Bodhitheblackdog said:

BobGeorge909 said:

morningsong said:

RachB65 said:

teach49 said:

I think there are two things at crosshairs here: 1) why someone starts taking the drug and 2) what it means physiologically to be addicted/dependent. Physiologically, why you start does not matter...addiction is addiction. But to some people it matters why someone starts. I can see why. If someone is in physical pain and needs pain medication and then becomes addicted, it's not like they were playing with fire. They didn't mean it and maybe didn't even like the fact that they ever had to take a drug at all. It does seem unfair to lump them in with those who were out for a party.

But I see the other side as well. When someone uses drugs recreationally and becomes addicted, how do you really know why they started? There is such a thing as deep emotional pain that can be excruciating to live with. You just don't know. I have a cousin who partied with her dad starting at 13. 13 years old...with her father! Yes, she was having fun and many would separate her from someone who got addicted for medical reasons if they ran into her on the street when she was homeless years later. But is that fair? Is it right? How do you know how or why someone starts in the first place? Most of the time, you don't. In the end, those who get addicted through "recreational" use don't get as much sympathy. I understand that and even feel it myself. And yet, I'm not sure it's really right or fair.

What bothers me about P's situation is that everything we know suggests he was addicted to vicodin, but not fentanyl, so I wish people would just accept that for now until we have evidence to the contrary. I think the "he was addicted to fentanyl for 30 years" story is as fantastical as the "he was killed my someone who slipped him the wrong pill on purpose" story.

He was addicted most likely to Tylenol with codeine. It appears he took something that was labeled as such, but it was fentanyl instead and it killed him. We don't know how he got it. That's what they are investigating.

We just don't know.

[Edited 8/23/16 18:09pm]

Perhaps people wouldnt lump your cousin in with others who started drugs for medical reasons BUT just the fact she was getting high with her FATHER at the age of 13 indicates some serious n tragic shit going on in that family(no offense, all families have dysfunction, mine included)...If her father was getting her high i venture to consider he was doing other 'things' with her too, ending up where she did, on drugs n homeless is a vivid indicator of THAT...Her pain is/was enotional n psychological and its legitinate, if u have ever been clinically depressed, had a bad childhood or have PTSD or grieving than u know that pain is real n literal and painkillers dulls that...There should b no less compassion just because the dependency was purely physical/medical..

Yes, everything you have written is exactly my point. If you come into contact with my cousin, you wouldn't know her history and she'd be unlikely to tell you because she loves her father (I don't think he did anything else but I guess who knows). So, many would not be compassionate toward her but her psychological pain from abuse/neglect and trauma is pretty great, not to mention what happened on the streets (it got way worse than partying with dad). I don't think the distinction is as great as people think...and Prince had plenty of emotional pain from childhood that rivals my cousin's (actually usurps it because she was not kicked to the curb by her mother -- parents were divorced).

It's possible that P had just a physical dependence from legit use of vicodin, but that's pretty questionable given that he had no prescription (in MN, at least) for pain meds for at least one year prior to his death. He was getting them elsewhere and that is a tell-tale sign of addiction, although there are things we still don't know. Personally, I don't believe he had graduated to high-powered drugs like fentanyl given the evidence we have so far (no fentanyl in his system in the bloodwork or other tests), but of course, these are unnamed sources. Just my two cents.

[Edited 8/25/16 12:26pm]

This is my point of view. I remember an interview in 1985. It’s a bit strange interview (I cannot find it online) but he is very open and gives an insight in his personality.

He said something like. ‘ I have to protect myself. What if everybody leaves me, then I’m left all alone’ .

I think being famous since he was 17 had an impact on his life, who to believe and who not. From the start of his career Prince was someone to make his own decisions, do everything to be in control and not rely on others, especially people he did not know.

He produced his own records , decided to change his name, make every creative decision on every area, from music ,clothes, album sleeves and creating his personal place ‘paisley park’ , control his rights to his music …..

There are thieves in the temple all the time. I can imagine him only trusting his closest friends. If he got addicted to painkillers over time (as a result of his life performances) or if he had a serious illness he would do everything to keep this private.

He had an image to protect and his closest friends and family who he loved and financially relied on him, to protect. I also think also he would like ‘the public eye’ to focus on his music. Therefore he had to protect his privacy and possibly ask one of his closest friends to search for other ways to get the medicines he needed. A decision that was more dangerous than he probably expected. I think that would make more sense than all the conspiracy theories. Like most of us I’m only guessing so hopefully we will know the truth or part of the truth. To get some kind of closure and a more clear view of what happened.

PurpleDiamonds1 said:

Menes said:

Still think what has been reported to be true..... Prince thought he was taking hydrocodone and someone switched it to be the look a like but it was fentanyl. Who ever provided the fentanyl should be charged with his death. Prince was not on fentanyl prior to his death.

The question then would be, why would someone want to switch his pills? Who in that house would want to off their boss? He was good to them. The benefit is nothing.

[ Not sure who specifically that person is.I wish it were all caught on tape.... It does not seem like Prince knew the pills were not the hydro... [Edited 8/25/16 9:59am]

1. They wouldn't.

2. He didn't.

herb4 said:

cloveringold85 said:

Excuse me, but why are you taking that tone with me. First, you don't know me or anything about me and what I know. You are saying I am "wrong"? And you are right, is that it?

So, you know for a FACT that Prince was addicted to pain meds and he just had pills strewn around his estate and walking around with deadly pills in his pocket?

Please, don't tell me what I know and DON'T know.

I know people travel with medications all the time.....PRESCRIBED medications.......not ILLEGAL ones!!

Sorry about the tone. Youre right and I apologize. I get frustrated listening to people who obviously haven't the first clue about drugs and all the posters here show suspect "foul play". It's ridiculous.

By "wrong" I was referring to "Prince would never put poison in his body" and assumed you were referring to drugs in general. He was taking drugs (pain meds) for sure. If you meant "he would never knowingly have poisoned himself with fentanyl", I agree. I think he meant to pop a pain pill and got a counterfeit one but dude very clearly had a problem, likely with hydrocodone.

I also think you're wrong that if he were carrying prescriptions that weren't his or illicit counterfeit pills that he would automatically be arrested and put in jail. In fact, I know you're wrong because A: I've done it and never went to jail and B: airport screening doesn't give shit one about people carrying pills. I do it all the time and have them right there in my carry on bag. I've had xanax right there in a bottle that wasn't mine and never had a single issue. They don't care. And no NSA screener is going to run a lab test on what looks like a regular old Lortab. I carried mountains of my grandmother's meds through screening when I traveled with her and no one batted an eye.

It's also quite common for people to put their pills (especially illicit ones) in regular vitamin and aspirin bottles, especially if they're hiding their use or have something they shouldn't. Addicts are cleve that way.

I feel pretty confident stating that Prince had and addiction issue with pain medicine in general, yes. I'd go as far as to state that it's a pretty undeniable fact. And, yes, I absolutely think you're wrong about someone switching off the security system and intentionally poisining him or that there was any "foul play" whatsoever.

I apologize again for my tone

Herb: I appreciate the apology. You were wrong to call me a "crazy person", as many other people here feel the same way I do. So, we are all just crazy!! I understand and respect your point of view, but I still stand by my earlier statements. I may not agree with what a lot of people say here, but I will never insult them. We need to respect each other's opinions. We all have a different perspective on things.

I'm not denying that Prince had a dependency on pain meds. I just have a hard time believing that he would take something that he knew was laced with a harmful and deadly drug. Was Prince in so much pain that he did not care anymore? We just don't know.

