It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chemicals VS Herbs

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   
docs are not there to prevent you from dying!!!!! They have a blade hanging over their head that makes them called lawsuits.
Doctors cannot do preventative medicine well. They don't trust herbs because most are not standardized and may contain 'other' unknown ingredients.

They can treat disease- if they can figure out what it is.

Once they can treat the disease they can prevent being sued.

If you are allergic to the medicine- if the medicine has more side effects than what it is treating- too bad.....(go to a naturopath instead- they at least can listen to what ALL your problems are and get to the root of the imbalance)

Sounds like the preventative medicines you are taking in small amounts over a long period of time may help you in the long run. Exercise, diet, and stress management can help prevent most '1st World diseases' like cholesterol, heart disease, and diabetes. IMHO if you want to be healthy, avoid toxins and eat organic, take a multivitamin, breathe clean air (if you can find it) meditate 20 minutes a day, exercise as much as you can without burning out.

I meditate, practice karate, split wood, geocache (gps game- great for walking and discovering places you never knew about) and am planning on starting a market garden, greenhouse, and nursery. The best food you can eat is from your own garden or at least local produce!

Good night and Good Luck




posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I take Coumadin and have since my pacemaker was placed in Dec.1998 for uncontrolled atrial fibrillation. I don't like it but...I have discussed trying aspirin, heparin, gingko and others meds (only available in Europe and Central America because of FDA control here), and there really is nothing that can track the therapeutic levels needed to not cause a stroke if a clot forms. I have met with various Naturopathic Doctors and Herbalists and not one has an answer as far as using something other than (warfarin)Coumadin. I DO KNOW if you are taking Coumadin you need to be extremely careful as to what herbs you use..i.e. gingko, St. John's Wort, ginseng, foods and products high in Vit.K, (all can cause your therapeutic levels to increase which can also cause a hemorrhage). I also find Coumadin more effective than warfarin but my new insurance won't cover Coumadin. (Rip off).

Thanks, lalaRN



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
As somebody pointed out earlier, There is no "money" in preventing Various diseases. When You are sick, You will pay lots of money. In order to get well.

When you well, You will not pay lots of money. In order to stay well. You have other responsibilities; That Will Get Your Hard earned paycheck. (Thus you seek to maintian your Lifestyle, While The Healthcare Agency focuses on its profit margins'.)

Most Americans will Buy the "cheaper" product. Unless its Vital For thier well being. (Hence the popularity of Doller General, Walmart, etc.)

This is where Herbal medicine, Yoga, Acupunture, Exercise, etc. Plays its part.

For exp.

Saint John' Wart is proven to help "mild" depression. You pay 5.00$ for about 100 Tablets.

The More better SRI Inhibitor Like Lexapro Costs 30.00$ for a 30 day supply.

While lexapro is More effective to control "mild" depression. It still Costs 1.00$ a pill Vrs 5 cents.

And if Your Depression can be Controlled by a 5 Cent pill. Your Going to Use the Cheaper procuct And spend the 95$ on something else. (A Simple rule of supply and demand.)(or save 5 cents and practice meditation.)

(to the original poster- I'm sorry I missed the Weekly testing of Blood levels. And Yes, It seems that those who Care. Are becoming Few and far Between.
And I fear one Day. We will become a "resource" and not a living person.)



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Wow quite a bit of information in this thread.I just wanted to get people's information on the following.My father who was in hospital last year due to a mishap with his diabetes(which is now under excellent control thanks to listening and a better specialist.) Was prescribed "low dose" aspirin which at the time no doubt the positives of its use far outweighed any negatives.But after reading this thread and trying to find more reputable information about how it could damage platlet formation among other things.Does anyone know of any good alternatives or recommendations i can bring up with the GP.There is bound to be an alternative for him out there.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Hello Tarzan

If you're looking at 'natural', you don't get any better than aspirin, really - it was originally isolated from the bark of a willow tree, I think! Old folk remedy in the UK was boiled willow bark, I think.

