I don't. I mean, really. Take a gander at the man. After he broke his crown
falling out of a tree, he must have been given some heavy duty opiates. Even if he had been clean prior to that fall, I would think he would relapse.

I am not judging. But as a former addict, I cannot say I could refrain from using again if I had as much money & as many connections as Keith has.

I think his alcoholism keeps the urge to use H at bay.

is that really all you have to think about? and not only think about, but take the time to post on the internet. About a man you know next to nothing about personally, who's medical care you know nothing about; whose personal drug use you know nothing reliable about for the last 20 years. Yet you hold a considered opinion about? really?

I mean really.

OLDKR

I don't think so. If Keith was using smack, he would write songs of the quality he wrote in the late sixties & early seventies.

Greetings from the Jersey Shore.

Quote
oldkr
is that really all you have to think about? and not only think about, but take the time to post on the internet. About a man you know next to nothing about personally, who's medical care you know nothing about; whose personal drug use you know nothing reliable about for the last 20 years. Yet you hold a considered opinion about? really?

I mean really.

OLDKR

Should I take that as a yes or a no, Church Lady?

The holier than thou attitude is unnecessary. If you didn't care for the topic, move on to another thread.

Quote
MILKYWAY
I don't. I mean, really. Take a gander at the man. After he broke his crown
falling out of a tree, he must have been given some heavy duty opiates. Even if he had been clean prior to that fall, I would think he would relapse.

I am not judging. But as a former addict, I cannot say I could refrain from using again if I had as much money & as many connections as Keith has.

I do not believe he does smack.

No, no, no. That's not to say he is drug-free, though.

I just think with a field as rich as the rolling stones it seems a strange thing to focus on, expecially given the absolutely limited information about the topic.

OLDKR

Well he did admit dabbling with it again in the 90's. But no I don't think he is a user. He probably had quite a scare with the fall, and the hard core drugs he had to take. He said as much, that is why he stopped doing blow. I don't think he is as big a drinker as he likes to lead people to believe. As with his smoking, a lot of it now is like the Rat Pack, part of the act.

Quote
oldkr
I just think with a field as rich as the rolling stones it seems a strange thing to focus on, expecially given the absolutely limited information about the topic.

OLDKR

Maybe you should check out the colonial's threads with such stimulating topics as whether the Stones wear boxers or briefs. Yes, perhaps those are more your cup of tea.

Does anyone REALLY believe Bill Wyman no longer bangs tons of chicks?

Quote
tkl7
Does anyone REALLY believe Bill Wyman no longer bangs tons of chicks?

Did he say he no longer does? I missed that article or interview.

Aren't there ways to tell? I mean from a visual standpoint. Pupils, manners and so on.

Quote
oldkr
is that really all you have to think about? and not only think about, but take the time to post on the internet. About a man you know next to nothing about personally, who's medical care you know nothing about; whose personal drug use you know nothing reliable about for the last 20 years. Yet you hold a considered opinion about? really?

I mean really.

OLDKR

Sir:

I am amazed by your hostility. Like it or not, Keith Richards was the poster child for drug use/abuse in the 1970s. It is not taboo for one to ask whether Keith still uses a drug he was addicted to for years.

Yet when someone did, you berated him. This type of reaction is very disconcerting. That's not right that member of this forum speculates as to whether Keith still uses smack and as a result that member & post get berated by a fellow member. Not right at all.

Ted

What would Keith have to gain by lying about his drug usage at this point in his life ?

Need I say more ?

After reading, well listening to Life, all it seemed to about was his drug habit, so its a fair question I think. I dont think he could give up totally, he clearly thinks that drugs are no problem for him and has had little regard if his drug taking effects others, like most drug takers, they are the only one that matters and others do not matter.

Quote
misterfrias
I don't think so. If Keith was using smack, he would write songs of the quality he wrote in the late sixties & early seventies.

Very well-reasoned and thoughtful response! Also, it made me laugh.

Keith's honeymoon period with smack gave us Let it Bleed thru to Exile...When it had truly hooked him and dragged him down into the gutter we got the dross that followed after..
Who knows what he gets up to nowadays?

Leave alone that old monkey "999". Now I have to dust this disc off as well as Walking into Clarksdale. Thanks man. It's been a while, maybe it will feel like something new.

I would speculate that his drug/alcohol use rate has been grossly exaggerated since the 90's, in fact I will say he is not even a true alcoholic as it seems he can moderate his drinking at will, a clinical alcoholic would find this almost impossible. He may be partly alcohol dependent as in not being able to quit all together but there is a difference. As far as heroin goes, I would be shocked if he still uses it regularly.

