posted
Nothing about the need of melanin to make vitamine D. Whites and albinism both lack melanin. They resemble each other in this way. ===========================================================
The Secret of Vitamin D Production
By John Cannell, MD The Vitamin D Council
Did you see the recent articles about vitamin D in Newsweek or The Boston Globe? The headline on the Newsweek article was, "Are Americans dying from a lack of vitamin D?" Why all this excitement about vitamin D?
We all know that vitamin D (cholecalciferol) is crucial to your health. But is vitamin D really a vitamin? Is it in the foods humans normally consume? Although there is some in fatty fish, vitamin D is not in our diets unless humans first fortify a food, like vitamin D fortified milk. Nature intended for you to make it in your skin, not put it in your mouth.
So is vitamin D really a vitamin?
Unlike any other vitamin, vitamin D is actually a prehormone. It is your body's only source of potent steroid hormone called calcitriol. How does this happen naturally? First, your skin makes vitamin D when sunlight strikes a precholesterol molecule. Then your liver converts vitamin D into the storage form called calcidiol (25-hydroxy vitamin D). The body stores calcidiol in the blood and fat for later use.
(Your doctor can measure calcidiol with a blood test to find out if you are vitamin D deficient. Ideal calcidiol [25-hydroxy vitamin D] levels are between 35-65 ng/ml [87-162 nm/L], year around.)
If you have enough calcidiol in your blood, then the real action starts. Some calcidiol goes to the kidneys to help maintain blood calcium levels but the real story is in your tissues. Tissues all over your body convert calcidiol into calcitriol. Calcitriol, or activated vitamin D, is the most potent steroid hormone in the human body. It is active in picogram quantities or 1/1,000,000,000,000 of a gram.
Like all steroid hormones, calcitriol works by turning your genes on and off. That is, in hundreds of tissues throughout your body, calcitriol demasks your genome! It signals your genes to make hundreds of enzymes and proteins crucial to maintaining health and fighting disease.
============================================================= i'm going home to eat bami, Indonesian noodles with bean sprouts, tofu and omlet.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: For example: Those suffering with Albinism produce Vitamin D the SAME as Europeans.
No they can't, Europeans can produce Vitamin D under darker skies through synthesis of UV, Albinos CAN'T do this. If they can, prove it. I'll wait.....
quote: Inuits in Europe would absorb Vitamin D from sunlight without the adverse side effects of SUN BURN and Skin Cancer which both Europeans and those with Albinism suffer.
Actually no. Inuits vitamin D intake wasn’t/isn't dependent upon the sun. Therefore they never evolved to absorb Vitamin D through sunlight under darker skies as Europeans have. They get all that they need from their diet, heavy on types of fatty fish that are naturally rich in vitamin D. Instead of making it through sun exposure, the Inuit got a healthy dose from traditional foods that happen to be rich in vitamin D: the skin of Arctic char; seal liver; the yolks of bird and fish eggs; and seal, walrus and whale blubber. But as the Arctic has changed, so have eating habits. While seal and char (trout) are still staples in Nunavut's isolated communities, walrus and whale consumption have been in decline for 30 years. The result is ****vitamin D deficiency***, which surfaces as ***rickets***
Inuits wouldn't develop rickets if they were able to produce vitamin D naturally under darker skies.
quote: The lack of skin melanin does not equate to not being able to produce Vitamin D.
Of course skin color does, which is why when darkskinned individuals move to northern latitudes they become Vitamin D deficient, and need to take supplements.
THE COLOR IN BONES - WHY BLACK WOMEN ARE AT HIGHER RISK
A variety of factors can cause calcium and vitamin D deficiency in African-American women. *****The high melanin content in darker skin reduces the skin's ability to produce vitamin D from sunlight.**** ****In fact, experts note that people with darker skin may need 20 to 30 times as much exposure to sunlight as fair-skinned individuals to generate the same amount of vitamin D.****** Inadequate intake of vitamin D in diet is another factor. Studies confirm that African Americans consume the lowest amounts of vitamin D from food alone among different ethnicities. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), as many as 75 percent of African Americans are lactose intolerant, possibly further limiting the consumption of calcium and vitamin D fortified dairy products.Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Even Africans in Africa develop rickets. EVERY culture develops rickets, as well as ALBINISM. So this is irrelevant and confirms my earlier observation that you lack even rudimentary physiological knowledge. This melaniated Mexican boy born and living in Mexico has rickets, so you proposal is lame.