All aspirin does is inhibit cyclo-oxygenase in platelets, which stops prostaglandins being formed, which in turn means you are less likely to get clots being formed where you don't want them being formed. Your dad will be getting a low-dose formulation, most probably at about 81 mg a day. There is definite evidence that it's a good thing wrt having a lower risk of stroke or TIA - try

www.cochrane.org...

Possible cautions would be in asthma (could maybe exacerbate it), and stomach ulcers (need all the prostaglandin you can get in this instance). Various other rarer problems, but I think they are the main 2. The Cox-2 inhibitors (eg Vioxx) were banned, but that's nothing to do with ASA! You'll probably find a bit of 'oozing' after dental extractions etc, but nothing dreadful. All in all, pretty safe and effective.

Just because something is marketed as an 'alternative' doesn't mean it's any better! Make sure they have substantiated evidence behind any claims. Also watch out for cost. 'Baby' aspirin costs pennies (or cents, depending on your location), but the stuff the drug companies throw at middle-aged men for prevention costs dollars despite being the same stuff in a fancy packet. (Allegedly).

I think aspirin is pretty safe and pretty effective and millions of people use it. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

Cheers

TD



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beer_Guy
Anyone have any insight as to why there are such big differences in doctors attitudes?


The Medical Indu$try bank$ on people being $ick and $taying $ick. Pharmaceutical corporation$ and mo$t practicing phy$ician$ have a $ymbiotic relation$hip.

Then there are a few doctors who really care about the health of the patient and are open to herbs and so on.

I take herbs for everything and they work better and with none of the nasty side effects. But I work with an herbalist, so they know what they're doing.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
Hello Tarzan

If you're looking at 'natural', you don't get any better than aspirin, really - it was originally isolated from the bark of a willow tree, I think! Old folk remedy in the UK was boiled willow bark, I think.

I think aspirin is pretty safe and pretty effective and millions of people use it. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

Cheers

TD



Hi,
He is on 100mg a day.Which as i belive the Dr still refered to as being "Low dossage".The only troubling thing for me was that i read it can hurt the kidneys.While the doctor's were worried of some damage he seems to be in the clear from what i understand.I mean why would the DR prescribe something if he had further problems.Should i be more worried and bring it up with the DR.

mod edit: shortened quote

[edit on 3-1-2006 by sanctum]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 05:07 AM
link   
You should certainly discuss it with your GP. Worst case, you could get peripheral edema, sodium and water retention and renal artery constriction, which is made worse by ACE inhibitors (used for hypertension). Not sure how common it is, most people moan about stomach upset and GI problems rather than kidney stuff. I think it has a pretty good track record

Every drug (alternative and mainstream) is going to have a risk and a benefit, it's really a question of whether the benefit (decreased probability of stroke and heart attack) outweighs the risk. Whichever path you choose to go down, make sure there is firm evidence backing up the claims!

Cheers

TD



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
You should certainly discuss it with your GP.

Whichever path you choose to go down, make sure there is firm evidence backing up the claims!

Cheers



Thanks for the feedback it is much appreciated.I will discuss it with the Dr since you just brought up the use of ACE inhibitors which he is taking.

cheers

mod edit: shortened quote

[edit on 3-1-2006 by sanctum]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   
While I was recovering from surgery I had a lot more time on my hands than I really wanted, LOL. About all I did back then is research and sleep.
I found that aspirin is waaaay safer than Coumadin, and Ginko is waaaaaay safer than aspirin.
I just chose the lesser of three evils


One more thing,
Since I was a kid I always slept with a feather pillow. I recently got rid of my feather pillows and switched to poly-fill pillows. As time goes on(about a month now) my respiratory problems are disapearing.


Coincidence


Great discussions, all of you!
Thanks



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   
I believe a combination of answers come into play here.

In any field, you will find varrying degrees of deep understanding. Some mechanics have learned what to do in almost any situation by rote, and it works fine 80% of the time.
Others, like my grandfather, have an almost perfect knowledge of what every part is doing, what can go wrong with it, what the effect of that will be, and how to mitigate those effects and fix the problem.