Was he even that strung out during his worst days, that the myth says? A junkie that are injecting smack tends to look in a certain way. But I haven't seen a single picture of him with bruised up arms or any marks that would reveal a needle use. I don't think I've even seen him hammered. There are tons of footage of Ronnie being so drunk that he can barely stand but this is the only footage of Keith I could think of where he seems really wasted.







Could his abuse of booze and drugs be widely exaggerated? I do think so.

No, he was a stone cold junkie. Rich, and on the best dope money could buy. And tons of handlers to basically move him around and get him to do what he was being paid to do. Wish You Where Here! But some of the lore of his partying was no doubt exaggerated. Of course there are stories that are far from the truth. But I have no doubt he was a junkie. There are pics of his upper arm badly mangled from the effects of skin popping. That is another reason he didn't have bruising or track marks, because he was not shooting intravenously. And man, just watching him on some interviews where he is practically drooling. And the rotted tooth and unbathed grime, he so often was awash in, is another indication of his junkiness. I wonder if he is wearing Patuli oil in that picture above? I hope something....

Quote
tkl7
Does anyone REALLY believe Bill Wyman no longer bangs tons of chicks?

very few outside the stones circle and under the age of 40 know who wyman is

Quote
DiscoVolante
Was he even that strung out during his worst days, that the myth says? A junkie that are injecting smack tends to look in a certain way. But I haven't seen a single picture of him with bruised up arms or any marks that would reveal a needle use. I don't think I've even seen him hammered. There are tons of footage of Ronnie being so drunk that he can barely stand but this is the only footage of Keith I could think of where he seems really wasted.







Could his abuse of booze and drugs be widely exaggerated? I do think so.

The Leibovitz pic is posing, though.

No he no longer does that crao if he did he woukd be dead plain and simple the man is 68 years old.

Quote
MILKYWAY
I don't. I mean, really. Take a gander at the man. After he broke his crown
falling out of a tree, he must have been given some heavy duty opiates. Even if he had been clean prior to that fall, I would think he would relapse.

I am not judging. But as a former addict, I cannot say I could refrain from using again if I had as much money & as many connections as Keith has.

No one could know for sure, but he certainly looks a lot more straight and sober in the most recent interviews and photos I've seen. I would think that heroin would be a very difficult drug to do only once in a while without falling back into total addiction.

Quote
MILKYWAY
I don't. I mean, really. Take a gander at the man. After he broke his crown
falling out of a tree, he must have been given some heavy duty opiates. Even if he had been clean prior to that fall, I would think he would relapse.

I am not judging. But as a former addict, I cannot say I could refrain from using again if I had as much money & as many connections as Keith has.

I consider the old PR story (see 25x5 video) about Keith coming off heroin as early as 1977/1978 (total BS of course) is some of the best PR the band has done and they had their reasons.

Keith having to buy his smack on the street in 1979, at least sometimes, could be a result of Mick and the lawyers making sure he or a dealer doesnt get busted again in a hotel, customs, studio or concert with the rest of the band. I do believe he got clean buy replacing heroin with booze and methadone in 1980, which seems to be the official story now. This makes sense. Mick would not go on tour with Keith on heroin in 1981. However I get your point. I too cant really see how he would maintain his lifestyle without dabbling now and then. The answer could be he took methadone when things got rough and drinking hard every day. He did dabble in 1997 and it shows, he seems much calmer and focused. And yes he might dabble now but that could be vicodin and oxycontin, same stuff his daughter uses.

Without making any kind of excuses for heroin I cant say it was a good thing to replace heroin with booze in the 80s. He lost something.

Quote
vertigojoe
Keith's honeymoon period with smack gave us Let it Bleed thru to Exile...When it had truly hooked him and dragged him down into the gutter we got the dross that followed after..
Who knows what he gets up to nowadays?

He was really hooked in 1968/1969 so that was a good thing for rock n roll. He got worse when he quit in the 80s.

Quote
Rickster
No he no longer does that crao if he did he woukd be dead plain and simple the man is 68 years old.

If he woukld use pure heroin in some form it wouldnt always show. Drinking is what makes him nutty, not smack. Heroin doesnt make him older, drinking does. No I dont think he uses heroin and I think he cut down on the booze the last two years. But I dont think its possible for him to stop using coke and cannabis and I dont think he will ever completely rule out smack. He said it himself btw.

Quote
whitem8
That is another reason he didn't have bruising or track marks, because he was not shooting intravenously.

He did both ways actually, from the start. I guess the skinpopping was sometimes easier on the road.