If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
Medusa wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:55 pm, Ilena Rose wrote: May God protect these brave scientists from the ravages of the MCS fake skeptics. http://ilenarose.blogspot.com Health Lover Written by Dr. Martin Pall/Matthew Hogg Wednesday, 17 October 2007 No, this won't be the end of the controversy. Some will just not believe what they don't want to know. Exactly. People with somatic illnesses will continue to refuse to accept that there can be any internal cause and will keep on looking for something outside themselves to blame. Medusa AA #2281 -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
On Oct 21, 1:39 pm, "
wrote: On Oct 21, 6:30 am, Coleah wrote: ing others. You admitted *bigot*. You people get what give...... (go back into your coma, Jan) Isn't it time you crawled back into your Robin's Nest? Is that your covert way of announcing that you have been searching for information on me? |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
On Oct 20, 10:22 pm, rpautrey2 wrote:
On Oct 20, 8:43 am, The One True Zhen Jue wrote: On Oct 20, 3:17 am, rpautrey2 wrote: TOTZJ, what are your credentials and/or experience with MCS? NONE!!!!! PA My credentials? Are you freakin' kidding? You don't already know from my 'nym? Geez, PA, I'm (dramatic pause) a Licensed Acupuncturist! I've seen more people who've claimed to have MCS than you've had years of education. My experience with MCS is far beyond your comprehension. Otherwise, you'd be in total agreement with me. TOTZJ: How do you treat chronic sinusitis with acupuncture? How successful are the treatments? So what you are saying is you treat psychosomatic disease(MCS!?) with acupuncture. Is your treatment a passive or active placebo? PA Psychosomatic disorders occasionally present in my clinic. Yes, I can treat anxiety and am often able to guide these individuals to psychologists or psychiatrists. For some reason, you seem to believe that psychosomatic illness don't exist, yet you believe that MCS is an organic disorder. Perhaps you should learn something about medicine before pontificating, Quack Daddy! |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
On Oct 21, 3:00 pm, The One True Zhen Jue
wrote: Psychosomatic illnesses are real illnesses. Some have an organic etiology, some (MCS) do not. Without a proper differential diagnosis, proper care is unlikely. If a person has allergies, I don't tell them they are nuts. If they have been poisoned, I don't tell them they are nuts. If they believe they have MCS, I don't tell them they are nuts. What I do is to suggest better use of their time & energy. Oh, goody. I meet your credentials for having an illness. I was poisoned, and that made me intolerant of minute chemical exposures. I spent my time and energy avoiding all the chemicals that made me sick. Now I am better, but cautious. When you greatly reduce their anxiety & discomfort, you earn credibility & their trust. Once established, you can counsel them as to better coping strategies. Proper diet and regular eating times help. This not only provides proper nutrition, but also some structure & a sense of control. Helping the patient find better use of their time & better outlets for their stress helps. Yoga, pilates, weights, martial arts, and cardio are healthy, provide structure, and a sense of control & accomplishment. I try to get patients to remember the time before they had the MCS and suggest that they can get back to that. The more a person embraces these positive methods of self-control & self-fullfilment, the less reactive they are to the "chemicals". Yeah, right. I suppose you'd tell somebody who has lost a limb to remember the time before the injury in order to get "normal" life back. It's not gonna happen. Try it and experience it for yourself. If you need further guidance and/or treatment for anxiety, check your yellow pages for an acupuncturist near you. I don't need any treatment for "anxiety." I would like yoga classes, but, guess what? My insurance doesn't cover it, and I can't afford it anymore. Maybe you didn't know it, but "health" insurance is for getting sick. They won't pay for much, if any, preventive medical care. But that's another rant about the state of health care in the United States. Medusa AA #2281 |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
Medusa wrote:
I spent my time and energy avoiding all the chemicals that made me sick. Now I am better, but cautious. What are these chemicals? Please don't just say generalities like "paint". The names of the chemical compounds, please. -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
On Oct 22, 5:04 pm, Medusa wrote:
On Oct 21, 3:00 pm, The One True Zhen Jue wrote: Psychosomatic illnesses are real illnesses. Some have an organic etiology, some (MCS) do not. Without a proper differential diagnosis, proper care is unlikely. If a person has allergies, I don't tell them they are nuts. If they have been poisoned, I don't tell them they are nuts. If they believe they have MCS, I don't tell them they are nuts. What I do is to suggest better use of their time & energy. Oh, goody. I meet your credentials for having an illness. I was poisoned, and that made me intolerant of minute chemical exposures. I spent my time and energy avoiding all the chemicals that made me sick. Now I am better, but cautious. When you greatly reduce their anxiety & discomfort, you earn credibility & their trust. Once established, you can counsel them as to better coping strategies. Proper diet and regular eating times help. This not only provides proper nutrition, but also some structure & a sense of control. Helping the patient find better use of their time & better outlets for their stress helps. Yoga, pilates, weights, martial arts, and cardio are healthy, provide structure, and a sense of control & accomplishment. I try to get patients to remember the time before they had the MCS and suggest that they can get back to that. The more a person embraces these positive methods of self-control & self-fullfilment, the less reactive they are to the "chemicals". Yeah, right. I suppose you'd tell somebody who has lost a limb to remember the time before the injury in order to get "normal" life back. It's not gonna happen. Losing a limb is an organic disorder. It can be positively determined if someone is missing a limb. Perhaps a prosthesis would be made for such a person. Now that I've entertained your diversion, lets get back to the topic. I have seen people with MCS give up on it and go back to the life they had before. Being a victim isn't as appealing to some and others don't get enough secondary gain to make the effort worthwhile. The disease only lasts as long as it is being maintained, Medusa. Stop feeding it and it WILL go away. People with MCS, by definition, have a non-organic somatization disorder. People who've been poisoned have an organic disorder. They don't have the delusion of being made ill by things that did not and do not make them ill. They do not react ONLY to the smell of the odors and they do react to the poison. MCS patients do not react to the chemicals, they react to the BELIEF that they are being exposed. You'd know that if you had bothered to read the many high-quality, replicated studies that have been posted here. Try it and experience it for yourself. If you need further guidance and/or treatment for anxiety, check your yellow pages for an acupuncturist near you. I don't need any treatment for "anxiety." That is your perogative. You can continue to live with your anxiety by denying it or sublimating it. That is your choice, but a very poor one. I would like yoga classes, but, guess what? My insurance doesn't cover it, and I can't afford it anymore. I suppose you'd like your insurance to cover broken hearts & shattered dreams, too. Perhaps you'd like it provide roadside auto assistance with towing as well. There IS an insurance that covers many of the things that most don't. I won't mention its name because that would essentially be an advertisement for a commercial product, but the mascot is a duck. If you'd like to do yoga, you can buy a book, rent or buy a DVD, or find instructions on the Internet. IF you want to do yoga, you can CHOOSE to make that happen. Maybe you didn't know it, but "health" insurance is for getting sick. No ****! Did you know fire insurance is for gasp! Fire (Fire!). Its not for non-combustion related events. They won't pay for much, if any, preventive medical care. But that's another rant about the state of health care in the United States. Many policies will pay for or contribute to smoking cessation and some will even pay part of a Gym membership. Other than that, we all have to be adults and take reasonable care of ourselves. Isn't that a strange concept, the idea that the individual is responsible for themselves? Yeah, some corporation or gov't should do everything for us so that we can spend more time complaining. Seriously, what would you have them cover in order to prevent MCS? Sexual abuse seems to be the most common risk factor (as far as I know), so do they need to become active in preventing that? How should they go about it? Medusa AA #2281 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
"The Proven Liar" wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 20, 10:22 pm, rpautrey2 wrote: On Oct 20, 8:43 am, The One True Zhen Jue wrote: On Oct 20, 3:17 am, rpautrey2 wrote: TOTZJ, what are your credentials and/or experience with MCS? NONE!!!!! PA My credentials? Are you freakin' kidding? You don't already know from my 'nym? Geez, PA, I'm (dramatic pause) a Licensed Acupuncturist! I've seen more people who've claimed to have MCS than you've had years of education. Key word *seen*. Not the same as hed it, been there done that. My experience with MCS is far beyond your comprehension. Otherwise, you'd be in total agreement with me. TOTZJ: How do you treat chronic sinusitis with acupuncture? How successful are the treatments? So what you are saying is you treat psychosomatic disease(MCS!?) with acupuncture. Is your treatment a passive or active placebo? PA Psychosomatic disorders ZZzz. Psycholobabble... The entity *somatization disorder* is psychobabble and is obtained from the DSM-IV manual and is used by psychologists and psychiatrists.MD's have borrowed the entity for their own uses. It is a spurious diagnosis with no laboratory indicators. that somatization disorder is a kind of junk category into which physicians dump patients presenting with mind/behaviorialsymptoms and/or a history of such which the physician does not fancy or understand, especially if the patient does not present with symptoms or symptoms which are not separate diagnoses (also anon-scientific way of separating symptoms and causality) . I mentiont his because mercury and lead are both known to cause primarily "psychiatric" symptoms, with a history of emotional instability, etc.in patients. So a "scientist" is someone who makes "a priori" judgements about what neurological symptoms a heavy metal poisoned patient can and cannot have. A "scientist" demands laboratory indicators whenever his fraternity does so. When the fraternity does not do so, the esteemed scientist Rx's Prozac like *mad*. But if the patient's complaints appear in some kind of package which don't meet the prejudices of the male clinician/voodoo doctor, then it's necessary to pull out theDSM-IV manual and wax on about scientific discipline and create from thin air a "somatization disorder". It's just another way of saying that one can create a loose definition of a nebulous condition and then stretch it to label anything which appears bizarre, so that rather than actually diagnose and solve problems you can dump the ones you don't like into the recycle bin andlet the DSM-IV manual thumpers profit from the stash. That way everybody is happy. The male voodoo doctor gets to see himself as a scientist and the psych therapist gets another client. I believe that SD is used by doctors who do not like the idea that conditiions which affect the brain cause certain mental states and behaviors which are not in keeping with their own requirements for how disease is supposed to manifest in the human body. I believe the medical profession has an alliance with the psych profession because they share a common belief system. No, the starting point is to go back to college and unlearn the psychobabble taught to physicians in med school. But that cannot be done--with all the psychological investments involved in the career and selfhood and one's supremecy of being--so instead one wages war on the Chronic Fatigue, Fibromyalgia, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivitysyndromes, since these syndromes are diseases of both body and brain,in which affective disorders are documented in all three. But since the Freudian-psychobabble-educated physician suffers cognitivedissonance when presented with these, the syndromes must be attacked. Continuing education is not an option. Instead, reality must be shaped to fit the psychological needs of the profession, and the patients need to be hazed. So rather than counsel with a psychotherapist over issues of selfhood and megalomania and deep insecurity which interfere with the process of continuing education--which is also the scientific process itself--it is necessary to reformulate these disease syndromes so that they fit into the 20th-century mind-body conceptual dualism taught to physicians, in which brain diseases are separate from diseases of thebody and mind states are separate from both. This needs to be done despite the fact that poisons such as lead and mercury have been known for 100 years to poison the brain, body, and mind all at the same time. So Science needs to be bent and manipulated to serve a profession which maintains a conceputal framework which is not rooted in Science, and those teachings must be maintained for those sychologically inclined to conservatism and intellectual dominance,all properly wrapped in the impressive rhetoric of scientific and clinical objectivity. A lot of your responses are flak garbage which you use to exhaust pariticpants. I made my position perfectly clear. Decades of psychobiological research, including century-long scientfically acquired knowledge on the effect of poisons such as heavy metals on the brain, show that mood and mental states can and do derive fromorganic origins. Meanwhile state-credentialed MD's are writing books and articles about how biological psychiatry is "pseudoscience", a"myth", and a "fraud". On *this* subject the present generation is corrupt, and is not going to give up its intellectual commitment to the psychobabble it received in med school. On the issue of MCS, ascribing "affective disorders" to "psychologicalf actors" is an opinion which is rammed through as Science. It is accompanied by dismissive descriptions of mind states and behavior of the patients, with all kinds of unscientific judgements andassumptions as to 1) whether those mind states and behavior arelegitimate (e.g. fear of chemicals, stress of chronic illness), and 2)whether the mind states and behavior have an organic or non-organic origin. MCS *will* receive a fair hearing only when the medical profession gives up its intellecutal commitment to the teachings of psychology as the only explanation for how mind states and behavior alter with disease. You asked me for evidence of "mind-body conceptual dualism" and I just gave an example from a psychobabbling physician in this thread. Your technique is to bait and throw out idiotic flak, so that now we can have a separate existential debate as to whether there really is adualistic mind-body conception in modern medicine. Yes, physicians do recognize a connection between the two--they call it somatization disorder. That is, your boyfriend broke up with you and you are self-pitiful due to your past child raising and have along history of maladaptive behaviors and you have sunken into depression and can't concentrate and now your immunity has sunk and now you have an infection etc etc. They may *also* talk about a"psychological component" as being the result of chronic stress from the illness. But the medical profession is selective about when the connection operates in one direction vs. the other. The fact is, there isn't an economy for the problem of chronic mercury and lead exposure causing maladaptive dysfunctional unhealthy minds and behaviors. Not because the science doesn't exist to support it. But because the economy doesn't exist to produce the professional intellect to study, talk about, and treat it. The psychotherapists and psychologists would be in less demand. There would be no drugs to patent. Hence the facts are dropped from consciousness. That mercury and lead f**k up people's emotions and minds (in addition to a hundred other symptoms) is so dropped out of consciousness that MD's can write books that argue that Biological Psychiatry is a fraud. As a result, one must conclude that MCS is not caused by poisons--which just about everyone who has the illness and has clinical experience treating it argues--but rather is a somatization disorder. This is how economy and professional cultures distort reality and allow ingrained assumptions and bias to manipulate and distort the process of scientific inquiry. No, many physicians recognize that they are often dealing with illnesses that involve both the mind & the body. It would seem as if you are attributing their admission of this fact to some sort of denial instead. Incorrect. But commonly the same conclusion that some patients erroneously arrive at if the doc declines to attribute the illness to physical factors alone. This thread is in the context of MCS. Within the context of this subject physicians *do not* generally conceive or discuss depression*or* anxiety in any terms other than the psychologist's, regardless *how* the psychologist constructs the relationship, it is the*psychologist's* constructiona and the psychologist's ideology. The very own terminology employed by the author of the medical textbook cited, who is at the pro-MCS end of the debate *within* the mainstream, is that it is an illness with "psychological factors". Since you mention arthritis in the context of this thread on MCS (which is a disease its propopents argue is the result of*poisoning*), I will say that poisons such as lead and mercury commonly causes brain symptoms *first*, because these poisons are emically attracted to brain tissue. The first stage of these poisonings is commonly brain symptoms only. Patients may suffer depression or anxiety for *years* before the symptoms originating in organs *below neck* emerge in sufficient degree to cause the patient to seek care. So the depression in these cases does *not* follow arthritis and the depression is not something "psychological" *asdistinct* from the physical. The depression is not of the"psychological" domain. It is a physical symptom no less than arthritis. It is not a "component" and it is not a "factor". It is a*symptom*. The problem is conceptualizing depression and anxiety as being in adifferent category than "physical" symptoms. This division in thought is reflected by your own use of language and the very manner in which you discuss depression in relation to other symptoms. Depression commonly bears no relation to the other symptoms except they both share a similar cause in some *poison* which has attacked the brain together with other organs in the body.This conceptualizing is largely responsible for the opposition to these diseases by the medical profession. Depression is not a *component* by "a priori" assumption. If doctors want to assume the nature of the pathology in a conceptual framework and language *originated by psychologists*, then they should seek psychology as a career and *not* human physiology. If doctors want to educate us about how depression affects human health--but *not* how mercury and lead affect affect brain and emotional and mental health--then they should be psychologists and lecture on Ophrah Winfrey, but *not* manipulate the research and interpretation of MCS research by projecting their own indoctrination onto reality. Depression needn't be a *component* and it needn't be a *factor *simply because psychologists (and physicians loyal to their ideology) insist that it be so. I do not agree that I am arguing with myself and I do not agree we are simply talking about terminology. I have a good first-hand understanding of the disease, I have a good understanding of non-mainstream discussions of the disease, and I have good understanding of mainstream discussions of the disease. Within the mainstream the depression/anxiety is presently discussed as being a"factor" or "component"--*not* a symptom. Ten years ago the depression/anxiety was discussed as being *causative*. There has beena gradual shift in language as the disorder has been *grudgingly*accepted as being somatic, but the acceptance has been gradual, in which the depression/anxiety has altered from being "primary" to being a "factor" or a "component". No this is not simply terminology but reflects changing