Same with doctors I would expect. They have their educations, they master the knowledge to varying degrees, and some have a more indepth insight of exactly what is causing the problem and what must be done to correct it.
That type will be better able to see when an herbal remedy is capable of providing appropriate relief. Others however may not have such an understanding of the intricacies of the problem and the medicines which treat it, and even if they do, may not necessarily know about alternative cures.

The second factor is skepticism. When skepticism is not guided by knowledge, effective answers can be written off because they sound similar to things that a person knows to be bad. Alternative treatments can be lumped together unfairly as a sham designed to make money. One might assume that all herbal remedies are bogus and that only a designer drug can work, just because they know that some herbal rememedies fail.

Then there is ego. These people belong to an elite profession. They spend an incredible amount of time on their educations, they invest a lot of money in those educations and then derive considerable income from it, and on top of all that they save lives. That'll give you an ego problem.

(although i'm swift to quote my mother, who is a critical care transport RN: "I don't really know how many people I've saved- maybe they would have lived anyway. On the other hand, I've got a pretty good idea of how many I've killed. Any nurse or doctor who says they never killed anybody is probably lying.")

When you've got that kind of a chip on your shoulder, it's hard to stomach the idea that "witch doctor" cures can do any part of what you and your high-calliber education and miracles of chemistry can.

Last but certainly not least, we're talking about money. Everyone needs money; in fact I know exactly how much money everyone needs: a little bit more. Even God needs money; in fact he needs it badly (or so my former church says).
The pharmaceutical industry is big money stuff. Government subsidies, massive prices, gross inefficiency in the name of ownership, 3 different medications to help grandpa perform in bed once his new hair drugs start getting him laid (while AIDS slaughters the poor wholesale), fight pot while pushing hardcore pills, etc etc: GET THE MONEY.
Whether the doctors are knowingly in on it or have been duped is up for debate, but money always finds a way. Money can do anything: Ask the president.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Hey Beer Guy

I agree with you about warfarin and aspirin, but then again it's 'horses for courses' - you use them in different situations.

Aspirin is more a 'well it's probably going to stop you getting a stroke or MI in the long run' drug, and thus not too extreme, whereas warfarin is a 'OMG, he's had Deep Vein Thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms and nearly died', we'd better stop this happening again ' sort of thing. It's more powerful, but comes with more risks.


Gingko I don't know a lot about - I come from a 'conventional' background, although I'm open-minded when there's good evidence (St John's Wort, sorry to keep repeating myself). Problem is good randomized control trials cost a fortune to do, so there may be stuff out there that works on people that is being dismissed because there isn't sufficient quality of evidence. It's a tough one.

I dunno. What can you say? Slap a 1000 people on gingko and 1000 similar people on warfarin over 20 years and see how many people live without having any 'significant events'. I'm sure someone's doing it as we speak, so wait until 2026 and you'll know exactly where you stand.


Cheers

TD



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Hello Vagabond

Please excuse me for completely messing up my attempts to quote you, because I'm not exactly sure how this option works!

**********************************************************
Same with doctors I would expect. They have their educations, they master the knowledge to varying degrees, and some have a more indepth insight of exactly what is causing the problem and what must be done to correct it.

*********************************************************

I completely agree with that statement. Pharmacology is incredibly complex, and most medical and dental students have forgotten their physiology because they study it in year 1 and 2. I know from experience that pharmacology lecturers speak s....l...o...w...l...y and try to avoid long words because we get confused very easily!

From my experience of prescribing a limited number of drugs (dentist), from what I can make out, the basic aim of this education is to prescribe so that you are relatively effective without killing the patient. I'll probably get away without having to prescribe more than six drug types in my entire career, although I have to know about the interactions of a lot more.

God only knows how difficult and stressful if must be to prescribe drugs to a patient with a whole host of conditions on a cocktail of meds already! I'd really have to try some to kill a patient with an Rx, but it must be pretty easy for a medic (Google Harold Shipman if you're interested, although frankly, I don't think it's unfair to say that he wasn't, strictly speaking, sane).


