I was at the PC yesterday, Awesome, but at the same time it got me curious as to how hair implants have been succseful on some people and not on others. As we all know Keith underwent a series of implants in the early to mid 90's, but they appear to have been totally unacceptable, similary Elton John tried every method to salvage his thinning bonce and in the end resorted to wigs. Yet Mick Jagger and Bono are two very famous stars who've had hair implants and they appear to be 100% accectable and a success. Does anyone know why? It can't be the cost or type of treatment as Mr Richards is not exactly short of a few bob, and Elton has spend a fortune over the years on his head.

By the way what happed to the craggy chicken like neck on Keef from the Licks tour, facelift?

Well, judging from seeing Keith's head from about 1 meter away, he is balding and wears it proudly. No sign of implants.

Mathijs

Seriously....did Keith have hait transplant cause I've never heard before???? And a face lift???? Or have I just been bitten?

Elto Johns bald....get out!!!

I´m with Mathijs here, even if I´m not so sure he´s proud.
Take a look at late Mr. Herbert "Bertie" Richards while he was with the guys during the 80´s tours. Another Herbert from Dartford.

hey micks hair looks great, implants or not and i think not

Dont know about Micks "implants";
but he sure has dropped some ink bottles over it, right?

"As we all know Keith underwent a series of implants in the early to mid 90's"
What exactly is the source of this knowledge that we all seem completely unaware of except you Maverick?

If Keith wanted to have a full head of hair, and no bald spots, believe me he can afford to have it fixed!

What a piece of crap! Keith never had hair implants and so did Mick. Mick had never thinning hair. Look at all the pictures from the last 42 years man, and show me one single pic where you can see Micks hair is getting thin. It is all his real hair. He can be lucky. He will never get bald.

A few days or weeks ago, someone posted on this board pictures of Keith (before and after?) and thought it could be Botox. It matters not to me, all the shots of yesterday's press conference.............they all looked great, gave me chills, but also made me wish for $$ to regain my youth.
I LOVE 'EM!!! HAIR NO HAIR,"INK", "NO INK"...Botox or not....

My old man is 2 years older than Mick and still has a full head of hair. I don't think Mick would or needs to resort to implants.

Are we really arguing about their hair?

hell....half the fans in the stadium will be bald, balding, thinning, dying, implanting.....who gives a fat f*ck?

Shouldn't we be happy they are still ALIVE?

Start 'em up, F*CKERS....and SEE YOU THERE!!

WOO-HOO.....is there ANYTHING better than the rush of hearing the Stones are back on the road????

I was air-guitaring the opening riffs to Brown Sugar all afternoon...throwing imaginary picks to the audience and doing my best "gorilla playing a guitar" imitations....

all in Keith's balding, non-proud, possibly-dyed, possibly-implanted, definitely burnt-out, arthritic-knuckled HONOR...

they f'n rule on any planet w/ any type of hair....so ROCK ON!!!

Right! Coolest man on earth (all of them)! Lets close this shite thread!

I wasn't being negative about keef's hair transplants/implants, just stating that as he's had them in the past, he seems to have rejected them and decided to bald graciously. Check out photo's from the early 90's to ones of about 95/96 then you will notice a dirfference.

Have any of you seen phot's of Mick's Dad? Bald as a coot he was, it was well known in the late 80's that Mick was undergoing some sort of hair restoration project.

Ron Wood's quite fortunate to, as the rest of the male side of his family are not so well blessed in the folicle department. mmm.....

Have you seen Let's Spend The Night Together? Charlie seems to have more hair now than he did 24 years ago, maybe there is hope for all you slapheads out there??

I thought you inherited your hair and/or hair loss patterns from your MOM'S side of the family....

Pseudo debate is this, anyway; that was the core of my stating of sh*te thread.
On Charlie it would be a matter of hair style.
Yep Basil Jagger is bald as a ....head; but we arent all inherited 100% from our fathers, not even on that. I think Mick has his mother to thank for his looks in many aspects (Rocks Off has a thread, it was up about a month ago, on Basil "Jo" Jagger -as far as I know he is still alive, 91-91 y o, as is Doris Richards, 86-87, - and other relatives: but I will not link it now, something tells me I have to do some work at my job...).

Less hair than now... ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-05-11 18:03 by Baboon Bro.

At least Maverick has a point concerning Charlie. The pic above is not 24 years ago, but 35. In Let´s spend the night together from the 1981 tour Charlie has really tin hair. In 1986 diry work he has definitely more hair. But ok, what are we talking about...

The Maverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wasn't being negative about keef's hair
> transplants/implants, just stating that as he's
> had them in the past, he seems to have rejected
> them and decided to bald graciously. Check out
> photo's from the early 90's to ones of about 95/96
> then you will notice a dirfference.
>
> Have any of you seen phot's of Mick's Dad? Bald as
> a coot he was, it was well known in the late 80's
> that Mick was undergoing some sort of hair
> restoration project.
>
> Ron Wood's quite fortunate to, as the rest of the
> male side of his family are not so well blessed in
> the folicle department. mmm.....
>
> Have you seen Let's Spend The Night Together?
> Charlie seems to have more hair now than he did 24
> years ago, maybe there is hope for all you
> slapheads out there??


What a load of shit. Can´t believe it.

Who cares? People who worry about the Stones hair needs to get a life or a girlfriend or something. Very said and pathetic.

IT'S THE SINGER NOT THE HAIR!!!!
THE NEW TOUR BEGIN 21. AUGUST AND THAT IS GREAT!!!

Chris Jagger has lots of hair - why shouldn't Mick?

Ronnie has always had lots of hair .....

Bill and Mick T. as well have lots of hair - have they had implants or is it just plain nature.....

Rod Stewart, Macca, Bruce S. have lots of hair - so it is not an impoosible thing to be hairy being 60 or so....

Charlie doesn't hide his loss of hair, neither Keith....

Edge is always using a top / hat to cover his baldness same with Little Steven....

I don't know why everyone is taken offence that the stones have had hair loss treatment, I'm simply pointing out that Mick Jaggers was a lot more succsesful than Keiths. No critisim, I couldn't care less if they are bald or not.

But the facts are that Keith did have hair implants in the early 90's check out photos over then past 15 years, thinning hair, then thick hair, now bald patches.

Jagger went undere treatment in the late 80's i think his was more minor and a great job by the way.

Other stars with hair implants include Bono, who has actually had the specialist who did the job come out and say so, at least his was succesful, ulike Francis Rossi and Elton John's! Keith's also but I suspect he doesn't really give a toss, fair play to him!

The Maverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know why everyone is taken offence that
> the stones have had hair loss treatment, I'm
> simply pointing out that Mick Jaggers was a lot
> more succsesful than Keiths. No critisim, I
> couldn't care less if they are bald or not.
>
> But the facts are that Keith did have hair
> implants in the early 90's check out photos over
> then past 15 years, thinning hair, then thick
> hair, now bald patches.
>
> Jagger went undere treatment in the late 80's i
> think his was more minor and a great job by the
> way.
>
> Other stars with hair implants include Bono, who
> has actually had the specialist who did the job
> come out and say so, at least his was succesful,
> ulike Francis Rossi and Elton John's! Keith's also
> but I suspect he doesn't really give a toss, fair
> play to him!


Get a life, Dumbass. You are talking too much shit. You are the only one who knows these "facts". You don´t have a clue about anything. Shut the @#$%& up and go out and play with the other children. You´re done!

What's the problem about that anyway.
I'm 22 years old now and I'll be bald for sure in a couple of years, as is my dad and my grandfather. I have absolutely no problem with that - and I couldn't care less about Keith's hair. And I think he doesn't care that much either.

they're old men, nothing wrong about hair loss
i'm half their age and balder than Charlie, I wish I were like Keith LOL

A new world Tour is announced, we get a first play of a new song and a cracking press conference and its taken 2 pages to discuss the possibility of Keith failed Hair Transplant. Its almost as bad as comparing MT v RW.....well almost!!

Anyway, it shows the popular cultures & in particular rock cultures obsession with youth... Hell, take a look at old freaky Chuckster Berry...
Give the boys a rest & lets discuss music again... I´m out of these threads (unless some r e a l wanking dumb-ass make some unbelievable stupid post again)

Thinking about Ronnie's hair, unnaturally thick for a man of his age, do you think he wears a wig? I saw Little Richard a couple of weeks ago and he definatly wears a wig. Maybe Ronnie wears something similar.

Keith looks ok with his bald batches though, I'm simply pointing out that he did try to cover his thinning locks a few years ago, but now accepts the loss, good on him, can't see why everyone is getting so uptight about it?

Gazza, give us the moonin smiley, huh? ...A, shite, he isnt here...

Keith does care hence the hooks and bandanas. Of course he cares. Mick has done something because he has lost hair, not much, but still.