The UV exposure levels of Europe and Alaska are basically THE SAME. Yet, INUITS evolved normally to their environments, while Europeans did not.
With similar UV exposure rates INUITS experience hardly near zero cases of skin cancers in their environments among their populations, while Europeans experience the highest rates of ALL peoples, in ALL environments, parallel only to one other group. Those who suffer from Albinism.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Even Africans in Africa develop rickets. EVERY culture develops rickets,as well as ALBINISM
Of course this is a non answer(all you're good for), as I've stated if Eskimos were able to produce Vitamin D naturally like Europeans, then Eskimos shouldn't develop rickets, but they do. Eskimos develop these rickets when not eating a diet consisting of adequate Vitamin D. Yes Albinism is present in every population around the world, even Europeans, but not all of them are, nor are East Asians.
quote:The UV exposure levels of Europe and Alaska are basically THE SAME. Yet, INUITS evolved normally while Europeans did not.
Both Inuits and Europeans are cold adapted. Europeans adapted to be able to produce Vitamin D through synthesis under darker skies, while Eskimos can't, which is why Eskimos develop rickets if they don't acquire adequate amounts of Vitamin D.. Eskimos are still hunter gatherers, Europeans are not.
quote: With similar UV exposure rates INUITS experience hardly no cases of skin cancers in their environments, while Europeans experience the highest rates of ALL peoples, in ALL environments, parallel only to one other group. Those who suffer from Albinism.
Inuits are hunter gatherers who require a rich vitamin D diet to be able to produce their melanin content. Europeans evolved under darker skies, not higher UV environments, to be able to produce Vitamin D.
Name one scientists who agrees that Europeans are African albinos based on skin cancer levels?
Name one scientists who says pale skin of Europeans does not allow them to produce Vitamin D through synthesis under darker skies???
Name one scientists who says African albinos can do the above, of which Europeans evolved pale skin for??
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you are trying to imply that INUITS CANNOT absorb sunlight and produce Vitamin D, than you are far dumber then I suspected.
As I stated earlier, INUITS have SUCCESSFULLY environmentally adapted to their native environment, while Europeans and those with Albinism have not.
The proof is in the fact INUITS DO NOT burn in their native environments and Europeans and those with Albinism DO burn exactly the same, in any UV exposed environment. This is a FACT that cannot be disputed.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: If you are trying to imply that INUITS CANNOT absorb sunlight and produce Vitamin D, than you are far dumber then I suspected.
As I stated earlier, INUITS have SUCCESSFULLY environmentally adapted to their native environment, while Europeans and those with Albinism have not.
The proof is in the fact INUITS DO NOT burn in their native environments and Europeans DO.
(1)Inuit: a member of any of several aboriginal peoples who live in coastal regions of the Canadian Arctic and in Greenland.
(2)Rickets: a disease, especially of children, caused by a deficiency in vitamin D that makes the bones become soft and prone to bending and structural change.
For centuries, Inuit living in Canada's Arctic spent months without sunlight, and lifetimes wearing thick, fur clothing that blocked the sunlight from their dark skin.
Mother Nature provided vitamin D in other ways. Instead of making it through sun exposure, the Inuit got a healthy dose from traditional foods that happen to be rich in vitamin D: the skin of Arctic char; seal liver; the yolks of bird and fish eggs; and seal, walrus and whale blubber.
But as the Arctic has changed, so have eating habits. While seal and char (trout) are still staples in Nunavut's isolated communities, walrus and whale consumption have been in decline for 30 years.
The result is vitamin D deficiency, which surfaces as rickets, a disease most Canadians might be surprised to hear still exists in Canada. Thirty-one new cases of rickets were discovered in the first five years of Nunavut's creation.