So, you think Prince was so careless as to put deadly pills in "Aleve" and "Vitamin C" bottles and leave them laying around. What if someone just happened to take one, not knowing what they actually were? That would not be a good outcome. But like you said, Prince was an addict and maybe he didn't care or think of the ramifications of his actions?

I have myself also traveled with "prescription" meds, and was not questioned about it. I think as long as it's from a doctor (prescribed), they can't do anything about it.

laurarichardson said:

1Sasha said:

Just to be clear: I wasn't agreeing that someone deliberately switched pills on Prince. My agreement is that he knew what he was doing - I don't know if he knew Fentanyl was in the mix of drugs he was taking - but that we should have compassion for anyone in that position, who feels s/he has to take such drugs to maintain a persona, a career, a life.

---- The ME has determined that he was not a long term Fentanyl user.

Yep. That's why he died when he ate the counterfeit pills. That, combined with the fact that they were laced hard enough to kill a mule.

I honestly believe that Prince WAS anti drug overall but needed pain meds for one reason or the otherand, be it the hip or whatever, over time he somehow became dependent on them and then accidentally got a hold of batch of fake ones. For someone with Prince's means, it'd be easy to get more than you're supposed to be safely prescribed.

I'm not prescribed enough to get hooked and have no issue whatsoever with hydro, although it does make it easier for me to function with my lower back and hip pain. I've gone weeks without taking any and never had any withdrawals, and I'm a recovering drug addict with a highly addictive personality.

You can function perfectly normally taking hydro daily so this argument I've read where "how did Prince do all this if he was a 'junkie'"? is a non sequitor. 10-20 mg of hydro a day wouldn't keep him from doing anything.

With stuff like vicodin, the dosage just keeps ramping up over time, which is likely what happened with Prince. Football and hockey players go through this a lot and, because they're rich and famous, they always have a supply and that's where trouble starts. If you take them as prescribed, you're in very little danger. Oxy is another matter and certainly also fentanyl which is basically used to treat dying cancer patients.

herb4 said:

cloveringold85 said:

Good, go away! You are an annoying TROLL

Hey now. I've been here a long time and have a stellar track record. I'm not trolling anyone.

Or is this the part where where anyone who doesn't suspect foul play or subscribe to conspiracy theories is suddenly just out to stir up shit for the mere sake of it? I could just as easily say that you're an insane person who doesn't understand the first thing about drugs, the NSA, or addiciton and that thinks that Prince was murdered and that the whole thing is a scam and a coverrup.

Oh, wait. I did say that.

Does that make you a troll or just a misguided person that I disagree very strongly with? Prince's death isn't half as complex as some of you are making it out to be. 95% of the pieces are all right there.

Herb: I apologize for calling you a "troll", but I said that because you called me a "crazy person", and that was before you apologized for saying I was wrong, but then you said I am still wrong, LOL, but anyways.....

We all have to respect each other's opinion. I don't think it's nice to call someone "crazy" just because they feel differently about what happened to Prince, that's all I'm saying. I don't agree with what a lot of people say on here at times, but you have to look at things from another persepctive.

You think that Prince's case is cut and dry: he was an addict and overdosed and there is no foul-play, but there are many who do believe there was foul-play. I hope you are aware that this is still an ongoing investigation by the Carver County Sheriff and the DEA. The circumstances surrounding Prince's death is in fact very "complicated", and the case is far from being closed.

RachB65 said:

cloveringold85 said:

herb4 said:

Sorry about the tone. Youre right and I apologize. I get frustrated listening to people who obviously haven't the first clue about drugs and all the posters here show suspect "foul play". It's ridiculous.

By "wrong" I was referring to "Prince would never put poison in his body" and assumed you were referring to drugs in general. He was taking drugs (pain meds) for sure. If you meant "he would never knowingly have poisoned himself with fentanyl", I agree. I think he meant to pop a pain pill and got a counterfeit one but dude very clearly had a problem, likely with hydrocodone.

