A medical director has strongly dismissed suggestions that actress Regina Daniels secured a negative drug test result because she underwent a detoxification process or temporarily stopped using substances.
Medical Director Slams 'Generational Ignorance'
The reaction was triggered after Regina Daniels shared the result of her drug test online. Medical Director Chidi A. Okoroafor took to his Facebook page to address the circulating narratives.
He expressed strong disapproval of the notion that one can easily 'flush out' drugs from their system before a test. "Once I hear 'she has gone abroad to detoxify/flush out the drvgs b4 test', I Mark myself and family safe from your generational ignorance," he wrote.
Okoroafor further questioned the logic in a series of rhetorical queries. He pointed out the inconsistency in such beliefs, especially when many families have relatives struggling with addiction and undergoing repeated rehabilitation.
Ned Nwoko's Statement on 'Temporary Abstinence'
Adding another layer to the discourse, Ned Nwoko, the estranged husband of Regina Daniels, issued a formal statement reacting to the negative drug test. He titled his statement pointedly: "Don't be fooled: Temporary abstinence is not sobriety."
Nwoko argued that a later negative test does not erase or disprove prior usage. "Presenting a later negative result as proof that no prior use occurred is Misleading and disingenuous," he stated.
He clarified that at best, such a result only indicates abstinence over a period of time. It does not, in his view, invalidate earlier medical reports or negate the reasons that prompted an intervention initially.
Public Reaction and Lasting Implications
The statements from both the medical expert and Ned Nwoko have fueled further public debate on the matter. They shift the focus from the single test result to broader issues of substance use, recovery, and public perception.
The incident, reported by Linda Ikeji on January 9, 2026, highlights how celebrity news can spark important conversations about health and misinformation. The core argument from both parties remains that a negative test following speculation does not conclusively address allegations of past behavior.
