other 'version' of MJ, if we eliminate the drug rumors (which is what IMO they are)...is a very astute businessman (see Sterchen's list, sorry for misspelling), a very generous humanitarian (see Souza's list), a very kind and gentle father (listen to anything anyone has ever said about him being a father), and a MAN would went about doing extraordinary things while everyone was too stuck on the drug "version" to notice.But who knows? I may be wrong and I can say with 100000000% certainty that if the 'drug' version of MJ turns out to be true, then I won't love him any less, but I will definitely come to know "the man I never knew".With L.O.V.E. always.