I also think you're wrong that if he were carrying prescriptions that weren't his or illicit counterfeit pills that he would automatically be arrested and put in jail. In fact, I know you're wrong because A: I've done it and never went to jail and B: airport screening doesn't give shit one about people carrying pills. I do it all the time and have them right there in my carry on bag. I've had xanax right there in a bottle that wasn't mine and never had a single issue. They don't care. And no NSA screener is going to run a lab test on what looks like a regular old Lortab. I carried mountains of my grandmother's meds through screening when I traveled with her and no one batted an eye.

It's also quite common for people to put their pills (especially illicit ones) in regular vitamin and aspirin bottles, especially if they're hiding their use or have something they shouldn't. Addicts are cleve that way.

I feel pretty confident stating that Prince had and addiction issue with pain medicine in general, yes. I'd go as far as to state that it's a pretty undeniable fact. And, yes, I absolutely think you're wrong about someone switching off the security system and intentionally poisining him or that there was any "foul play" whatsoever.

I apologize again for my tone

I'm not denying that Prince had a dependency on pain meds. I just have a hard time believing that he would take something that he knew was laced with a harmful and deadly drug.

So, you think Prince was so careless as to put deadly pills in "Aleve" and "Vitamin C" bottles and leave them laying around. What if someone just happened to take one, not knowing what they actually were? That would not be a good outcome. But like you said, Prince was an addict and maybe he didn't care or think of the ramifications of his actions?

I have myself also traveled with "prescription" meds, and was not questioned about it. I think as long as it's from a doctor (prescribed), they can't do anything about it.

1. He wouldn't and I never asserted that. I think he ate the poison pills thinking they were Norco or Vicodin.

2. It's very common, especially for a long term addict trying to hide the scope of their addicition and/or for someone who travels a lot. It's not like Prince left them in the common restroom area or there were scores of kids running around. They were more than likely in his private areas and personal quarters. Areas that only he and his closest associates frequented.

3. NSA doesnt much give a shit unless you have hundreds of pills on you and appear to be trafficking. They're much more concerned with important shit. Deadly things like shampoo, your shoes and marijuana *sarcasm*

Put it this way. I could much more easily make it through airport security with 50 of the pills that killed Prince, prescribed or not, than I could with less than a gram of weed or a bottle of shampoo.

herb4 said:

cloveringold85 said:

herb4 said:

Hey now. I've been here a long time and have a stellar track record. I'm not trolling anyone.

Or is this the part where where anyone who doesn't suspect foul play or subscribe to conspiracy theories is suddenly just out to stir up shit for the mere sake of it? I could just as easily say that you're an insane person who doesn't understand the first thing about drugs, the NSA, or addiciton and that thinks that Prince was murdered and that the whole thing is a scam and a coverrup.

Oh, wait. I did say that.

Does that make you a troll or just a misguided person that I disagree very strongly with? Prince's death isn't half as complex as some of you are making it out to be. 95% of the pieces are all right there.

Herb: I apologize for calling you a "troll", but I said that because you called me a "crazy person", and that was before you apologized for saying I was wrong, but then you said I am still wrong, LOL, but anyways.....

We all have to respect each other's opinion. I don't think it's nice to call someone "crazy" just because they feel differently about what happened to Prince, that's all I'm saying. I don't agree with what a lot of people say on here at times, but you have to look at things from another persepctive.

You think that Prince's case is cut and dry: he was an addict and overdosed and there is no foul-play, but there are many who do believe there was foul-play. I hope you are aware that this is still an ongoing investigation by the Carver County Sheriff and the DEA. The circumstances surrounding Prince's death is in fact very "complicated", and the case is far from being closed.

It's all right. We're good. I was out of line.

I honestly believe though that the extent of the "ongoing investigation" is nothing more than a matter of being able to prove who bought the bullshit pills and gather iron tight evidence. I do dismiss out of hand the idea the idea of any conspiracy or intentionality of murder and believe in my heart that the whole thing was a horrible accident.

I don't find it all that complicated and feel comfortble beleving that I know about 90-95% of what transpired.

I could be wrong.

herb4 said:

cloveringold85 said:

I'm not denying that Prince had a dependency on pain meds. I just have a hard time believing that he would take something that he knew was laced with a harmful and deadly drug.

So, you think Prince was so careless as to put deadly pills in "Aleve" and "Vitamin C" bottles and leave them laying around. What if someone just happened to take one, not knowing what they actually were? That would not be a good outcome. But like you said, Prince was an addict and maybe he didn't care or think of the ramifications of his actions?

I have myself also traveled with "prescription" meds, and was not questioned about it. I think as long as it's from a doctor (prescribed), they can't do anything about it.

1. He wouldn't and I never asserted that. I think he ate the poison pills thinking they were Norco or Vicodin.

2. It's very common, especially for a long term addict trying to hide the scope of their addicition and/or for someone who travels a lot. It's not like Prince left them in the common restroom area or there were scores of kids running around. They were more than likely in his private areas and personal quarters. Areas that only he and his closest associates frequented.

3. NSA doesnt much give a shit unless you have hundreds of pills on you and appear to be trafficking. They're much more concerned with important shit. Deadly things like shampoo, your shoes and marijuana *sarcasm*

Put it this way. I could much more easily make it through airport security with 50 of the pills that killed Prince, prescribed or not, than I could with less than a gram of weed or a bottle of shampoo.

Herb: I appreciate what you are saying. Now, I haven't ruled-out either that Prince could have very well known these pills were "laced", but took them anyway, but I'm leaning more on the side of "he did not know" what he was really ingesting. Another thing, Prince was a smart dude, and with all the harmful street drugs out there, you would think he would know better. But, we just don't know what was going on inside his head. The fact is, Prince was in pain and he didn't want to tell anyone, and that just breaks my heart. Maybe he felt he could "deal" with it on his own, which is the saddest part of all.

I agree with you on the NSA.

[Edited 8/25/16 12:34pm]

herb4 said:

cloveringold85 said:

Herb: I apologize for calling you a "troll", but I said that because you called me a "crazy person", and that was before you apologized for saying I was wrong, but then you said I am still wrong, LOL, but anyways.....

We all have to respect each other's opinion. I don't think it's nice to call someone "crazy" just because they feel differently about what happened to Prince, that's all I'm saying. I don't agree with what a lot of people say on here at times, but you have to look at things from another persepctive.

You think that Prince's case is cut and dry: he was an addict and overdosed and there is no foul-play, but there are many who do believe there was foul-play. I hope you are aware that this is still an ongoing investigation by the Carver County Sheriff and the DEA. The circumstances surrounding Prince's death is in fact very "complicated", and the case is far from being closed.

It's all right. We're good. I was out of line.

I honestly believe though that the extent of the "ongoing investigation" is nothing more than a matter of being able to prove who bought the bullshit pills and gather iron tight evidence. I do dismiss out of hand the idea the idea of any conspiracy or intentionality of murder and believe in my heart that the whole thing was a horrible accident.

I don't find it all that complicated and feel comfortble beleving that I know about 90-95% of what transpired.

I could be wrong.

Herb: All is well and thank you!

I agree; I think the DEA is just trying to find the "source" of the pills. Not sure if they ever will.

Was it confrimed that Prince was not a long term fentanyl user? Did the medical examiner say that?

Menes said:

Was it confrimed that Prince was not a long term fentanyl user? Did the medical examiner say that?

Depends on what you mean by confirmed. The ST reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl in his system then, and I believe -- though I'd have to look it up -- the article stated that the ME tested (probably a hair test) and determined that he was not a long-term user so he took the fentanyl in the last 24 hours of life. People here have said the hair test would go back 90 days.

