Today's Evil Beet Gossip

Surprise! Even Zac Efron’s friends think he’s on drugs

zac efron

Zac Efron pitched some bullshit story to police yesterday after he and his “bodyguard” were beaten up by “transients” while waiting for a tow truck in the Skid Row area of Los Angeles overnight on Wednesday. The story sounded like absolute rubbish from start to finish – especially after the “slipped on a puddle and broke my jaw” nonsense last year, and turns out, his friends are on the same page as us and are pretty sure he’s doing drugs again.  Uh, duh! Ya think?

From TMZ:

Cops are skeptical, and it’s echoed by Zac’s friends.  As one friend put it, “Zac’s a loner.  He goes out rarely and the idea of him driving for miles to go to some sushi restaurant in downtown L.A. after midnight is preposterous.”

Several of Zac’s friends tell us the so-called bodyguard is not a bodyguard at all.  We’ve confirmed he’s a convicted drug dealer who has been spending a lot of time with Zac recently … despite warnings from friends.

There were a number of reports Zac went to rehab twice last year to kick his cocaine habit.  But sources now tell us … Zac NEVER went to rehab.  Both times he went to a friend’s house outside California and received private therapy — but that’s it.

Zac has lost friends in the last few months because they became frustrated that he was slipping off the rails again.

By the way … on Thursday we reported what the “bodyguard” told us … that he was viciously stabbed in the face, chest and stomach by transients.  Law enforcement sources tell us … when they arrived at the scene the only one bleeding was Zac.  The “bodyguard” was just sitting there texting away.

Right, so it’s complete bullshit, just like we thought. No surprises there.

Follow us on Twitter | Facebook

3 CommentsLeave a comment

  • ok simply enough to verify his story. Did a tow truck ever show up? Did anyone try to start his dead car? I guess if they did there wouldn’t be the need for this “drug deal gone bad” speculation story. BTW I think he was trying to score drugs

  • I agree with Bieber Our Canadian health care syestm is not perfect but when you consider the overall impact of administrating universal health care there are substantial costs savings, which means we pay less for the same services. Spreading the risks irregardless of health status greatly reduces the cost per individual in the long term. It is also a question of morals. The USA is the wealthiest nation in the world and yet 40, 000, 000 persons cannot afford basic health care needs. The disparity between the rich and the poor suggests that their fundamental values are individualistic when you consider how they treat the least among them. The USA is generally an unhealthy nation with poor publicly funded health promotion and prevention strategies focusing on a curative approach (technology and drugs) will be unsustainable as the costs of technology and drugs rise and the population continues to age (* these costs administrative, technology and drugs are largely driven by large corporations). USA assumes that we pay astronomically for our high quality health care but the truth is that USA spends approximately 15% of their GDP but only maintains a world ranking of 37, which means their return on investment is far worse than ours (we pay 10% GDP, 30th ranking) plus we get universal coverage for all (WHO, 2000). The poor health care syestm of the USA results in substantial costs to society (PYLL, etc). Our syestm protects persons such as single mothers so that a cycle of health inequality does not continue to their children. I have studied other health care syestms, including studying abroad in the UK and I am convinced that not only our publically funded health care syestm but many public and two-tiered syestms across OECD developed world are by far better than the US’ at a lower cost. For more information check out the World Health Organization world rankings. RamonaMSc Health Services and Public Health ResearchBHSc Health Information Management