*********************************************************
That type will be better able to see when an herbal remedy is capable of providing appropriate relief. Others however may not have such an understanding of the intricacies of the problem and the medicines which treat it, and even if they do, may not necessarily know about alternative cures.

*********************************************************

To be fair, at least in Europe, you see a lot of people on alternative meds, be they homeopathic or naturopathic, so you're pretty aware of what people take. You also have it hammered into you (at least in Canada) the interactions these drugs have.

I think that some people are small-minded about these things, but others are open-minded. The only problem I have with the above statement is that unless there is good evidence that the alternative therapy works (see the reply I just posted to Beer Guy), it's difficult to say one way or the other if it works. For example:

www.cochrane.org...

If I was a doc, dealing with someone who had just been diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, or who had deep vein thrombosis, then I would be recommending warfarin, because it is proven to work. There just isn't the evidence for other stuff. Although that's not to say it doesn't work - it's just that it would need a randomized control trial (see Beer Guy reply) to be completely sure.

And when push comes to shove in these days of defensive medicine (or dentistry), when the patient gets of stroke and sues you, you need to be able to prove that what you did (or at least recommended) was based on the evidence.

That's not to say that the patient is not at least as important at the clinician in making a decision - the days of 'doing what the doc tells you' are long gone, and I am bang alongside the concept of informed consent (and informed refusal). I admire someone like Beer Guy for weighing up the pros and cons and taking responsibility for his own health, even if it deviates from what would be regarded as the gold standard of care.

**********************************************************
The second factor is skepticism. When skepticism is not guided by knowledge, effective answers can be written off because they sound similar to things that a person knows to be bad. Alternative treatments can be lumped together unfairly as a sham designed to make money. One might assume that all herbal remedies are bogus and that only a designer drug can work, just because they know that some herbal rememedies fail.
***********************************************************

Bang on. I agree with this 100% - I just don't see a way around it unless lots of expensive studies are done comparing various treatment options over *years*. Which isn't much good for people trying to make decisions now.

********************************************************
(although i'm swift to quote my mother, who is a critical care transport RN: "I don't really know how many people I've saved- maybe they would have lived anyway. On the other hand, I've got a pretty good idea of how many I've killed. Any nurse or doctor who says they never killed anybody is probably lying.")

When you've got that kind of a chip on your shoulder, it's hard to stomach the idea that "witch doctor" cures can do any part of what you and your high-calliber education and miracles of chemistry can.
********************************************************

Pretty much accepted that there is a 30-40% mis-diagnosis rate in standard medicine. The classic one is the 'you need your tonsils out' option in the New England Medicine Journal, can't remember the reference, but basically, it was competely arbritary.

Some naturopaths know what they are going, and some alternative therapies work. However, some don't.

quackwatch.org...

I'm starting to sound like a cracked record, but if both 'professions' were held up to similar standards of evidence and care, everyone would be a lot happier because we would all know where we stand.

**********************************************************
industry is big money stuff. Government subsidies, massive prices, gross inefficiency in the name of ownership, 3 different medications to help grandpa perform in bed once his new hair drugs start getting him laid (while AIDS slaughters the poor wholesale), fight pot while pushing hardcore pills, etc etc: GET THE MONEY.
**********************************************************

Pharmaceutical companies are evil multinationals? Get away.


Completely agree. Malaria kills millions, but gets a pathetic budget because most people that catch it tend to be poor and thus can't pay for the meds.

On the other hand, they have to invest billions to get a drug to market, under severe regulations to make their profit. Of course Vioxx proves that the system doesn't always work. In Europe at least, the homeopaths can claim more or less anything for any product without jumping through the same hoops. Think this may have changed recently due to proposed EU legislation, but am on the wrong continent now so am out of the loop on that one.

Classic one was somethin like 'Oil of Evening Primrose' on aphtous ulcers. Had patients swearing blind that their symptoms had completely resolved by 7 days. Just try and convince them that they'd have had exactly the same result by doing a hot salty mouthwash, because on average it take 7 days for a minor ulcer to clear up anyway. No chance. Still, it keeps people happy and the money in circulation which is good for the economy.


That's being facetious, I know - there is some pretty good evidence for other remedies, but as I said before, a level playing field in terms of evidence-based prescribing would make everyone a lot happier.

Have to go and get my fix of caffeine now! And let let's not get started on *that* drug!

Cheers

TD



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Wow, very informative Dragon. Have a WATS vote on me.

You have voted TaupeDragon for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


The best way to do the quoting thing is to look at the very top right of the section of the page where the post to be quoted is located.

all you do then is copy the [./quote] tag and insert it where ever you like to end a given section of quotation, hit "enter" to start a new line and make your reply.

By copying the [.quote] and [./quote] tags that are generated when you use the automatic quote button, you can insert them anywhere and arrange a pattern of quotes and replies in any way that tickles you.

Hope this helps.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   
While modern medicine has many upsides and most doctors try their best to the right thing there are some things in the medical business that alarms me.

My biggest gripe is most prescription medications are brought to doctor's offices by attractive young women who usually bring 5-star catering with them. They no nothing about the medicine they are selling to the doctors, there purpose is to be eye candy for the doctors and make the doctor's office happy in hopes they will prescribed that product to their patients. It is no illegal because almost every doctor office(general family physicians) has a few pharmacedical reps pay visit them every week.

I briefly worked at a fine dining restauraunt and we had a huge meeting paid for by the company that made Vioxx, this was just after their first round of problems. This meeting had about 100 local doctors with their spouses and was Vioxx attempt to assure the doctors their product was safe. Basically there were a few very attractive female(none with any medical credentials) that 'organized' and greated all the doctors and 1 doctor who had a powerpoint presentation that proves that Vioxx was a safe drug. Needless to say less then a month later Vioxx was pulled permantly because it was deemed unsafe.

Drug companies way of pushing their drugs is not medically sound. They just want more people taking their drug and the best way it to make a good impression. While I do think most doctors try to help their patients, they are still flawed humans and drug companies do a great job using of making an impression that their product is great, and are better at marketing than they are a healing the sick.

Perhaps almost all medical problems can be treated with herbs. The reason why drug companies are quick to dismiss herbal remedies as 'hoodoo' and can influence some doctors to do the same is they cannot patent something that is natural. Their power lies in sythetic chemicals they develop and those patents are only for a limited number of time so they are quick to find a 'better' alternitive before theie patent runs out.

As for me, I have no insurrance so going to the doctor not and option. When I feel sick I go for some homegrown orange juice and amino-acids like L-lysine.


[edit on 3-1-2006 by jrod]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   
The Fact that I think most people Forget.

Is that Almost All "original" meds have started in Herb Form. And over the Years, Man tries to improve on those "herb" chemicals. Many For Good, And many For Bad. (You would be surprised how many "animals" die for our Benefit.)

Recently, A lot of Health Care has taken the approach that man made is always Better then "nature" made meds. (With many reasons for the Cause, Already stated. For - Safety, Proven effective in test studies, etc -Against Greed, Ego, Ignorance, Sexual attraction, etc)

And this is my most Important Point. There is many in the Health Care Fields that try to "Use" the best of "Both Worlds". "Natural" and "Man made". And The Vast Majority of "All Natural" and "Controlled Man made" Idealists. Paint us as either Being "Sell outs", Or Worse "Traitors for the opposing camp".

And my only Hope, Is That I am allowed to talk. Before I'm Labeled. In either camp.

just a side note:

As A Nurse, I am Barly Able to Afford Helath Insurence for my Family. I spend 700.00$ A Month on Health Insurence. They, Not me. Are making the money.
I also Have To pay a large amount of money on Malpractice insurence. Agian They, Not Me. Are making The Money.

Both Malpractice, And Health Insurence Take 60% of my income. So I Know from First Hand experience. What its like to be "Ra*ed" by the Health Care Field.