This tracks with the ME report that states it as an accidental, self-administered OD. If he had fentanyl in his system, indicating that he was a regular user, how could one state with certainty that it was accidental? Suicide was ruled out pretty quickly by LE and then the ME and that tracks with him taking a dose of vicodin but getting a fatal dose of fentanyl. And, the ST said that LE is leaning toward the idea that he did not know he was taking fentanyl. This all points to him not being a long-term fentanyl user. Of course, we don't have the definitive word from the investigation, such as it may be.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:15pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:26pm]

teach49 said:

Menes said:

Was it confrimed that Prince was not a long term fentanyl user? Did the medical examiner say that?

Depends on what you mean by confirmed. The ST reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl in his system then, and I believe -- though I'd have to look it up -- the ME tested (probably a hair test) and determined that he was not a long-term user so he took the fentanyl in the last 24 hours of life. People here have said the hair test would go back 90 days.

This tracks with the ME report that states it as an accidental, self-administered OD. If he had fentanyl in his system, indicating that he was a regular user, how could one state with certainty that it was accidental? Suicide was ruled out pretty quickly by LE and then the ME and that tracks with him taking a dose of vicodin but getting a fatal dose of fentanyl. And, the ST said that LE is leaning toward the idea that he did not know he was taking fentanyl. This all points to him not being a long-term fentanyl user. Of course, we don't have the definitive word from the investigation, such as it may be.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:15pm]

You said the Star Tribune reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl was in his system? Where did they say that? Who did they source to confirm that? The ME?

She would be the only one that would know that. I only recall the ME's report stating that it was an accidental self administered OD in her medical opinion. I am wodnering where poeple are getting that the Star Tribune confirmed that he was not a long term user.

teach49 said:

Menes said:

Was it confrimed that Prince was not a long term fentanyl user? Did the medical examiner say that?

Depends on what you mean by confirmed. The ST reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl in his system then, and I believe -- though I'd have to look it up -- the article stated that the ME tested (probably a hair test) and determined that he was not a long-term user so he took the fentanyl in the last 24 hours of life. People here have said the hair test would go back 90 days.

This tracks with the ME report that states it as an accidental, self-administered OD. If he had fentanyl in his system, indicating that he was a regular user, how could one state with certainty that it was accidental? Suicide was ruled out pretty quickly by LE and then the ME and that tracks with him taking a dose of vicodin but getting a fatal dose of fentanyl. And, the ST said that LE is leaning toward the idea that he did not know he was taking fentanyl. This all points to him not being a long-term fentanyl user. Of course, we don't have the definitive word from the investigation, such as it may be.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:15pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:26pm]

RE: Hair Test - yes, there is a full scope drug test that is performed by using a lock of hair that reveals what drugs might have been used in last 90 days. Per the ME and "official" cited in the latest news reports, he doesn't seem to have been a drug user.

FUNKNROLL said:

teach49 said:

Depends on what you mean by confirmed. The ST reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl in his system then, and I believe -- though I'd have to look it up -- the article stated that the ME tested (probably a hair test) and determined that he was not a long-term user so he took the fentanyl in the last 24 hours of life. People here have said the hair test would go back 90 days.

This tracks with the ME report that states it as an accidental, self-administered OD. If he had fentanyl in his system, indicating that he was a regular user, how could one state with certainty that it was accidental? Suicide was ruled out pretty quickly by LE and then the ME and that tracks with him taking a dose of vicodin but getting a fatal dose of fentanyl. And, the ST said that LE is leaning toward the idea that he did not know he was taking fentanyl. This all points to him not being a long-term fentanyl user. Of course, we don't have the definitive word from the investigation, such as it may be.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:15pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:26pm]

RE: Hair Test - yes, there is a full scope drug test that is performed by using a lock of hair that reveals what drugs might have been used in last 90 days. Per the ME and "official" cited in the latest news reports, he doesn't seem to have been a drug user.

