This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#214614 by t-Roy and The Smoking Section
Tue May 14, 2013 2:52 pm
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130514/DA690BH02.html


This was "preventative"...and it prevents me from seeing her the same now.

I sincerely wish she would have waited until there was a good reason for this....

I can think of two very nice reasons she should not have done this...

Those reasons are: left and right.

#214616 by gbheil
Tue May 14, 2013 3:50 pm
Sad . . . what a sad cry out for attention.
The genetic link is unproven, and even worse someone whom can afford so much personal medical care to have gone so extreme a measure.

If there was ever "cheese on her cracker" it has slid clean off.

Sadder even still is the multitude of the misled whom worship at the celebrity alter will follow suit.

#214622 by jimmydanger
Tue May 14, 2013 4:04 pm
A lot of women are having preventative hysterectomies and mastectomies in the hope of delaying the inevitable. How about live the best you can right now and play the cards you're dealt as you get them? So many people think they're going to live forever.

#214624 by Cajundaddy
Tue May 14, 2013 5:13 pm
They will be missed...

#214625 by Planetguy
Tue May 14, 2013 5:20 pm
not by me....i have them mounted on the dash of my car.

#214630 by gbheil
Tue May 14, 2013 6:21 pm
Not going to go into the the whole "fear of death" issue.

I will say that whomever is telling these women that their cancer is "inevitable" based on some rather sketchy genetic science had best hope their eternal dues are paid in full . . . after the lie is told.
#214642 by J-HALEY
Tue May 14, 2013 8:38 pm
yod wrote:http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130514/DA690BH02.html


This was "preventative"...and it prevents me from seeing her the same now.

I sincerely wish she would have waited until there was a good reason for this....

I can think of two very nice reasons she should not have done this...

Those reasons are: left and right.

After the surgery can they not put a newer and improved version (implants) in? :D

#214643 by jimmydanger
Tue May 14, 2013 8:47 pm
She already had her implants put in, but I would not call them improved. Not sure if you've ever experienced implants but they do not feel very nice.

#214644 by VinnyViolin
Tue May 14, 2013 9:13 pm
Planetguy wrote:not by me....i have them mounted on the dash of my car.

:lol: That's cool, but a little bit selfish to be hording such an icon all to yourself?

They would look sweet on the front bumper of your Jag!

Cause too many accidents though ... but take a look at your upright bass, there above it's waist? Of course you would have to eat the extra expense of outfitting it with fashionable bikini tops .. but then you could ask for more money when you play topless, not to mention the fortune in tips! :lol:

#214645 by gbheil
Tue May 14, 2013 10:09 pm
jimmydanger wrote:She already had her implants put in, but I would not call them improved. Not sure if you've ever experienced implants but they do not feel very nice.


Not going into how I know this but as implants go, a lot depends on
(1) The popper or improper application of the appliance.
Proper appliance selection ( as in replacement for cosmetic repair post operative ) A size of implant suitable to the host can be very natural in appearance and feel.
Improper appliance application ( augmentation for purely vain reasoning ) can also be very close to "real" if the application is not a gross mismatch to the host body type. Such as adding a D to a host whom was an A frame.
Huge implants on scrawny chicks look and feel fake, and also often cause serious health issues over time.

(2) The natural amount of adipose tissue surrounding the implant.
Again the principle is the same, minimal augmentation is barely noticeable. Grossly negligent applications look and feel like "fake tits".

#214646 by Joewillplay
Tue May 14, 2013 10:33 pm
sanshouheil wrote:
jimmydanger wrote:She already had her implants put in, but I would not call them improved. Not sure if you've ever experienced implants but they do not feel very nice.


Not going into how I know this but as implants go, a lot depends on
(1) The popper or improper application of the appliance.
Proper appliance selection ( as in replacement for cosmetic repair post operative ) A size of implant suitable to the host can be very natural in appearance and feel.
Improper appliance application ( augmentation for purely vain reasoning ) can also be very close to "real" if the application is not a gross mismatch to the host body type. Such as adding a D to a host whom was an A frame.
Huge implants on scrawny chicks look and feel fake, and also often cause serious health issues over time.

(2) The natural amount of adipose tissue surrounding the implant.
Again the principle is the same, minimal augmentation is barely noticeable. Grossly negligent applications look and feel like "fake tits".
LOL,,,That's a little too much info there pard.Who knows those kinda facts???Just give me the sausage don't tell me how it's made.

#214647 by gbheil
Tue May 14, 2013 10:40 pm
Joewillplay wrote:
sanshouheil wrote:
jimmydanger wrote:She already had her implants put in, but I would not call them improved. Not sure if you've ever experienced implants but they do not feel very nice.


Not going into how I know this but as implants go, a lot depends on
(1) The popper or improper application of the appliance.
Proper appliance selection ( as in replacement for cosmetic repair post operative ) A size of implant suitable to the host can be very natural in appearance and feel.
Improper appliance application ( augmentation for purely vain reasoning ) can also be very close to "real" if the application is not a gross mismatch to the host body type. Such as adding a D to a host whom was an A frame.
Huge implants on scrawny chicks look and feel fake, and also often cause serious health issues over time.

(2) The natural amount of adipose tissue surrounding the implant.
Again the principle is the same, minimal augmentation is barely noticeable. Grossly negligent applications look and feel like "fake tits".
LOL,,,That's a little too much info there pard.Who knows those kinda facts???Just give me the sausage don't tell me how it's made.



LOL . . . who knows . . . a >20 year RN whom happens to like tits . :lol:

#214654 by t-Roy and The Smoking Section
Wed May 15, 2013 1:12 am
jimmydanger wrote:A lot of women are having preventative hysterectomies and mastectomies in the hope of delaying the inevitable. How about live the best you can right now and play the cards you're dealt as you get them? So many people think they're going to live forever.




That's what I don't understand too.


This is what they do once you have the cancer, so why couldn't she do this IF she got that? I mean, she could die suddenly in a plane crash (or a thousand other things) before this happened.

It's a sad day for mankind and for Brad Pitt.





.

#214659 by J-HALEY
Wed May 15, 2013 2:29 am
jimmydanger wrote:She already had her implants put in, but I would not call them improved. Not sure if you've ever experienced implants but they do not feel very nice.


Dang you just know everything about everything don't you brother? I ENJOY them EVERY DAY and THEY'S BIG and absolutely PERFECT!
Jimmy it is obvious you don't know squat about TITS! :lol:

#214661 by J-HALEY
Wed May 15, 2013 2:53 am
My point is (no pun intended) that science has all kinds of options these days. Angelina Jolie has the best doctors and options available. It is common sense that her tata's are VERY natural! I know MY beautiful wife's are! :wink:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest