Sponsored

Coronovirus discussions

Jomo

Active Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
40
Reaction score
75
Location
San Diego
Vehicle(s)
Mazda 3
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
On that site you mentioned, I don't know how accurate the 2.36% is though. As mentioned in my earlier post, a key to the more localized Germany study, was including persons infected who were asymptomatic or having few symptoms. If those persons are not including, which is the case in some other analysis, then we can see higher (possibly erroneous) figures.
If you are going to compare statistics of lethality of the typical flu vs. Covid-19, they should be on the same basis. I assume Asymptomatic flu carriers are not considered in the 0.1% lethality. If the virus was just 3-4 times more lethal than the flu with the same transmission efficiency, We probably would not quarantine at all. Regardless, this report is validating that social distancing is good idea as for every person testing positive, there are 4 out there that have it and could transmit it to others, but do not symptoms.

Lets get back to the subject at hand. The Bronco reveal.
Sponsored

 

Dads_bronze_bronco

Raptor
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
4,169
Reaction score
7,455
Location
NC
Vehicle(s)
08 JKUR / x_x 00 TJ x_x
Your Bronco Model
Raptor
Clubs
 
I was looking at this study out of a region in Germany. It indicates a COVID-19 lethality rate of 0.36%. Quite a bit less than some of the earlier estimates. For reference, I think the common flu has an average lethality rate of 0.10%. A reason for the reduced lethality could be a more accurate count of those who have been infected with the virus. See link to the study below for reference, and in case anyone has a different conclusion.

Bronco content? Well, if this German study result is born out in other populations, and we can make social policy align with the realities of the virus situation (a big if), maybe we get things rolling again earlier rather than later in terms of Bronco reveal/production/delivery.

https://www.land.nrw/sites/default/...henergebnis_covid19_case_study_gangelt_en.pdf
Ok, look at New York, and think whether you want that to be happening across the entire country. Because the lethality rate of 0.36 still equates to something like a million deaths. And would the 0.36 stay 0.36 if everyone got sick at once?
 

indio22

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
8,168
Location
Chicagoland, USA
Vehicle(s)
'72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
If you are going to compare statistics of lethality of the typical flu vs. Covid-19, they should be on the same basis. I assume Asymptomatic flu carriers are not considered in the 0.1% lethality. If the virus was just 3-4 times more lethal than the flu with the same transmission efficiency, We probably would not quarantine at all. Regardless, this report is validating that social distancing is good idea as for every person testing positive, there are 4 out there that have it and could transmit it to others, but do not symptoms.

Lets get back to the subject at hand. The Bronco reveal.
Actually from what I could find, the 0.1% for flu does include infected. Basically the IFR. And yes, it's looking like COVID-19 is around 4 times more lethal than typical flu, and on par with lethality of some severe flu years. Significantly less lethality than some of the earlier estimates that were placing as high as 3%.

I think this is worth looking into further and including some other studies as we get more robust data, but yes we should be looking at efficacy of quarantine and the use of quarantine going forward.

Bronco quarantine and reveal? Ford is going to have to deal with the real and imagined severity of COVID-19. It's impacting their ability to manufacture, supply chains of parts, and how marketing the Bronco looks to the public in this time of crisis.
 

indio22

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
8,168
Location
Chicagoland, USA
Vehicle(s)
'72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
Ok, look at New York, and think whether you want that to be happening across the entire country. Because the lethality rate of 0.36 still equates to something like a million deaths. And would the 0.36 stay 0.36 if everyone got sick at once?
There is merit to avoiding many persons becoming sick at once from an illness that could for a time overwhelm some medical treatment centers. But if it holds true, 0.36% lethality is significant less than some earlier estimates. We need to be asking hard questions about handling this thing going forward. And Ford is not going to be selling new Broncos to citizens who are too paralyzed by fear to leave their homes (a few of my neighbors). Not to mention vehicle production and supply chain disruption. How long will (and should) we have this disruption? Will flatten the curve transform into save every person, and if so how do we deal with that pandora's box? What illness and which persons deserve saving?
 

Jook13

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Josh
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Threads
3
Messages
350
Reaction score
1,132
Location
Prescott az
Vehicle(s)
Suzuki samurai
Your Bronco Model
Base
There is merit to avoiding many persons becoming sick at once from an illness that could for a time overwhelm some medical treatment centers. But if it holds true, 0.36% lethality is significant less than some earlier estimates. We need to be asking hard questions about handling this thing going forward. And Ford is not going to be selling new Broncos to citizens who are too paralyzed by fear to leave their homes (a few of my neighbors). Not to mention vehicle production and supply chain disruption. How long will (and should) we have this disruption? Will flatten the curve transform into save every person, and if so how do we deal with that pandora's box? What illness and which persons deserve saving?
Everyone already seems to have moved past flatten the curve. The goal post has been moved ....
 

Sponsored

RupertH

Banned
Banned
Banned
First Name
Rupert
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
77
Reaction score
168
Location
West
Vehicle(s)
Mostly
Everyone already seems to have moved past flatten the curve. The goal post has been moved ....
No, they haven't- we are still in 'flatten' mode, even if it looks like we 'made it' through. See below...
There is merit to avoiding many persons becoming sick at once from an illness that could for a time overwhelm some medical treatment centers. But if it holds true, 0.36% lethality is significant less than some earlier estimates. We need to be asking hard questions about handling this thing going forward. And Ford is not going to be selling new Broncos to citizens who are too paralyzed by fear to leave their homes (a few of my neighbors). Not to mention vehicle production and supply chain disruption. How long will (and should) we have this disruption? Will flatten the curve transform into save every person, and if so how do we deal with that pandora's box? What illness and which persons deserve saving?
There are several factors that lead to a difference between a typical influenza year and a bad year (like Bird, Swine, etc.) and other similar communicable diseases like Corona (SARS, MERS, etc.). The core factors are: R0, herd immunity, and lethality are the big 3, but incubation and contagion periods and capacity play an integral role in the mix and tend to be exponential factors rather than just a straight multiplier. Low R0 and low immunity can combine to cause capacity issues, as can high lethality rates or moderate lethality rates, with longer contagious periods.

So, influenza- even a more lethal variant- will not always peg the meter, due to how they are treated. Because most cases are treated with meds, rest, and fluids; and only the most grave cases involve hospitalization, capacity to treat doesn't become a major issue. Additionally, the infection vectors are well understood, and between the annual vaccine and the similarities to other strains, there's some hope of herd immunity that helps increase the R0 by making the virus more difficult to spread. Also helping, are shorter incubation and contagion periods, making tracing the virus back easer, and less opportunity to pass it along.

However, with something like COVID-19, we have a more pernicious threat. The R0 is very low, the incubation period tends to be long, the contagion period tends to be long (BONUS! there're also high levels of asymptomatic-carriers), there's little herd immunity, and while the lethality is moderate, the impact on capacity is huge, because the critical cases require substantial limited resources to treat. This is borne out in the data when you compare death rates with new cases. As cases in a given area grew, death rates surged faster. NYC and Washington state really show this if you look inside the numbers They ran up against limitations inherent in the system, and began to see massive death rates, while the rest of the country had far fewer deaths, causing a much less stark overall picture of things.

So, to answer your question, it is NOT a Pandora's box. Illnesses that have the potential to overwhelm the system and cause death and destruction get treated differently. The flu is actually an example of that! There are very few diseases that have such a low lethality that we have a vaccine for, AND said vaccine is usually covered by heath insurance! I would argue that the millions of dollars spent annually on this is far outside the norm for preventative medicine, and yet, here we are! Why? Because of the factors above- a nudge in the herd immunity saves both overall costs and limits concerns for capacity issues. Even with it's relatively low impact, without an annual vaccine, the R0 would drop, and the resulting demand for Z-paks and nebulizers would quickly surpass capacity, pushing the lethality higher. How much higher would depend on several factors, but the point is, we make these decisions all the time; and your suggestion that we are suddenly changing how we treat illness and deciding who lives and dies has changed is incorrect.

My opinion: we should focus on getting more testing done. Partly, to better track the infection front, but especially to parse out our immune population and get them back to work ASAP!
 

securitysix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
442
Reaction score
832
Location
Oklahoma
Vehicle(s)
2011 Toyota Tundra
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
Clubs
 
My opinion: we should focus on getting more testing done. Partly, to better track the infection front, but especially to parse out our immune population and get them back to work ASAP!
I agree with this, but we also have no idea how long immunity lasts.

We need an antibody test, and we need a way to apply that antibody test to people who are known to have been recovered from COVID-19 for various timeframes.

If the antibodies several years, then a vaccine would be good, but less important as more people get infected naturally and recover.

If the antibodies only last a few months, development of a vaccine becomes more important.
 

BuckWildOffRoad

Raptor
Well-Known Member
First Name
Austin
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
436
Reaction score
1,722
Location
Arkansas
Vehicle(s)
Badlands Bronco, King Ranch F250, Taurus SHO
Your Bronco Model
Raptor
Clubs
 
To recap this thread: China sucks, virus bad, stay home if you are non essential, support local business if able. When this is all over, have normal a med-small supply of essential goods for peace of mind of this happens again in the fall....

There is definitely constitutional infringements happening and I warn greatly against allowing this to be forced. The constitution hasn't changed and is not null and void in a pandemic...

I definitely want everyone to remain safe and everyone else should also. I have and still feel that the hysteria sensationalized by the media has been inaccurate and irresponsible.

People wearing masks while they pickup a carton of cigarettes? Wearing gloves while shopping, but still touching your phone and belongings that you touch after taking off the gloves? Lol.

My current hospital has been dead, most hospitals are. I have nurse friends in many states and they are mostly all reporting the same.
 

indio22

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
8,168
Location
Chicagoland, USA
Vehicle(s)
'72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
To recap this thread: China sucks, virus bad, stay home if you are non essential, support local business if able. When this is all over, have normal a med-small supply of essential goods for peace of mind of this happens again in the fall....

There is definitely constitutional infringements happening and I warn greatly against allowing this to be forced. The constitution hasn't changed and is not null and void in a pandemic...

I definitely want everyone to remain safe and everyone else should also. I have and still feel that the hysteria sensationalized by the media has been inaccurate and irresponsible.

People wearing masks while they pickup a carton of cigarettes? Wearing gloves while shopping, but still touching your phone and belongings that you touch after taking off the gloves? Lol.

My current hospital has been dead, most hospitals are. I have nurse friends in many states and they are mostly all reporting the same.
People are arguing on another site that Jeep top-down driving is too great a risk. Someone might cough in another car, and the exhaled air might hit you, and you might get COVID-19.

Ford Bronco Coronovirus discussions CoronavirusJumpTheShark
 

BuckWildOffRoad

Raptor
Well-Known Member
First Name
Austin
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
436
Reaction score
1,722
Location
Arkansas
Vehicle(s)
Badlands Bronco, King Ranch F250, Taurus SHO
Your Bronco Model
Raptor
Clubs
 
I would also like to add, that despite me feeling that this is over blown, you should always look after your neighbors ?. We are the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. ??

I am leaving my currently non-impacted hospital to be in a high need hospital. I will be going for 13wks, and my precious family will not be going with me. This is because I will always put my family first, and will not risk infecting my 10month old or my wife. I am exposed whether or not I am at a local hospital or one 2k miles away. The difference is I cannot expose my family if I don't come home. Makes me sick knowing i won't see my family for over 3 months, that I will miss my dauhters first birthday, my wife's birthday, our anniversary, friends, summer on the lake, etc. But again, even though I feel this is overblown, I will never risk others for my selfish reasons.
 

Sponsored

indio22

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
8,168
Location
Chicagoland, USA
Vehicle(s)
'72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
No, they haven't- we are still in 'flatten' mode, even if it looks like we 'made it' through. See below...

There are several factors that lead to a difference between a typical influenza year and a bad year (like Bird, Swine, etc.) and other similar communicable diseases like Corona (SARS, MERS, etc.). The core factors are: R0, herd immunity, and lethality are the big 3, but incubation and contagion periods and capacity play an integral role in the mix and tend to be exponential factors rather than just a straight multiplier. Low R0 and low immunity can combine to cause capacity issues, as can high lethality rates or moderate lethality rates, with longer contagious periods.

So, influenza- even a more lethal variant- will not always peg the meter, due to how they are treated. Because most cases are treated with meds, rest, and fluids; and only the most grave cases involve hospitalization, capacity to treat doesn't become a major issue. Additionally, the infection vectors are well understood, and between the annual vaccine and the similarities to other strains, there's some hope of herd immunity that helps increase the R0 by making the virus more difficult to spread. Also helping, are shorter incubation and contagion periods, making tracing the virus back easer, and less opportunity to pass it along.

However, with something like COVID-19, we have a more pernicious threat. The R0 is very low, the incubation period tends to be long, the contagion period tends to be long (BONUS! there're also high levels of asymptomatic-carriers), there's little herd immunity, and while the lethality is moderate, the impact on capacity is huge, because the critical cases require substantial limited resources to treat. This is borne out in the data when you compare death rates with new cases. As cases in a given area grew, death rates surged faster. NYC and Washington state really show this if you look inside the numbers They ran up against limitations inherent in the system, and began to see massive death rates, while the rest of the country had far fewer deaths, causing a much less stark overall picture of things.

So, to answer your question, it is NOT a Pandora's box. Illnesses that have the potential to overwhelm the system and cause death and destruction get treated differently. The flu is actually an example of that! There are very few diseases that have such a low lethality that we have a vaccine for, AND said vaccine is usually covered by heath insurance! I would argue that the millions of dollars spent annually on this is far outside the norm for preventative medicine, and yet, here we are! Why? Because of the factors above- a nudge in the herd immunity saves both overall costs and limits concerns for capacity issues. Even with it's relatively low impact, without an annual vaccine, the R0 would drop, and the resulting demand for Z-paks and nebulizers would quickly surpass capacity, pushing the lethality higher. How much higher would depend on several factors, but the point is, we make these decisions all the time; and your suggestion that we are suddenly changing how we treat illness and deciding who lives and dies has changed is incorrect.

My opinion: we should focus on getting more testing done. Partly, to better track the infection front, but especially to parse out our immune population and get them back to work ASAP!
If lethality of COVID-16 is accurate at the estimated 0.37%, that is a significant difference compared to the +1.0% lethality (some as high as 3.0%) originally assumed, which was a key factor in the decisions on how to approach.

With 0.37% lethality rate, we are in range of 0.27% lethality rate for 1957-58 flue epidemic. In comparison, 1918 Spanish flu is estimated at 2.6%.

Overwhelming health centers as a cause of increased mortality? That will be reviewed, in light of the extent to which severe cases of COVID-19 are amicable to cure from medical care, and capacity for given areas.

Would authorities have essentially shut down the country with shelter in place, had they known 0.37%? That is a legit question. Maybe not. Or at least not to the extent it has been done. Regardless going forward, a more targeted approach should be considered, aimed at the particularly vulnerable segments of the population, and based on risk analyses of areas.
 

indio22

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
8,168
Location
Chicagoland, USA
Vehicle(s)
'72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
I would also like to add, that despite me feeling that this is over blown, you should always look after your neighbors ?. We are the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. ??

I am leaving my currently non-impacted hospital to be in a high need hospital. I will be going for 13wks, and my precious family will not be going with me. This is because I will always put my family first, and will not risk infecting my 10month old or my wife. I am exposed whether or not I am at a local hospital or one 2k miles away. The difference is I cannot expose my family if I don't come home. Makes me sick knowing i won't see my family for over 3 months, that I will miss my dauhters first birthday, my wife's birthday, our anniversary, friends, summer on the lake, etc. But again, even though I feel this is overblown, I will never risk others for my selfish reasons.
My son in college works at a grocery store. So all these nuts can stock up on toilet paper and liquor. Then "shelter in place", engaging in boozing, glutton, boozing, and I guess wiping their backsides. A few of my FB friends of privilege and means, started complaining about how their food deliveries were not up to par. I let loose - not sure if they are my FB friends anymore, lol.

My son could have blown off working at the store - we don't need the money. I could have blown off volunteering at the homeless shelter. We could be sheltered in our house not even answering the front door like a few neighbors. We don't roll that way.

I agree those who have a more reasonable ability to assess risk, and are able to deal with fear, should help those who don't have such qualities (even those people who don't deserve the help.)
 

guernsej

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
144
Reaction score
263
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
2017 Raptor
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
For anyone interested in helping get back to normal, consider volunteering

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/new...antify-undetected-cases-coronavirus-infection

@indio22 @Dads_bronze_bronco - lot's of good discussion to be had regarding CFR vs IFR and where we're headed in terms of predicted/actual outcomes. Given the relatively high percentage of asymptomatic cases I think most populations will see CFR between 2-8% and IFR around 0.4-1% with outliers above that depending on distribution of age and prevalence of underlying conditions. Many different factors at play and tons of new information coming out daily.

https://reason.com/2020/04/12/offic...-of-total-infections-a-new-analysis-suggests/

Until population antibody studies start cranking out results, I personally think ships like Diamond Princess and USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT offer the best insight into actual IFR given they're essentially closed systems with known population demographics and comprehensive testing.

@Jomo using the flu as a reference point can be useful but also misleading. Populations are (generally) far more susceptible to novel vs endemic diseases such as influenza - even if COVID ends up around 4 times deadlier and similarly contagious to seasonal influenza, without baseline immunity or vaccinations there is a MUCH, MUCH larger vulnerable population. Viruses like COVID and novel influenza with relatively high basic reproduction numbers are absolutely capable of infecting a third of the population or more if the effective reproduction number is not reduced.

The national pandemic strategy is specifically designed to stop novel influenza because it's fucking deadly without immunity and vaccinations.

https://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/...earch-methods/1a-epidemiology/epidemic-theory
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/index.html

@Jook13 - you're being unhelpful again, no one is moving goalposts
 
Last edited:

guernsej

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
144
Reaction score
263
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
2017 Raptor
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
In comparison, 1918 Spanish flu is estimated at 2.6%.
Keep in mind Spanish Flu occurred at a time when millions of young healthy adults were warring in the trenches, sanitation was woefully lacking around the world, patient record keeping was essentially non-existent, proper medical care was rarely available, and treatment frequently involved prescribing a lethal dose of aspirin. Estimates for the Spanish Flu are really only useful in demonstrating that novel influenza pandemics are super not good.

Regardless going forward, a more targeted approach should be considered, aimed at the particularly vulnerable segments of the population, and based on risk analyses of areas.
Absolutely.
 

RupertH

Banned
Banned
Banned
First Name
Rupert
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
77
Reaction score
168
Location
West
Vehicle(s)
Mostly
To recap this thread: China sucks, virus bad, stay home if you are non essential, support local business if able. When this is all over, have normal a med-small supply of essential goods for peace of mind of this happens again in the fall....

There is definitely constitutional infringements happening and I warn greatly against allowing this to be forced. The constitution hasn't changed and is not null and void in a pandemic...

I definitely want everyone to remain safe and everyone else should also. I have and still feel that the hysteria sensationalized by the media has been inaccurate and irresponsible.

People wearing masks while they pickup a carton of cigarettes? Wearing gloves while shopping, but still touching your phone and belongings that you touch after taking off the gloves? Lol.

My current hospital has been dead, most hospitals are. I have nurse friends in many states and they are mostly all reporting the same.
I'm genuinely curious as to these constitutional infringements you which you speak... I suspect you have no concrete examples. Unless you ALSO consider it a violation of your rights for the Fire Dept to prevent you from entering your business or home while it's on fire.

To recap, you believe the media has overblown things; yet acknowledge that average people clearly don't understand how to protect themselves properly or how significant the threat can be in areas that aren't 'mostly' reporting nothing significant AND yet are volunteering to support efforts because the not 'mostly' NBD turns out to not be NBD? (later post, good on you by the way!) About half the mask wearers I've seen out there have been wearing them UNDER their nose. The average person isn't very bright, which is part of the reason the media seems to need to headline the big death numbers and such. Partly because it sells (I worked in TV for a few years, it's painful sometimes!) but also because they can't get the point across to the slobbering majority of their viewers.

People are arguing on another site that Jeep top-down driving is too great a risk. Someone might cough in another car, and the exhaled air might hit you, and you might get COVID-19.
A risk? Yes. A significant risk? Probably not. An attempted reductio ad absurdum? Almost guaranteed.
I would also like to add, that despite me feeling that this is over blown, you should always look after your neighbors ?. We are the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. ??

I am leaving my currently non-impacted hospital to be in a high need hospital. I will be going for 13wks, and my precious family will not be going with me. This is because I will always put my family first, and will not risk infecting my 10month old or my wife.
Again, I just can't square the curve between these two statements, BUT I'm humbled that you're putting yourself in harm's way for the greater good. Makes me feel good to be a 'MERICAn
Would authorities have essentially shut down the country with shelter in place, had they known 0.37%? That is a legit question. Maybe not. Or at least not to the extent it has been done. Regardless going forward, a more targeted approach should be considered, aimed at the particularly vulnerable segments of the population, and based on risk analyses of areas.
I think the harder question to answer is what would the rate be if we hadn't shut down the country? All indications point toward a massive wave of sickness that would probably rival 1918- shortages of everything needed, people dying in cots in school gyms, the whole show. Sadly, this is always the result of any major catastrophe. Deal with it even marginally well and under-run the estimates? You're all just overreacting. Deal with it poorly and prove the estimates correct? Why didn't you scream louder, if you knew this would happen?!? Not a job I'd want...
My son in college works at a grocery store. So all these nuts can stock up on toilet paper and liquor. Then "shelter in place", engaging in boozing, glutton, boozing, and I guess wiping their backsides. A few of my FB friends of privilege and means, started complaining about how their food deliveries were not up to par. I let loose - not sure if they are my FB friends anymore, lol.

My son could have blown off working at the store - we don't need the money. I could have blown off volunteering at the homeless shelter. We could be sheltered in our house not even answering the front door like a few neighbors. We don't roll that way.

I agree those who have a more reasonable ability to assess risk, and are able to deal with fear, should help those who don't have such qualities (even those people who don't deserve the help.)
Is this what the kids call a flex? Or is it a humblebrag? Possibly both? While your rich friends and no need to work aside, there's a difference between assessing risk and fear- also for the record, fearlessness!=bravery. The average person's risk of infection is moderate, given basic precautions, and hiding isn't the answer, but neither is bravely recklessly sallying forth as if there is no threat. You are correct, those of us who have the ability to assess risk (from what I've seen probably not you) should help those who can't. That becomes more difficult, when there are so many spreading misinformation (I see two groups of fearmongerers- the 'COVID will kill us all!' group and the 'open the economy before we all die!' group. Neither is helpful. Neither is saying that anyone running around yelling 'fake news!' anytime the media says, well, anything that doesn't jive with your particular view on life. (I'm looking at everyone- neither side has cornered the market on BS)

I'm not event going to dive into the subject of who you feel doesn't deserve help, just staple the STD pamphlet through the condom and toss it to the next stupid slut in line...
Sponsored

 
 


Top