"It's not something that is actually spoken about much in public health," Isaac Sobol, Nunavut's chief medical officer of health, said. "It's almost a disease of the past, or other populations."
Rickets appears in children, and is often identified by bowleggedness in its more advanced phase. The disease is so rare in most of Canada that while Dr. Sobol has Nunavut's numbers on hand, he has no national statistics with which to compare them.
The signs of deficiency don't bode well at a time when new research suggests that a lack of vitamin D is linked to high cancer rates in northern countries.
To address the problem, public-health officials in Nunavut have developed programs that put them on the cutting edge of vitamin D promotion.
Nunavut taps into the Canada Prenatal Nutrition Program - a federal fund - to get vitamin D supplements to all pregnant and nursing mothers, babies and children under 2. The Canadian Paediatric Society's Indian and Inuit health committee recommends that pregnant and nursing mothers living above the 55th parallel take 800 international units of vitamin D a day from October to April.
In all of Nunavut's 25 communities, expectant mothers are invited to cooking and sewing classes in their local wellness centres and community halls.
Nurses and community health representatives lead lessons in cooking healthy food, emphasizing basic nutrition and using traditional recipes for foods such as bannock, seal stew and fish soup.
New mothers also get lessons in thrifty shopping at the local grocery store. Modern sources of vitamin D - such as fortified milk, yogurt, canned fish and mayonnaise - are readily available in Nunavut, but can be expensive.
The Toonoonik Sahoonik Co-op in Pond Inlet on the northern tip of Baffin Island sells two-litre jugs of milk for $7.39. That's with a government air-freight subsidy that aims to make fresh, healthy food cheaper than junk food, which can be delivered once a year by ship and sold cheaply year-round.
In spring, when supply rooms are almost empty, the subsidy works. But when the boats come in, the price of soda pop drops from $3.50 a can to $2 - cheap by northern standards and, for some, tastier than healthy foods.
While few new mothers could escape the message of vitamin D, Inuit in general, who are less engaged with the health-care system, aren't necessarily aware of the vitamin and its benefits.
Free vitamin D supplements in tablet form are available to Inuit at the community health centre, but health officials say people don't always take them. Pamphlets describing different vitamins and their uses are also available, and are translated into Inuktitut.
The materials are impressive, but come with one small glitch. "Unfortunately," Dr. Sobol says,” 'vitamins' was translated into 'things that make you fat' in Rankin Inlet and Arviat."
While vitamin D deficiency might seem an obvious problem for Arctic dwellers, there is a surprising lack of research on what that means for Inuit, Geraldine Osborne, Nunavut's associate medical officer of health, said.
Dr. Osborne said she found several articles linking vitamin D shortages to rickets and bone development. Some of them point to lower levels of vitamin D in Indian and Inuit children, and one, from 1984, proposes vitamin deficiency as a possible cause of northern infant syndrome, a complicated sickness then found in 16 Indian and Inuit babies.
She found nothing that looks at the impacts of low vitamin D levels on people living closer to the North Pole than the equator. "I was surprised by how little research there was," Dr. Osborne said. "It's an evolving topic."
For now, people living in the land of the midnight sun - and sometimes months of complete darkness - aren't exactly clamouring to up their dose of vitamin D.
"There is not much cancer in our community, I am happy to say," said Susan Salluviniq, the mayor of Resolute Bay, Canada's second-most-northerly community.
For the next few months at least, the hamlet, with its 200 inhabitants, doesn't have to worry about a lack of sunshine.
Resolute Bay entered 24-hour daylight on April 29, and community residents will continue to enjoy non-stop sun until mid-August.
posted
Debunked only in your own little fantasy prone mind.
Show number of cases of skin cancer for INUITS in their environment versus number of skin cancer cases for Europeans in the environment they are SUPPOSED to be environmentally adapted, Europe.
It has nothing to do with rickets or vitamin D. It has to do with a genetic mutation that possibly began tens of thousands of years ago in Africa. The side effects of this mutation is, no melanin skin production resulting in sun burn and resulting skin cancer. Only two groups of people in the world experience these adverse effects, multinational Albinism, and Europeans.Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It has nothing to do with skin cancer levels, as pale skin was not evolved to protect from the harmful sunrays, you jackass!!!! Darkskin was evolved to protect from the sun. It has everything to do with living in northern latitudes and needing Vitamin D to keep skin dark. Plain and simple.
You're debunked as always. Nothing new.
Name one scientists who agrees that Europeans are African albinos based on skin cancer levels?
Name one scientists who says pale skin of Europeans does not allow them to produce Vitamin D through synthesis under darker skies???
Name one scientists who says African albinos can do the above, of which Europeans evolved pale skin for??
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pale skin was not EVOLVED dumbass. Skin color types adapt to the environment. European skin did not, else having similar UV exposure levels, they'd look like INUITS complexion wise. They did not because they exhibit traits of an adverse mutation. It's called, ALBINISM stupid. LMAO
What eye aid prescription do you use..hmmmm? Does Jawbowski wear glasses, an what color are her eyes?
Where are those skin cancer comparisons you were supposed to find?
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Pale skin was not EVOLVED dumbass. Skin color types adapt to the environment.
Pale skin evolved/adapted to lower UV environments. Still waiting for you to prove otherwise???
quote: European skin did not, else having similar UV exposure levels, they'd look like INUITS complexion wise.
Are you seriously that slow? Inuits stay dark due to their Vitamin D intake you nitwitted peon. Inuits change their diets they develop Vitamin D deficiencies, jackass!!
quote: They did not because they exhibit traits of an adverse mutation. It's called, ALBINISM
Meanwhile the adaptation was recently in evolutionary terms and evolved independently in East Asians and Europeans from Africans?? East Asians are affected by the same genes, pigmentation genes. Present in all humans.
quote: Signatures of Positive Selection in Genes Associated with Human Skin Pigmentation as Revealed from Analyses of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms
KEYWORDS human pigmentation • skin color • positive selection • genetic adaptation • Perlegen database • SNP • EHH test ABSTRACT
Phenotypic variation between human populations in skin pigmentation correlates with latitude at the continental level. A large number of hypotheses involving genetic adaptation have been proposed to explain human variation in skin colour, but only limited genetic evidence for positive selection has been presented. To shed light on the evolutionary genetic history of human variation in skin colour we inspected 118 genes associated with skin pigmentation in the Perlegen dataset, studying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and analyzed 55 genes in detail. We identified eight genes that are associated with the melanin pathway (SLC45A2, OCA2, TYRP1, DCT, KITLG, EGFR, DRD2 and PPARD) and presented significant differences in genetic variation between Europeans, Africans and Asians. In six of these genes we detected, by means of the EHH test, variability patterns that are compatible with the hypothesis of local positive selection in Europeans (OCA2, TYRP1 and KITLG) and in Asians (OCA2, DCT, KITLG, EGFR and DRD2), whereas signals were scarce in Africans (DCT, EGFR and DRD2). Furthermore, a statistically significant correlation between genotypic variation in four pigmentation candidate genes and phenotypic variation of skin colour in 51 worldwide human populations was revealed. Overall, our data also suggest that light skin colour is the derived state and is of independent origin in Europeans and Asians, whereas dark skin color seems of unique origin, reflecting the ancestral state in humans.
quote: The genetic architecture of normal variation in human pigmentation: an evolutionary perspective and model
Skin pigmentation varies substantially across human populations in a manner largely coincident with ultraviolet radiation intensity. This observation suggests that natural selection in response to sunlight is a major force in accounting for pigmentation variability. We review recent progress in identifying the genes controlling this variation with a particular focus on the trait's evolutionary past and the potential role of testing for signatures of selection in aiding the discovery of functionally important genes. We have analyzed SNP data from the International HapMap project in 77 pigmentation candidate genes for such signatures. On the basis of these results and other similar work, we provide a tentative three-population model (West Africa, East Asia and North Europe) of the evolutionary–genetic architecture of human pigmentation. These results suggest a complex evolutionary history, with selection acting on different gene targets at different times and places in the human past. Some candidate genes may have been selected in the ancestral human population, others in the ‘out of Africa’ proto European-Asian population, whereas most appear to have selectively evolved solely in either Europeans or East Asians separately despite the pigmentation similarities between these two populations. Selection signatures can provide important clues to aid gene discovery. However, these should be viewed as complements, rather than replacements of, functional studies including linkage and association analyses, which can directly refine our understanding of the trait.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fact: Everyone comes from Africa. Including Europeans, Asians, Oceanic's etc...
Fact:Pale skin of East Asians and Europeans occurred independently and separate from eachother. Meaning not at the same time. Meaning East Asians didn't come from African albinos and neither did Europeans. Meaning Europeans pale skin didn't come from Asians, nor vice versa. The genes were independently evolved in both populations. Except for Africans, Africans don't have these mutations as East Asians and Europeans do.
Fact:Man evolved in the hot African sun as black, to be able to protect themselves from the harmful UV rays, man walked OOA(Out Of Africa) black, as we can see from Oceanic's(Australians, Melanesians etc..). But when humans move into northern latitudes without the intense sunrays, darkskin is a disadvantage since it blocks out the ability to synthesize UV. Under lower UV environments skin has to be lighter to be able to let in UV to allow production of Vitamin through synthesis. This is what pale skin evolved for.
Fact: Pale skin doesn't have to evolve if there is enough Vitamin D in ones diet to allow the melanin levels to stay strong. Clear example of a human population retaining pigmentation under harsh low UV environments are Eskimos.
Fact:Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. Meaning during early upper paleolithic Europeans were still tropically adapted, but by the late upper paleolithic, Europeans were already becoming cold adapted.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
So how about original Black and coloured Europeans surviving by means of geographical isolation and conscious intermarriage to have power and riches, just as some Chinese would do today? Or the Indians in Uganda under Idi Amin, who did not want to mix. This would be the only mean for a minority to get and keep power.
Snowden covers the Classical Era (800 BC) till the early Christian Era (300 AD). So how about 500-1500? The Era of the Blue Men? Then 1500-1789 the rule of Blue Blood and European Kingship.
Today the titles remain, they still intermarry and think themselves superior, and some look different than the general population.
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Pale skin was not EVOLVED dumbass. Skin color types adapt to the environment. European skin did not, else having similar UV exposure levels, they'd look like INUITS complexion wise. They did not because they exhibit traits of an adverse mutation. It's called, ALBINISM stupid. LMAO
What eye aid prescription do you use..hmmmm? Does Jawbowski wear glasses, an what color are her eyes?
Where are those skin cancer comparisons you were supposed to find?
Why even argue with him Meninarmer he is a European.
quote:According to the 2000 U.S. Census there were almost four million inhabitants. Eighty percent of Puerto Ricans described themselves as "white"; 8% as "black"; 12% as "mulatto" and 0.4% as "American Indian or Alaska Native"
quote:According to the 2000 U.S. Census there were almost four million inhabitants. Eighty percent of Puerto Ricans described themselves as "white"; 8% as "black"; 12% as "mulatto" and 0.4% as "American Indian or Alaska Native"
First of all, I was born and raised in NYC. So an analysis on the Island of how people describe themselves socially, hardly has any FACT bearing information on their actual genetic background, nor the over 4 million PR's in the United States, let alone around the world. But I wouldn't expect a crackerjack such as yourself to know this.
How Puerto Rico Became White: An Analysis of Racial Statistics in the 1910 and 1920 Censuses Mara Loveman Jeronimo Muniz University of Wisconsin, Madison University of Wisconsin, Madison
Abstract The gradual “whitening” of Puerto Rico over the course of the twentieth century is often noted in scholarly, journalistic, and popular descriptions of the island’s population. In 1899, a year after Puerto Rico came under U.S. dominion, the census reported that 62 percent of the population was white; by the year 2000, according to official census results, the white proportion of the Puerto Rican population reached 80 percent. Observers of Puerto Rican society have speculated about the sources of this trend, which is typically cited as evidence of the hold of “whitening ideology” on the island. To date, however, none of the hypothesized mechanisms of whitening have been subjected to empirical test. Using newly available public use samples of the 1910 and 1920 censuses of Puerto Rico, this paper explores three possible explanations for the growth in the white population according to official statistics: (1) demographic processes, (2) institutional bias of the Census Office, and (3) socio-cultural shifts in societal conceptions of race. We find little support for the first two hypotheses. The proportion of whites in the Puerto Rican population in 1920 is at least ten percent higher than would be expected due to natural rates of population growth. And it appears, somewhat surprisingly, that any institutional bias of the Puerto Rican Census Office worked to mitigate the magnitude of whitening in this period rather than contributing to it. We find that the statistical whitening of Puerto Rico between 1910 and 1920 is primarily due to changes in the social definition of whiteness. The children of interracial unions, in particular, were much more likely to be classified as white in 1920 than in 1910.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Knowledgeiskey718: [QUOTE]
Abstract The gradual “whitening” of Puerto Rico over the course of the twentieth century is often noted in scholarly, journalistic, and popular descriptions of the island’s population. In 1899, a year after Puerto Rico came under U.S. dominion, the census reported that 62 percent of the population was white; by the year 2000, according to official census results, the white proportion of the Puerto Rican population reached 80 percent. Observers of Puerto Rican society have speculated about the sources of this trend, which is typically cited as evidence of the hold of “whitening ideology” on the island. To date, however, none of the hypothesized mechanisms of whitening have been subjected to empirical test. Using newly available public use samples of the 1910 and 1920 censuses of Puerto Rico, this paper explores three possible explanations for the growth in the white population according to official statistics: (1) demographic processes, (2) institutional bias of the Census Office, and (3) socio-cultural shifts in societal conceptions of race. We find little support for the first two hypotheses. The proportion of whites in the Puerto Rican population in 1920 is at least ten percent higher than would be expected due to natural rates of population growth. And it appears, somewhat surprisingly, that any institutional bias of the Puerto Rican Census Office worked to mitigate the magnitude of whitening in this period rather than contributing to it. We find that the statistical whitening of Puerto Rico between 1910 and 1920 is primarily due to changes in the social definition of whiteness. The children of interracial unions, in particular, were much more likely to be classified as white in 1920 than in 1910.
[Cape Verdeans]
All these theories about the Black Europeans turning white do not offer a clue how this is supposed to have happened, what has triggered this sudden change after so many thousands of years of remaining black. So why some Blacks couldn’t have survived either the invasion of whites from Asia or the miraculous change into whites? The very dark skinned Dravidians survived the invasion of the white Aryans, did they not?
I have noticed in the ODR Rules that they have a long list on what Blacks are, how they are to be defined, and how persons risk suspension if they leaf any ambiguity about what they mean in their postings with the designation ‘Black.’ They also find the SSA thing very important; to know if there is talk about ‘Real Negroes’ or people they apparently consider ‘African Caucasians’ e.g Somali, Ethiopians and such.
But they never insist on a definition of Whites. We find that Europeans today have many types, yet nobody makes the same sharp distinction which they make with African types. I have posted something on Cape Verdians who on arrival in the US were considered whites. An American senator observed that ‘the Irish are not Teutonic but of another race.’ A cartoon says that the Irish resemble Negroes. There is an article about how the Irish in the US became white. Neither Polish nor German immigrants in the US were first considered whites.
So Porto Ricans are defined as whites in order to keep them separate from Blacks. Just as the Black Surinamese in Holland are kept away from Africans. Some Africans in Holland come to hate Surinamese Blacks, not thinking of them as Blacks anymore.
This logic can be applied to the Europeans (1500-1789) who came to be considered ‘white’s’ and their portraits even over painted with beige to prevent any mistake of considering them anything else but white. Then by presenting Blacks as apes and disease riddled, coloured people are taught to physically breed themselves into whiteness.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic