Re: Omega 3 supplementation - lipid peroxidation

January 5, 2006

On 1/5/06, jafa <jafasum@...> wrote:

> What exactly is lipid peroxidation? Is it similar to creating free radicals

or different?

It is basically the most important form of free radical damage. Lipid

peroxides are free radicals, and are caused by free radicals inside

the cell attacking the inner membrane. The lipid peroxides then

initiate a chain reaction of lipid peroxidation, until they are

stopped by the antioxidant network.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

January 5, 2006

Thanks, but further question. Aren't free radicals, electrons that are no

longer attached to their atom? Then when an antioxidant comes along, the

electron attaches to that and everything is fine again. If wrong, please

correct me.

So, what is peroxidation? Does it also have something to do with electrons

becoming separated from its atom? If not, please explain.

Thanks for doing this. It will make my understanding of the CLO controversy

and lipid peroxidation easier to understand. Figure there may be others with

the same questions.

jafa

Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote: On 1/5/06, jafa

<jafasum@...> wrote:

> What exactly is lipid peroxidation? Is it similar to creating free radicals

or different?

It is basically the most important form of free radical damage. Lipid

peroxides are free radicals, and are caused by free radicals inside

the cell attacking the inner membrane. The lipid peroxides then

initiate a chain reaction of lipid peroxidation, until they are

stopped by the antioxidant network.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

<HTML><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN "

" http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " ><BODY><FONT

FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >

IMPORTANT ADDRESSES

<UL>

<LI><A

HREF= " / " >NATIVE

NUTRITION</A> online</LI>

<LI><A HREF= " http://onibasu.com/ " >SEARCH</A> the entire message

archive with Onibasu</LI>

</UL>

<PRE><A

HREF= " mailto: -owner " >LIST OWNER:</A>

Idol

MODERATORS: Heidi Schuppenhauer

Wanita Sears

</PRE>

</BODY>

</HTML>

January 5, 2006

On 1/5/06, jafa <jafasum@...> wrote:

> Thanks, but further question. Aren't free radicals, electrons that are no

>longer attached to their atom?

No. They are atoms or molecules that have an unpaired electron -- an

odd number of electrons. Electrons like to be paired.

> Then when an antioxidant comes along, the electron attaches to that and

>everything is fine again. If wrong, please correct me.

Nope. When an antioxidant comes along, the antioxidant turns into a

free radical itself. It would be just as dangerous, if not for other

antioxidants that are part of the grand antioxidant network that allow

the transfer of free radicals either out of the body, or rechannel

them into productive activity (free radicals are important to

physiological processes.)

The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

radical itself. But since a free radical is mostly surrounded by

non-free radicals, more free radicals basically mean more damage

rather than just canceling each other out. The antioxidants serve to

distract the free radical by becoming oxidized themselves, but,

whereas a membrane lipid tends to damage other membrane lipids when it

is oxidized, an antioxidant has a higher affinity for other

antioxidants that will allow the cell some time to get rid of it.

> So, what is peroxidation?

The formation of peroxide radicals. Lipids that have been oxidized

and become lipid peroxides or generated hydrogen peroxide. The

hydrogen peroxide is turned into water by the selenium-dependent

glutathione peroxidase enzyme, which for some reason that I don't

understand is spared or increased by vitamin A. Without vitamin A,

this enzyme gets used up quickly with increased peroxidation, but

vitamin A maintain its levels in the face of oxidative damage.

> Does it also have something to do with electrons becoming separated from its

atom? If not, please explain.

>

> Thanks for doing this. It will make my understanding of the CLO controversy

and lipid peroxidation easier to understand. Figure there may be others with

the same questions.

Hope that helped a little.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

January 5, 2006

>-----Original Message-----

>From:

>[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Masterjohn

>The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

>radical itself.

Which clearly means our goal should be to have an equal number of free

radicals ;-)

The

>hydrogen peroxide is turned into water by the selenium-dependent

>glutathione peroxidase enzyme, which for some reason that I don't

>understand is spared or increased by vitamin A. Without vitamin A,

>this enzyme gets used up quickly with increased peroxidation, but

>vitamin A maintain its levels in the face of oxidative damage.

Wow...another valuable tidbit on the value of vitamin A! This is

fascinating!

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

January 5, 2006

On 1/5/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> >The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

> >radical itself.

>

> Which clearly means our goal should be to have an equal number of free

> radicals ;-)

Equal to what? You mean even? Ok, next time I count my pollutants

I'll make sure only to breathe in even numbers. LOL.

> The

> >hydrogen peroxide is turned into water by the selenium-dependent

> >glutathione peroxidase enzyme, which for some reason that I don't

> >understand is spared or increased by vitamin A. Without vitamin A,

> >this enzyme gets used up quickly with increased peroxidation, but

> >vitamin A maintain its levels in the face of oxidative damage.

>

> Wow...another valuable tidbit on the value of vitamin A! This is

> fascinating!

I think you would be utterly fascinated if you read my dioxin article. LOL. ;-)

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

January 5, 2006

>-----Original Message-----

>From:

>[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Masterjohn

>

>On 1/5/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

>

>> >The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

>> >radical itself.

>>

>> Which clearly means our goal should be to have an equal number of free

>> radicals ;-)

>

>Equal to what? You mean even? Ok, next time I count my pollutants

>I'll make sure only to breathe in even numbers. LOL.

LOL. Yeh, I meant even! d'oh!

>

>> The

>> >hydrogen peroxide is turned into water by the selenium-dependent

>> >glutathione peroxidase enzyme, which for some reason that I don't

>> >understand is spared or increased by vitamin A. Without vitamin A,

>> >this enzyme gets used up quickly with increased peroxidation, but

>> >vitamin A maintain its levels in the face of oxidative damage.

>>

>> Wow...another valuable tidbit on the value of vitamin A! This is

>> fascinating!

>

>I think you would be utterly fascinated if you read my dioxin

>article. LOL. ;-)

I was utterly fascinated the first time I read it. But that tidbit eluding

my stellar memory.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

January 5, 2006

On 1/6/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> I was utterly fascinated the first time I read it. But that tidbit eluding

> my stellar memory.

I think there's something to take for that, but I forget.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

January 5, 2006

Thank you, but still somewhat over my head.

See under your comments.

Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote: On 1/5/06, jafa

<jafasum@...> wrote:

> Thanks, but further question. Aren't free radicals, electrons that are no

>longer attached to their atom?

No. They are atoms or molecules that have an unpaired electron -- an

odd number of electrons. Electrons like to be paired.

-------what causes the unpaired electron to become " unpaired " - oxidation??

If so, what about all of the oxygen we breath. Always wondered about that! Or

are we talking about 2 completely different things?

> Then when an antioxidant comes along, the electron attaches to that and

>everything is fine again. If wrong, please correct me.

Nope. When an antioxidant comes along, the antioxidant turns into a

free radical itself. It would be just as dangerous, if not for other

antioxidants that are part of the grand antioxidant network that allow

the transfer of free radicals either out of the body, or rechannel

them into productive activity (free radicals are important to

physiological processes.)

The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

radical itself. But since a free radical is mostly surrounded by

non-free radicals, more free radicals basically mean more damage

rather than just canceling each other out. The antioxidants serve to

distract the free radical by becoming oxidized themselves, but,

whereas a membrane lipid tends to damage other membrane lipids when it

is oxidized, an antioxidant has a higher affinity for other

antioxidants that will allow the cell some time to get rid of it.

--------this is fairly confusing. Oh well...

> So, what is peroxidation?

The formation of peroxide radicals. Lipids that have been oxidized

and become lipid peroxides or generated hydrogen peroxide. The

hydrogen peroxide is turned into water by the selenium-dependent

glutathione peroxidase enzyme, which for some reason that I don't

understand is spared or increased by vitamin A. Without vitamin A,

this enzyme gets used up quickly with increased peroxidation, but

vitamin A maintain its levels in the face of oxidative damage.

> Does it also have something to do with electrons becoming separated from

its atom? If not, please explain.

>

> Thanks for doing this. It will make my understanding of the CLO

controversy and lipid peroxidation easier to understand. Figure there may be

others with the same questions.

Hope that helped a little.

------------I would like to read up on this more. Do you know of an internet

site or a book that describes in simple terms what is occuring with free

radical damage and lipid peroxidation? Hopefully with some pictures. If not,

that's ok. I'll look for myself. I am really showing my ignorance! Thanks

again.

---------------------------------

Photos

Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,

whatever.

January 6, 2006

On 1/6/06, jafa <jafasum@...> wrote:

> -------what causes the unpaired electron to become " unpaired " - oxidation??

> If so, what about all of the oxygen we breath. Always wondered about that!

> Or are we talking about 2 completely different things?

Well first of all, oxidation doesn't necessarily have anything to do

with oxygen. It's just that in many of the oxidation reactions --

many of them occured in burning, oxygen is the oxidizing agent, and so

the concept of oxidizing was named after oxygen, and then it was only

later that scientists realized the underlying phenomenon was electron

thievery, rather than oxygen-binding.

Second, it should be noted that oxidation is NOT BAD! What's bad is

random, uncontrolled oxidation of things that shouldn't be oxidized.

Antioxidants do not function to thwart the whole process of oxidation

in the body -- whose essential processes require oxidation -- but to

stop oxidation where it's not supposed to happen. So, the oxygen we

breathe is, yes, used to facilitate oxidation in many ways but that is

the whole point of breathing in the oxygen.

The oxygen that we breathe in isn't, as such, a free radical. But

oxygen comes in diatomic molecules -- molecules with two atoms. If

you ripped them apart, each would have an unpaired electron and thus

be a free radical. But when they are together, the unpaired electron

in one of them is paired with the unpaired electron in the other.

The same is true of chlorine gas. Chlorine is such a good oxidizing

agent, however, because the chlorine molecules dissociate pretty

easily in response to any increase in energy, from, for example,

light. So the degradation of some substances occurs when exposed to

light because it initiates the dissociation of naturally occuring

chlorine, which then causes free radical damage.

> The only thing that can neutralize a free radical is another free

> radical itself. But since a free radical is mostly surrounded by

> non-free radicals, more free radicals basically mean more damage

> rather than just canceling each other out. The antioxidants serve to

> distract the free radical by becoming oxidized themselves, but,

> whereas a membrane lipid tends to damage other membrane lipids when it

> is oxidized, an antioxidant has a higher affinity for other

> antioxidants that will allow the cell some time to get rid of it.

>

> --------this is fairly confusing. Oh well...

Take, for example, the above chlorine molecule. Light has caused it

to dissociate into two chlorine radicals, each with an unpaired

electron. If they were to bump into each other again in the right

orientation, what would happen? They'd bond and each unpaired

electron would have the other to be paired with.

But if you put the two in a mix with thousand other molecules nearby,

what are the chances of them running into each other? They can, but

1000 to 1 they'll run into something else. Once they do, they've

stolen an electron and are no longer free radicals, but now the

molecule they stole it from as become a free radical since it has had

its electron stolen, and so on: a chain reaction. Out of these 1000

molecules and 2 chlorine atoms, there are only two given particles at

any one time who are radicals -- radicals have an odd number of

electrons. All the other molecules have an even number of electrons.

If a radical bumps into one of the latter, it steals its electron

making it a radical. But if the radical bumps into the other radical,

once again the two radicals pair up their unpaired electrons.

That's the first half. The second point was that any antioxidant,

having become oxidized by the radical, must become a radical itself,

unless it was a radical the first place. It's a radical if it has an

odd number of electrons. If it loses one, either it was a radical and

became not a radical, or it was not a radical and became a radical.

So the antioxidant does not eliminate the radical, since it isn't a

radical itself. Instead, its function is to get oxidized because the

cell can *afford* to have that substance oxidized, whereas if some

other substance were oxidized -- say, a membrane lipid-- it would

cause structural damage. So the antioxidant gets oxidized first and

its ok, becasue that antioxidant has ways of either getting rid of

that unpaired electron or using it for some process in the cell

requiring oxidation -- like energy production -- whereas other things

would have been damaged or caused damage immediately by being

oxidized.

> ------------I would like to read up on this more. Do you know of an

internet site or a book that describes in simple terms what is occuring with

free radical damage and lipid peroxidation? Hopefully with some pictures. If

not, that's ok. I'll look for myself. I am really showing my ignorance!

Thanks again.

Here's one:

http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Antioxidants/Introduction.html

It doesn't have pictures and it might not be exactly what you're

looking for, but it's the only one I've seen on the internet, though I

haven't done much looking.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

January 6, 2006

>-----Original Message-----

>From:

>[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Masterjohn

Instead, its function is to get oxidized because the

>cell can *afford* to have that substance oxidized, whereas if some

>other substance were oxidized -- say, a membrane lipid-- it would

>cause structural damage. So the antioxidant gets oxidized first and

>its ok, becasue that antioxidant has ways of either getting rid of

>that unpaired electron or using it for some process in the cell

>requiring oxidation -- like energy production -- whereas other things

>would have been damaged or caused damage immediately by being

>oxidized.

Which one of these - being diverted to some other process in the cell

requiring oxidation or eliminating it from the body - is the end result of

redox? The latter, right? OK, I'm sure it is now that I think of it because

the former could not happen in redox UNLESS the reduced radical was somehow

needed for some other process. Righto?

Do LIPID peroxides get reduced in some instances, to your knowledge?

>

>> ------------I would like to read up on this more. Do you know

>of an internet site or a book that describes in simple terms what

>is occuring with free radical damage and lipid peroxidation?

>Hopefully with some pictures. If not, that's ok. I'll look for

>myself. I am really showing my ignorance! Thanks again.

" The Antioxidant Network " by Lester Packer, who first discovered this

network, I believe. It's totally written for the lay person.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

January 6, 2006

On 1/6/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> So the antioxidant gets oxidized first and

> >its ok, becasue that antioxidant has ways of either getting rid of

> >that unpaired electron or using it for some process in the cell

> >requiring oxidation -- like energy production -- whereas other things

> >would have been damaged or caused damage immediately by being

> >oxidized.

>

> Which one of these - being diverted to some other process in the cell

> requiring oxidation or eliminating it from the body - is the end result of

> redox? The latter, right? OK, I'm sure it is now that I think of it because

> the former could not happen in redox UNLESS the reduced radical was somehow

> needed for some other process. Righto?

I was talking about the unpaired electron, not the reduced radical.

The reduced radical has its electron paired up, and is therefore no

longer a radical. I don't know what happens to it. In some case, it

becomes part of the cell water.

But the unpaired electron needs to go somewhere. I think in some

cases it gets used for energy production. For example the reduced

form of CoQ10 is necessary for antioxidant function but the oxidized

form of CoQ10 works in energy production. I'm not sure how the two

are tied together so I'm just throwing that out there.

I've also read that water-soluble antioxidants like vitamin C are

responsible for carrying unpaired electrons out of the body in the

urine. I think I read that in a Barry Sears newsletter on the

benefits of polyphenols in extra virgin olive oil, which help carry

the electron from fat-soluble to water-soluble antioxidants.

Chris

>

> Do LIPID peroxides get reduced in some instances, to your knowledge?

>

> >

> >> ------------I would like to read up on this more. Do you know

> >of an internet site or a book that describes in simple terms what

> >is occuring with free radical damage and lipid peroxidation?

> >Hopefully with some pictures. If not, that's ok. I'll look for

> >myself. I am really showing my ignorance! Thanks again.

>

> " The Antioxidant Network " by Lester Packer, who first discovered this

> network, I believe. It's totally written for the lay person.

>

> Suze Fisher

> Lapdog Design, Inc.

> Web Design & Development

> http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

> Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

> http://www.westonaprice.org

>

> ----------------------------

> " The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

> heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

> Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

> University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

>

> The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

> <http://www.thincs.org>

> ----------------------------

>

> <HTML><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN "

" http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " ><BODY><FONT

FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >

> IMPORTANT ADDRESSES

> <UL>

> <LI><A

HREF= " / " >NATIVE

NUTRITION</A> online</LI>

> <LI><A HREF= " http://onibasu.com/ " >SEARCH</A> the entire message

archive with Onibasu</LI>

> </UL>

> <PRE><A

HREF= " mailto: -owner " >LIST OWNER:</A>

Idol

> MODERATORS: Heidi Schuppenhauer

> Wanita Sears

> </PRE>

> </BODY>

> </HTML>

>

January 6, 2006

> Re: Omega 3 supplementation - lipid peroxidation

>

>On 1/6/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

>

>> So the antioxidant gets oxidized first and

>> >its ok, becasue that antioxidant has ways of either getting rid of

>> >that unpaired electron or using it for some process in the cell

>> >requiring oxidation -- like energy production -- whereas other things

>> >would have been damaged or caused damage immediately by being

>> >oxidized.

>>

>> Which one of these - being diverted to some other process in the cell

>> requiring oxidation or eliminating it from the body - is the end

>result of

>> redox? The latter, right? OK, I'm sure it is now that I think of

>it because

>> the former could not happen in redox UNLESS the reduced radical

>was somehow

>> needed for some other process. Righto?

>

>I was talking about the unpaired electron, not the reduced radical.

>The reduced radical has its electron paired up, and is therefore no

>longer a radical. I don't know what happens to it. In some case, it

>becomes part of the cell water.

And I was thinking of the donor antioxidant that then gets reduced to a less

harmful radical by another antioxidant in the network. Like an antioxidant

that donates an electron to a hydroxal radical, then the antioxidant becomes

a less potent radical itself (H202?) until another antioxidant donates an

electron to it, and so forth and so on till it's reduced to a harmless

substance. IOW, it might get rid of that unpaired electron when another

antioxidant " donates " ane electron, and that NEW antioxidant becomes a less

potent radical, hence redox. So it does tie in to what you were saying about

an antioxidant getting oxidized and getting rid of an unpaired electron,

unless I'm totally misunderstanding you.

Suze

January 6, 2006

On 1/6/06, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> >> Which one of these - being diverted to some other process in the cell

> >> requiring oxidation or eliminating it from the body - is the end

> >result of

> >> redox? The latter, right? OK, I'm sure it is now that I think of

> >it because

> >> the former could not happen in redox UNLESS the reduced radical

> >was somehow

> >> needed for some other process. Righto?

> >

> >I was talking about the unpaired electron, not the reduced radical.

> >The reduced radical has its electron paired up, and is therefore no

> >longer a radical. I don't know what happens to it. In some case, it

> >becomes part of the cell water.

>

> And I was thinking of the donor antioxidant that then gets reduced to a less

> harmful radical by another antioxidant in the network. Like an antioxidant

> that donates an electron to a hydroxal radical, then the antioxidant becomes

> a less potent radical itself (H202?) until another antioxidant donates an

> electron to it, and so forth and so on till it's reduced to a harmless

> substance. IOW, it might get rid of that unpaired electron when another

> antioxidant " donates " ane electron, and that NEW antioxidant becomes a less

> potent radical, hence redox. So it does tie in to what you were saying about

> an antioxidant getting oxidized and getting rid of an unpaired electron,

> unless I'm totally misunderstanding you.

You said, as quoted above:

" OK, I'm sure it is now that I think of it because the former ['being

diverted to some other process in the cell requiring oxidation'] could

not happen in redox UNLESS the reduced radical was somehow needed for

some other process. Righto? "

And I'm responding that the reduced radical is not what would be

" diverted to some other process in the cell requiring oxidation, "

because, having been reduced, it is no longer an oxidizing agent.

You may now be saying something different now, but I'm not sure what

you mean, especially by:

" IOW, it might get rid of that unpaired electron when another

antioxidant " donates " ane electron, and that NEW antioxidant becomes a

less potent radical, hence redox "

Yes, if a second antioxidant donates an electron, this is a redox

reaction, as are all reactions in which an electron is transferred. I

don't understand why a new antioxidant becoming less potent drives (as

you say " hence " ) your use of the term " redox, " which doesn't itself

indicate any change in " potency. "

Yes, the electron is transferred in a chain of antioxidants. Are you

saying something more than this here?

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

Sign In

Re: Omega 3 supplementation - lipid peroxidation

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Activity