• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

People/Organisms In The Field Of Biotech


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 05:23 AM


This thread is a collection of examples of strange but ture advancements in biotech. If you'd like to add to this topic, please limit your post to a couple of sentences, and add a link. A picture is welcome, but not required.



[caliban] A modern freakshow BJ? [unsure]
Ah well, why not.
[ggg]
[/caliban]




;) okok, you got me... It's just amazing what we can do with a few genes and a microscope. I just want to "see" what we're doing.... visceral primate instinct.

Edited by XxDoubleHelixX, 27 May 2003 - 10:26 PM.


#2 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 05:25 AM

Posted Image
In regular light, Alba appears like any other furry white rabbit. But place her under a black light, and her eyes, whiskers and fur glow an otherworldly green. Article

To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#3 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 05:27 AM

Posted Image
The young lamb named Dolly (left), with her surrogate mother, was created by cloning at the Roslin Institute. Article

#4 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 06:23 AM

Posted Image
Here's a salamander, known as an axolotl, with the entire head of another axolotl sticking out of its right eye socket. The grafted head, which had been transplanted from an embryo, developed normally with two anatomically perfect eyes and a snapping set of jaws. Article

#5 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 06:47 AM

The chimeric animal shown [below] is a baby “geep”, made by combining a goat and sheep embryo. Notice the chimerism evident in the skin — big patches of skin on front and rear legs are covered with wool, representing the sheep contribution of the animal, while a majority of the remainder of the body is covered with hair, being derived from goat cells. Article

Attached Files

  • Attached File  geep.jpg   26.98KB   0 downloads


#6 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 07:00 AM

Researchers in Texas have cloned a domestic cat, producing a two-month-old kitten called CopyCat. Article

Posted Image

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#7 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 18 January 2003 - 07:12 AM

Apligraf - Produced from a single piece of donated tissue (circumcised infant foreskin). First mass-produced product containing living human cells to gain FDA approval. Two FDA approvals: diabetic ulcers, venous leg ulcers Article

Posted Image

#8 ocsrazor

  • Guest OcsRazor
  • 461 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 25 February 2003 - 06:56 PM

Hi Gang,

Another interesting piece of aging news today. The oldest man in the U.S. died Monday at 113 years of age. The current world record holder is a 115 year old woman in Japan.

Full Article Here:
John McMorran, America's Oldest Man, Dies at 113

My respects to this super centenarian for inspiring us all with the possibility of extending human lifespan.

Best,
Ocsrazor

Edited by XxDoubleHelixX, 27 May 2003 - 10:04 PM.


#9 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 25 February 2003 - 08:15 PM

I wonder how old the oldest man 'ever' was.. as opposed to the oldest woman: Jean Calment at 122

Ahh, I may have found the answer:
http://www.grg.org/A...stLivingMen.htm
Yukichi Chuganji - 122 Years... he may still be alive...

#10 Limitless

  • Guest
  • 105 posts
  • 1

Posted 27 February 2003 - 05:49 PM

Feb. 27, 2003. 07:07 AM



VITTORIO LUZZATI/NEW YORK TIMES
Chemist Dr.Rosalind Franklin was not credited for her role in the discovery of the molecular structure of DNA. She took the X-ray photograph that helped Watson and Crick determine the molecule's winding double helix shape. Franklin died in 1958 and the Nobel Prize is not awarded posthumously.

50th anniversary for 'secret of life'
DNA structure found by Watson, Crick


MICHAEL STROH
SPECIAL TO THE STAR


About noon on Feb. 28, 1953, two men burst into their favourite pub, a scruffy spot called The Eagle near their Cambridge University laboratory. As people sipped their beers and forked down shepherd's pie, one of the men announced: "We have discovered the secret of life.''

The scene — which played out 50 years ago this week — is one of the most famous of 20th-century science. It marked the conclusion to an intellectual footrace to find the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid, better known as DNA.

Playing with a crude cardboard model of the DNA molecule, Francis Crick, a 36-year-old Englishman, and his 24-year-old American partner, James Watson, had puzzled out DNA's now-familiar double helix early that day. Their discovery solved the fundamental mystery of heredity. A half-century later, historians are still filling in the details of the story behind the discovery and discussing who should get credit.

In her recent biography, Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA,author Brenda Maddox shows how the secretly acquired photographs and molecular measurements of DNA by little-known chemist Rosalind Franklin led Watson and Crick to a Nobel Prize.

James Dewey Watson and Francis Harry Compton Crick met in October 1951. Born in Northampton, England, Crick was known for his nonstop talking and stiletto-sharp intellect. Watson, meanwhile, was an eccentric skirt-chaser from Chicago who graduated from the University of Chicago with a degree in zoology at 19.

Both altered their careers after stumbling upon physicist Erwin Schrodinger's book What is Life? which argued that genes were the essential stuff of life.

The book inspired Crick, at the relatively late age of 33, to abandon physics for biology and pursue a doctorate at Cambridge. Watson, too, had become obsessed with DNA after reading Schrodinger and went to Cambridge with hopes of unlocking the molecule's secrets.

Although the two were officially assigned to other things, unofficially they spent most of their time talking about DNA over tea in Room 103 of the Cavendish Laboratory or over lunch at The Eagle.

Discovered in 1869, DNA was considered only a bit player in genetics. Scientists thought proteins, which perform most essential tasks in the body, were most likely to be responsible for passing on hereditary traits. DNA appeared to be too simple a molecule to do that.

Among the handful of scientists interested in DNA was Linus Pauling at the California Institute of Technology, a chemist who went on to win two Nobel Prizes. He had an unorthodox approach to solving problems: He liked to build Tinkertoy-like models of molecules, rearranging the pieces until they fit.

Just before Watson arrived at Cambridge, the 50-year-old Pauling had used his toys to pull off a scientific coup, discovering that certain proteins had a corkscrew — or helix — shape.

Some scientists were speculating that DNA also might be helix-shaped. Watson, who saw DNA as the "most golden of all molecules," worried that Pauling might try to find out.

In fact, in the fall of 1951, Watson and Crick knew that Pauling was sniffing around for good photographs of DNA.

The place to which Pauling — and soon Watson and Crick — would turn for photos was King's College in London, where Maurice Wilkins and Franklin were taking the world's finest portraits of DNA using a technique called X-ray crystallography.

The photos produced from the crystallography, however, were extraordinarily hard to interpret. DNA showed up as a fuzzy, cross-shaped blob.

In November 1951, Wilkins invited Watson to London to hear Franklin speak at a seminar. Hoping she would show her DNA photos, Watson eagerly accepted.

Today, even schoolchildren know the answers that Watson and Crick were groping for then. DNA looks like a spiral staircase: a twisted double strand of sugar and phosphate molecules forms the outer rails, while a series of four molecular "bases" — adenine, cytosine, thymine and guanine — serve as stairs. But the wasn't clear from the few ghostly images available then.

When Watson returned to Cambridge, he and Crick started to build a model based on his sketchy recollection of Franklin's talk.

The pair invited Wilkins and Franklin to see the model. It was all wrong, Franklin said, pointing out several errors of basic chemistry, a subject which the Cambridge scientists acknowledged was not their best.

In May 1952, Franklin took an X-ray photo of DNA she labelled Photograph 51. To the untrained eye it looks only slightly less blurry than her other shots. But it would turn out to be key to Watson and Crick's success.

Watson's fears about Pauling came true around Christmas 1952, when he heard that the Caltech scientist had figured out DNA's structure and would soon publish his solution. Watson and Crick were devastated — until they got hold of an early draft. Pauling's model of DNA was built of three strands. They felt it was wrong, just like theirs.

"We were still in the game," Watson later wrote.

On Jan. 28, 1953, Watson again travelled to London to hear Franklin give a seminar on her latest DNA X-ray results. Wilkins, who was barely on speaking terms with his partner Franklin by that time, quietly pulled Watson aside and showed him Photo 51. The photo led Watson to redraw the molecule with two corkscrew-like helical strands — a guess. A few days later, Watson and Crick secretly started building a new model based on that photo.

At a lunch meeting with Crick shortly thereafter, Wilkins let slip that Franklin had prepared a report on her latest measurements of the DNA molecule. Crick secretly obtained a copy of the report, and immediately concluded the DNA molecule was indeed made of two strands — a double helix that ran in opposite directions.

By Feb. 28, the pair had roughed out a cardboard model of the molecule, and a few days later, they wired together a rickety metal model eventually photographed by Time magazine.

Watson and Crick won a Nobel Prize in 1962, sharing it with Maurice Wilkins. But the scientist who took the photograph that led to Watson and Crick's breakthrough would not share the glory. Franklin died of ovarian cancer in April 1958. The Nobel committee does not award the prize posthumously.


BALTIMORE SUN

Taken from the Toronto Star Web Site:

Toronto Star Web Site

Edited by Limitless, 27 February 2003 - 05:55 PM.


#11 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 27 February 2003 - 07:45 PM

This is a very true story and an important example of the Glass Ceiling that many like to pretend never existed, just as they would like to pretend that everything is all better now.

#12 Limitless

  • Guest
  • 105 posts
  • 1

Posted 28 February 2003 - 12:12 AM

This is a very true story and an important example of the Glass Ceiling that many like to pretend never existed, just as they would like to pretend that everything is all better now.



I agree, wholeheartedly.....I can't say this sort of story surprises me. I wouldn't put anything past human beings....this story seems almost underwhelming, compared to some others.....not to minimize its significance, though.

#13 ocsrazor

  • Guest OcsRazor
  • 461 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 28 February 2003 - 03:56 AM

This particular characterization of the story seems to be pretty slanted. I've read a few different accounts of this story and what seems to be the case here is that none of these people would have been able to do this alone.

By all accounts Franklin was a great technical chemist, but probably wasn't on the same intellectual level as Crick. The production of photograph 51 was a great technical achievement, but this type of progress is never rewarded as much as the type of synthesis of data that Watson and Crick performed. Their putting all the pieces together from multiple sources is what finally solved the puzzle. It is unlikely that Franklin on her own would have been able to solve it, because she had not done the extensive data collection and model building that Watson and Crick had.

There is no question that Wilkins showing Crick the photograph and the report was unethical, but Watson and Crick did credit her with a citation in their famous paper. If she had lived, she would have been more deserving of the prize than Wilkins, but since she didn't, we will never know how it would have turned out. History has credited her with her contribution and brought to light where she was wronged though.

Best,
Ocsrazor

#14 ocsrazor

  • Guest OcsRazor
  • 461 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 28 February 2003 - 04:59 PM

Hi Gang,

Over the past few years I have noticed a number of interesting opinions expressed by James Watson and Francis Crick, the discoverers of the structure of DNA. My suspicion is that they have strong transhuman leanings. Please post any examples for or against this idea in this thread.

I'll start it off with this article I just noticed.

DNA Discoverer: Use Genetics To Improve IQ

Feb. 28, 2003 — The scientist who co-discovered the structure of DNA stirred a row on Friday, the 50th anniversary of the breakthrough, by saying he backed genetic engineering to make people smarter and better-looking.

The remarks were criticized by other experts, fearful of plunging gene research into a fresh storm about eugenics, the Orwellian pseudo-science about selective breeding of humans to "improve" the species.


Full Article Here

Best,
Ocsrazor

#15 ocsrazor

  • Guest OcsRazor
  • 461 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 28 February 2003 - 05:08 PM

Also check out the betterhumans.com summary of Watson.

James Watson

#16 Limitless

  • Guest
  • 105 posts
  • 1

Posted 01 March 2003 - 03:20 AM

This particular characterization of the story seems to be pretty slanted. I've read a few different accounts of this story and what seems to be the case here is that none of these people would have been able to do this alone.


Well, you know a lot more about the story than I do....I can say that every article is slightly biased, though.

I agree that Crick & Watson's brilliance is what ultimately led to their success, but, -many accomplished individuals got some well-placed "Luck" , wouldn't you say [?]


By all accounts Franklin was a great technical chemist, but probably wasn't on the same intellectual level as Crick.



Maybe not, but I'm not sure that's the main issue here. Definitely, I think Crick was deserving, but I think history has shown that although one must "Make their own luck", the phrase "Right place, right time" also applies.


The production of photograph 51 was a great technical achievement, but this type of progress is never rewarded as much as the type of synthesis of data that Watson and Crick performed. Their putting all the pieces together from multiple sources is what finally solved the puzzle. It is unlikely that Franklin on her own would have been able to solve it, because she had not done the extensive data collection and model building that Watson and Crick had.



I tend to agree with this. The thing that perturbs me is the behaviour of Wilkins. In his case, the award was pretty empty, -in my opinion. This wasn't any old prize Wilkins received. I think it is up to the Nobel Prize Committee to do their due diligence in determining a winner....I'm not sure Wilkins deserved the award, regardless.



There is no question that Wilkins showing Crick the photograph and the report was unethical, but Watson and Crick did credit her with a citation in their famous paper. If she had lived, she would have been more deserving of the prize than Wilkins, but since she didn't, we will never know how it would have turned out. History has credited her with her contribution and brought to light where she was wronged though.



Definitely......I pose this question: Isn't it time the Nobel Prize Committee cut the act, and started awarding the prize the most worthy recipient, and not just the most worthy live creature of carbon [?]

I personally knew another person (his wife was my mother's friend) who was a possible Nobel Prize nominee, but died prematurely (at about 52) of a heart defect, before the nomination.
The man's name was Sam Goldstein, and he did research in one of our fields of interest: -gerontology. His most important work occurred only from the 1980s, to early 90s, (because of his death) which is one of the reasons that he didn't really have the "Transhuman mentality." When my father mentioned to him around 1985 that it "Would be nice to live forever", Goldstein said "Well, that's not exactly what we're working on." However, his work continues, and his colleagues could be more optimistic, for all I know.....Maybe I'll look into this.


Bye for now. :)

Edited by Limitless, 01 March 2003 - 03:41 AM.


#17 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 22 August 2003 - 03:41 AM

Something you don't hear coming from sea sponges often, heh.

Trick of the light

Aug 21st 2003
From The Economist print edition


A deep-sea sponge with optical properties

ENGINEERS often admire the ways in which living creatures solve problems. The difficulty with man-made fibre-optic cables, says Joanna Aizenberg of Lucent Technologies in Murray Hill, New Jersey, is that they often crack and break. For a solution, Dr Aizenberg and her colleagues have turned to the exquisitely structured siliceous skeleton of a deep-sea sponge known as the Venus flower basket. This sponge, they say, can do things better.

As they explain in a paper published in this week's issue of Nature, the sponge has a lattice of spiny outgrowths, or “spicules”, at its base, which provide structural support. These spicules behave remarkably like conventional fibre-optic cables. They are similar in size, and are even made of the same material. And as with commercial optical fibres, the spicules have three separate layers of material with different refractive index values which allow them to bend light waves that travel through their core.

According to Dr Aizenberg, these layers are glued together by organic films at their surface, which make them less likely to break. Furthermore, the spicules are formed under normal, low-temperature conditions. Commercial optical fibres, by contrast, must be manufactured under high temperatures, and often require additives such as sodium ions to improve their refractive index properties (and hence their ability to conduct light waves). Adding the sodium ions at high temperatures is problematic, says Dr Aizenberg, because these are lost during cooling. Again, though, the spicules of the sea sponge have the upper hand, because sodium ions are naturally present throughout their lengths.

The team is not sure just how these optical fibre spicules benefit the sponge. The job of anchoring the sponge to the sea bed seems unlikely to require the high-grade optical properties found in the spicules.

The researchers do suggest one intriguing possibility, however. This is that the sponge may be using the fibres to distribute light emitted by bioluminescent animals. The filter-feeding sponge lives in the inky depths of the ocean, at between 1,000 and 15,000 feet. If it is harbouring some of the light-emitting creatures that live at these depths, the spicules may serve as a fibre-optic network to attract other micro-organisms to serve as food for the sponge. Dr Aizenberg says “it is potentially an ‘illuminated glass house' of the deep”.

The research group hopes that, by modelling such natural processes, it can not only learn more about the lifestyle of the sea sponge but also exploit its chemical prowess to build better fibre-optical materials. The Venus flower basket derives its name partly from its delicate lattice-like skeleton, and partly from the fact that its interior typically houses a pair of shrimps that breed in it for life. As such, it is a symbol of a happy marriage in some cultures. In the world of fibre-optics, a marriage between conventional technology and biology may prove equally fruitful.

Posted Image

#18 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 28 August 2003 - 03:42 PM

August 28, 2003

Silkworm's Secret Unraveled

Posted Image

Scientists have long envied the lowly silkworm's ability to spin the strongest natural fiber known to man. Now they are one step closer to understanding just how the creature manages the feat. In a paper published today in the journal Nature, researchers reveal that the key lies in the animal's ability to carefully control the water content in its silk glands. The findings should help improve future artificial silk-making techniques.

Scientists have known for some time that silk's impressive strengths arise from a mix of proteins with varying properties. Some, for example, are hydrophilic (water loving), whereas others are hydrophobic (water fearing). But just how silkworms and spiders can convert solutions containing these compounds into silk threads without clogging their silk glands was unclear. In the new work, David L. Kaplan and Hyoung-Joon Jin of Tufts University dissolved silk from a cocoon and removed the compounds responsible for gluing the fibers together. They then examined how the remaining proteins behaved in the presence of varying amounts of water. They found that as the water level lowered, tiny islands of solid proteins began to form. As more water was removed, these so-called micelles joined together to form larger gel-like structures ranging between 100 and 200 nanometers in diameter. This aggregation allows the proteins to stay soluble and avoid premature crystallization.

If the proteins were to become solid too soon in silk-producing animals, they could permanently block the spinning system with potentially fatal results. According to the report, the silk proteins fold in on themselves and arrange their hydophobic and hydrophilic parts such that they remain soluble prior to being spun. Notes Kaplan, "this finding could lead to the development of processing methods resulting in new high-strength and high-performance materials used for biomedical applications, and protective apparel for military and police forces." --Sarah Graham

© 1996-2003 Scientific American, Inc.

#19 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 14 November 2003 - 08:55 PM

", ereg_replace("
", " ", "











Link:
Date: 11-13-03
Author: H. JOSEF HEBERT
Source:[URL=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news
Title: Scientists Gain on Artificial Organism
")) ?>



WASHINGTON - Scientists announced significant progress Thursday toward creating an artificial organism that one day may have uses ranging from pollution control to clean energy production.

Scientists using commercially available DNA took only two weeks to build from scratch an artificial virus with the identical genetic code of a simple virus already known to infect and kill bacterial cells.

The research at the Institute of Biological Energy Alternatives in Rockville, Md., was detailed in a paper to be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (news - web sites) and at a news conference by the Energy Department, which funded the three-year research effort.

While the project was based on widely known molecular biology principles, the breakthrough was in the short time — days instead of months or years — it took to construct the virus, said institute founder J. Craig Venter, one of the lead researchers.

Researchers previously synthesized the polio (news - web sites) virus from enzymes that naturally occurred in cells, but that process took three years and produced viruses with defects.

The effort last summer by Venter and his colleagues took only two weeks from start to finish and created a viral DNA identical to the known genetic code, the researchers said.

The synthetic virus "had the ability to infect and kill bacterial cells," the authors wrote in the paper. Even though the experiment involved a simple organism, the researchers suggested their work demonstrated the ability to quickly and accurately synthesize long segments of DNA that can serve as "a stepping stone to manipulating more complex organisms."

At a news conference, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham (news - web sites) called the accomplishment "an extraordinary and exciting development" that will speed up "our ability to develop biology-based solutions for some of our most pressing energy and environmental challenges."

As a result of the scientists' progress, Abraham said it is now "easier to imagine in the not-too-distance future a colony of specially designed microbes living within the emission-control system of a coal-fired plant, consuming its pollution and its carbon dioxide, or employing microbes to radically reduce water pollution or to reduce the toxic effects of radioactive water."

But Venter, among the scientists who first produced a map of the complete human genetic code, said much research is needed to produce such a significantly larger artificial organism.

"It's an interim step. Now we have the enabling technology to take us to these next exciting frontiers," Venter said. For now, "This is basic science at the most basic level with lots of unknowns."

Still, he said, "the ability to construct synthetic genomes may lead to extraordinary advances in our ability to engineer microorganisms for many vital energy and environmental purposes."


Venter said all the research details would be included in the paper to be published in the scientific journal and that at this time, his company has no plans to file for any patents.

In addition to Venter, the lead scientists involved in the research were Hamilton Smith, the institute's science director who in 1978 shared a Nobel Prize for his genetic research; Clyde A. Hutchison of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Cynthia Pfannkoch of the institute.
----------------------------------------
The news post should of said they were talking about bacteriophages (don't know if its apart of the T family or lambda). Oh well, here is a visual.

Posted Image

To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#20 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 12 April 2004 - 11:20 PM

World’s oldest mouse reaches milestone birthday

Posted Image

Yoda, the world's oldest mouse, celebrated his fourth birthday on Saturday, April 10, 2004 . A dwarf mouse, Yoda lives in quiet seclusion with his cage mate, Princess Leia, in a pathogen-free rest home for geriatric mice belonging to Richard A. Miller, M.D., Ph.D., a professor of pathology in the Geriatrics Center of the University of Michigan Medical School.

Yoda was born on April 10, 2000 at the U-M Medical School . At 1,462-days-old, Yoda is now the equivalent of about 136 in human-years. The life span of the average laboratory mouse is slightly over two years.

“Yoda is only the second mouse I know to have made it to his fourth birthday without the rigors of a severe calorie-restricted diet,” Miller says. “He's the oldest mouse we've seen in 14 years of research on aged mice at U-M. The previous record-holder in our colony died nine days short of his fourth birthday. 100-year-old people are much more common than four-year-old mice.”

Miller is an expert on the genetics and cell biology of aging. To study the aging process, he has developed strains of mice, derived from wild mice captured in Idaho, that live longer, stay smaller and age more slowly than ordinary mice. Although extremely low-calorie diets have been shown by other scientists to produce very long-lived mice, the genetic approaches used in Miller's laboratory achieve longevity without the need to restrict food intake.

Miller's mouse colony also includes strains of mutant dwarf mice, developed at Jackson Laboratory, which are very small and long-lived. Yoda is the longest-living member of this unusual tribe.

Miller's geriatric mice are providing important clues about how genes and hormones affect the rate of human aging and risks of disease late in life. His current work focuses on identifying defects in T cells from aged mice that interfere with a normal immune response, and finding ways to reverse those defects.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users