Many of my Doctor Friends Pay 75% of thier income For Malpractice Insurence. And Yes, Thier 25% Income. Is Way more Then most incomes in America. But Still, Why must they Pay 75% of thier Income. And the Health Care Frauds out there selling "Mercury" as a Cure all. Get off, Scotch Free. (Note: Many Doctors Will Go Broke from Malpractice Payments, And the lawsuits that go with it.)

And the Conspiracy Is. Why are the Suits\Lawyers Allowed to "rape" the Health Care industry. While Doctors and Nurses Get all the Blame???



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Wow, very informative Dragon. Have a WATS vote on me.

You have voted TaupeDragon for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Thanks very much Vagabond! Representation without taxation - it can't be bad!


I'll keep your quote instructions in mind next time!

TD



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 07:09 PM
link   


My biggest gripe is most prescription medications are brought to doctor's offices by attractive young women who usually bring 5-star catering with them. They no nothing about the medicine they are selling to the doctors, there purpose is to be eye candy for the doctors and make the doctor's office happy in hopes they will prescribed that product to their patients. It is no illegal because almost every doctor office(general family physicians) has a few pharmacedical reps pay visit them every week.

I briefly worked at a fine dining restauraunt and we had a huge meeting paid for by the company that made Vioxx, this was just after their first round of problems. This meeting had about 100 local doctors with their spouses and was Vioxx attempt to assure the doctors their product was safe. Basically there were a few very attractive female(none with any medical credentials) that 'organized' and greated all the doctors and 1 doctor who had a powerpoint presentation that proves that Vioxx was a safe drug. Needless to say less then a month later Vioxx was pulled permantly because it was deemed unsafe.


Hey. I read something in the T.O. Globe and Mail just before Xmas about the New England Medical Journal and some bad ju-ju about the original cox-2 study. Will see if I can find it!

Companies will do everything they can this side of the law to 'bribe' GP's. It's usually sponsoring an event with all the canapes you can eat. Not *too* worried about that, because most people treat that with the contempt it deserves - whilst at the same time eating the spring rolls. Certainly in the NHS you are not allowed to prescribe 'brands', only generics, and I am pretty sure there is no financial incentive to prescribe on brand over another. Are you saying that North American doctors are directly compensated for prescribing a specific brand?

I have heard *rumours* of consultants being treated to 'ski holidays' by drug reps, but this is completely illegal in the EU at least, so maybe that's an urban legend. It would be *that* sort of thing that got my alarm bells ringing.




As for me, I have no insurrance so going to the doctor not and option. When I feel sick I go for some homegrown orange juice and amino-acids like L-lysine.


I come from a country (UK) where the medicine is socialized - completely free at the point of access. Cheap and cheerful, and not 'next day' treatment like the US. Waiting lists of months for several procedures. Higher tax rate (probably 40% top rate over $6OK US), but no need for private health insurance (unless you want it). What's the top rate in the US?

TD


[edit on 3-1-2006 by jrod]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   
The Globe and Mail link is available if you go to their site and pay them top dollar for 'insider's edition'!

Here's the 'free word's they'll give:

**********************************************************************


'Deletions' alleged in Vioxx study

By CAROLYN ABRAHAM

MEDICAL REPORTER

Friday, December 9, 2005, Page A1

Authors of a pivotal Canadian-led study involving the once popular painkiller Vioxx are now being accused of withholding evidence about the drug's heart risks by editors of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine.

The full text of this article has 939 words.
*********************************************************************

Way off topic I know. Sorry.
TD

PS You can get 'The Times' for free. What's so special about the Globe and Mail?


And here's proof it's a much better paper (edit)

www.timesonline.co.uk...

[edit on 3-1-2006 by TaupeDragon]



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 07:27 PM
link   
drug companies are pure evil. their drugs which "help" you just cause more problems which means you need to take more drugs which cause more problems ect. their are plenty of natural remedies that dont have freakish side effects. i dont nessecarily think doctors are bad but why bother taking a bunch of perscriptions when you could just take some herbs that come from the earth and are natural? good job in not falling for their lies



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join