Jackson 'in good health before jab', says report
Michael Jackson was in good health before being given the anaesthetic that killed him, a leaked post mortem report revealed today.
The report, obtained by The Associated Press news agency, shows Jackson was not the sickly skeleton of a man portrayed by some.
It says Jackson's arms were covered with punctures, his face and neck were scarred and he had tattooed eyebrows and lips. But overall he was a fairly healthy 50-year-old.
Jackson's 136lbs were in the acceptable range for a 5ft 9ins man and his heart was strong. He had some arthritis and his lungs were damaged, which may have left him short of breath.
But the report said none of those health issues were life-threatening and that the pop star died from the injection his personal physician gave him to sleep.
His lungs were the most seriously affected, with chronic inflammation and he had reduced capacity that might have left him short of breath.
However, according to the document, the lung condition was not serious enough to be a direct or contributing cause of death.
"His overall health was fine," said Dr Zeev Kain, chairman of the anaesthesiology department at the University of California, Irvine, who read the report. "The results are within normal limits."
Jackson died at his rented Los Angeles mansion on June 25 after his personal physician, Dr Conrad Murray, administered the anaesthetic propofol and two other sedatives to get the chronic insomniac to sleep, court documents state.
Propofol, normally a surgical anaesthetic used in operating rooms, acts as a respiratory depressant and requires constant monitoring.
When Murray realised Jackson was unresponsive, he began frantic efforts to revive him but Jackson never regained consciousness and was declared dead at the University of California, Los Angeles Medical Centre.
Although the full autopsy report has not been publicly released, the coroner's office announced last month that Jackson's death was a homicide caused by "acute propofol intoxication", with the other sedatives listed as a contributing factor.
They said the standard of care for administering propofol was not met and the recommended equipment for patient monitoring, precision dosing and resuscitation was missing.