But who said that the ME said he was not a long term user? Does anybody have that " source". Thanks

Menes said:

FUNKNROLL said:

RE: Hair Test - yes, there is a full scope drug test that is performed by using a lock of hair that reveals what drugs might have been used in last 90 days. Per the ME and "official" cited in the latest news reports, he doesn't seem to have been a drug user.

But who said that the ME said he was not a long term user? Does anybody have that " source". Thanks

Im not trying to be difficult here but you said "per the ME". When did she say that? This was not in her report, and I dont remember her giving any interviews about any test.

Menes said:

teach49 said:

Depends on what you mean by confirmed. The ST reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl in his system then, and I believe -- though I'd have to look it up -- the ME tested (probably a hair test) and determined that he was not a long-term user so he took the fentanyl in the last 24 hours of life. People here have said the hair test would go back 90 days.

This tracks with the ME report that states it as an accidental, self-administered OD. If he had fentanyl in his system, indicating that he was a regular user, how could one state with certainty that it was accidental? Suicide was ruled out pretty quickly by LE and then the ME and that tracks with him taking a dose of vicodin but getting a fatal dose of fentanyl. And, the ST said that LE is leaning toward the idea that he did not know he was taking fentanyl. This all points to him not being a long-term fentanyl user. Of course, we don't have the definitive word from the investigation, such as it may be.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:15pm]

You said the Star Tribune reported that tests from the day before did not show that fentanyl was in his system? Where did they say that? Who did they source to confirm that? The ME?

She would be the only one that would know that. I only recall the ME's report stating that it was an accidental self administered OD in her medical opinion. I am wodnering where poeple are getting that the Star Tribune confirmed that he was not a long term user.

Well, everything that has been reported in the last week comes from "sources," first to the ST article and then other news organizations as the story gained traction. So, if you're looking for the official word from the investigation, then there has been nothing new since the ME's report, where she does confirm it was accidental (and LE stated fairly quickly that it was not suicide).

If you consider the reports this week from mainstream news organizations as having any credibility, then the story is that he had bloodwork in the last day from the doctor (remember the bloodwork?) and then the sources also state that the ME did testing that indicated he was not a longterm user. People here surmise that it was a hair test, which would go back 90 days.

It's my understanding that we will not hear from the ME again. The death report is all we will get. We may at some point hear from LE about the investigation, especially if arrests are made. We have not heard anything official from LE about the investigation.

Menes said:

FUNKNROLL said:

RE: Hair Test - yes, there is a full scope drug test that is performed by using a lock of hair that reveals what drugs might have been used in last 90 days. Per the ME and "official" cited in the latest news reports, he doesn't seem to have been a drug user.

But who said that the ME said he was not a long term user? Does anybody have that " source". Thanks

The ST has the source, but they did not give names.

teach49 said:

Menes said:

But who said that the ME said he was not a long term user? Does anybody have that " source". Thanks

The ST has the source, but they did not give names.

But the ST report does track with the ME's report (that it was accidental) and LE confidentally stating it was not suicide. That is consistent with him taking one pill but getting another instead. Of course, we are not privy to all the info so there are other ways they may come to that conclusion, but it's one way to check a news report...does it seem to be jibing with what LE and the ME have stated publicly (and it does).

Either way it does appear that he took what he thought was vicodin that came to him from some other source than a prescription from a doctor.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

teach49 said:

teach49 said:

The ST has the source, but they did not give names.

But the ST report does track with the ME's report (that it was accidental) and LE confidentally stating it was not suicide. That is consistent with him taking one pill but getting another instead. Of course, we are not privy to all the info so there are other ways they may come to that conclusion, but it's one way to check a news report...does it seem to be jibing with what LE and the ME have stated publicly (and it does).

Either way it does appear that he took what he thought was vicodin that came to him from some other source than a prescription from a doctor.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

Do you have that Star Tribune report or write up? I cant seem to find that. Thanks.

Menes said:

teach49 said:

But the ST report does track with the ME's report (that it was accidental) and LE confidentally stating it was not suicide. That is consistent with him taking one pill but getting another instead. Of course, we are not privy to all the info so there are other ways they may come to that conclusion, but it's one way to check a news report...does it seem to be jibing with what LE and the ME have stated publicly (and it does).

Either way it does appear that he took what he thought was vicodin that came to him from some other source than a prescription from a doctor.

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

[Edited 8/25/16 13:48pm]

Do you have that Star Tribune report or write up? I cant seem to find that. Thanks.

For the record, I am talking about the write up that states he had blood work/hair test done to support that he was not a long term user. Just that news story is what I want to see. I cant find that. I know what the ME report says.

RachB65 said:

morningsong said:

Nobody has an opinion about the possibility that the legitiate meds were actually discontinued about a year or 2 ago.

Than i would assume there was no terminal illness. ...Few doctors would refuse painkillers to a terminallly ill person. In fact,if he was that ill he could have had a hospice nurse live with him n have all the drugs he wanted

I say it again - who is to know if a terminal / critical illness had actually been officially confirmed? P might have had one but been in denial of its symptomatology and not sought medical intervention for it! That doesn't mean there wasn't one running concurrently with a dependence on pain meds (which ultimately killed him).

Menes said:

Menes said:

Do you have that Star Tribune report or write up? I cant seem to find that. Thanks.

For the record, I am talking about the write up that states he had blood work/hair test done to support that he was not a long term user. Just that news story is what I want to see. I cant find that. I know what the ME report says.

Prince accidentally overd...ar Tribune

Are you talking about this report?

Dibblekins said:

RachB65 said:

morningsong said: Than i would assume there was no terminal illness. ...Few doctors would refuse painkillers to a terminallly ill person. In fact,if he was that ill he could have had a hospice nurse live with him n have all the drugs he wanted

I say it again - who is to know if a terminal / critical illness had actually been officially confirmed? P might have had one but been in denial of its symptomatology and not sought medical intervention for it! That doesn't mean there wasn't one running concurrently with a dependence on pain meds (which ultimately killed him).

I feel it was chronic more so than terminal. But then we are talking about a very stubborn man. So, perhaps he turned down doctor's advice, and tried a few alternative routes, maybe they didn't work for him and he just called himself settling on what worked best for him, unfortunately with tragic results. It happens all the time. People ignore or refuse and make their own rules. In most cases we applaude them.

I think now I moving closer to accepting the fact that he lived the life he wanted to live and that's pretty much all one can ask for. I'm not crazy about it but I guess it really isn't my call. I've got my own life to live and I know I've made a whole lot of mistakes that may not come out well in the end for me, so what more can I say about what decisions he made.

morningsong said:

Dibblekins said:

I say it again - who is to know if a terminal / critical illness had actually been officially confirmed? P might have had one but been in denial of its symptomatology and not sought medical intervention for it! That doesn't mean there wasn't one running concurrently with a dependence on pain meds (which ultimately killed him).

I feel it was chronic more so than terminal. But then we are talking about a very stubborn man. So, perhaps he turned down doctor's advice, and tried a few alternative routes, maybe they didn't work for him and he just called himself settling on what worked best for him, unfortunately with tragic results. It happens all the time. People ignore or refuse and make their own rules. In most cases we applaude them.

I think now I moving closer to accepting the fact that he lived the life he wanted to live and that's pretty much all one can ask for. I'm not crazy about it but I guess it really isn't my call. I've got my own life to live and I know I've made a whole lot of mistakes that may not come out well in the end for me, so what more can I say about what decisions he made.

Indeed, Morningsong...And let's be honest, he wouldn't be the first man to be in denial about an underlying illness...In my experience, when it comes to visiting doctors about suspicious symptoms, burying their heads in the sand is par for the course!