conceptions of the disease as the medical society isslowly accepting that chemical intolerance exists, but cannot shake lose its belief system for how depression and anxiety play a role in these diseases. You say that much is not understood about the disease. Then I expect that the medical society which you defend *suspend* its assumptiosn about depression/anxeity being primary *or* a "component" or "factor"in any causative way regarding chemical intolerance, and to cease using language which communicates that very conception. A neurologist who has decribed what actually happens in MCS is that the brain is abnormally stimulated by the chemical and an electrochemical reaction occurs in the brain in which the neurotoxicant glutamate is released and brain cells swell and the patients suffers debiliitating symptoms. He further states that this process is a process of ongoing injury to brain cells, a disease of pre-existing brain cell injury with continuing brain cell injury uponchemical exposures. He reached these conclusions after studying changes in EEG measurements in which patients were exposed tochemicals such as paint, gasoline, perfume, lacquer, etc. He found wildly altering EEG measurements upon chemical exposure and found evidence of dementia in the patient in various areas of the brain, with brain function deteriorating upon exposure. This neurologist'sattempt 10 years ago to gather a scientific audience for his findingsresearch was frustrated and obstructed while at the same time descriptions by mainstream medical scientists and professionals of "affective disorders" being primary or a causitive "factor" or"component" are accepted without question. I think that if one examines the *neurological* observations made and explanations advanced for what is happening in the brain upon chemical exposures, one would find the descriptions of "affective disorders" and "somatization disorders" as being causitive "components"/"factors" to be asinine in their utter vacuity with regard to the subject. So I do not even agree with the primacy which is given to anxiety/depression in these diseases because examinations of the disease which actually have some neurobiological depth find that anxeity/depression have little to do with the disease process. It is a sideshow produced by persons who know nothing of the disease and are prefectly content to send both the patients and neurological investigations into their disease into the garbage chute. What has been occuring has been a type of medical and sociological final solution to a disease and its sufferers which appear to be bizarre to many uninformed. But because the numbers of affected is so high, the culture and the society is forced to make some kind of adjustments in its willingness to admit the reality of the disease, but because it resists explanations outside of the intellectual box it has been taught, it still cannot accept chemical intolerance because it cannot fit the emical intolerance together with the affective disorders, because it is not willing to alter its dogma regarding how affective disorders present themselves with other brain symptoms in body-brain diseases. No I'm sorry but this is not simply about terminology. Don't kid yourselves. If you think the debate is resolved by physicians who like to throw around big terms like "somatization" as if they are experts on the topic, don't kid yourselves. Go get your Shrink's license and do the kind psycho babbling and psycho labelling instead of passing yourselves off as honest scientists. In that role, rather than as the frustrated shrinks you presently are, you can get all the hard-ons you want writing profiles for Abnormal Psychology journals. By the way, I just recently spoke to a mother of an autistic child who said her child has "raging" chemical sensitivities. This I think will demand some more inventive, delusional, and self-elevating psychobabble from frustrated psychologists in the physicians lounge. Autistic children make good meat for physicians contemptuous of new diseases which stretch their education. Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity syndromes are beyond the medical education and intellect of the present generation. The medical textbooks which properly deal with these diseases medically and scientifically will be written by the next generation. The present generation of sci/med professionals generally will protect its intellectual turf until it retires, and hese patients will be scoffed at, ridiculed, marginalized etc. until fresh yound minds, which will not find these diseases to be strange, will give these diseases the study and respect they deserve |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message ... Medusa wrote: I spent my time and energy avoiding all the chemicals that made me sick. Now I am better, but cautious. What are these chemicals? ZZzz. One does not need to know exactly which chemicals. News Flash! CHEMICALS, CHEMICALS, CHEMICALS EVERYWHERE. Please don't -- TELL OTHERS WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT SAY! Peter Bowditch |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The End of Controversy
"Jan Drew" wrote:
"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message .. . Medusa wrote: I spent my time and energy avoiding all the chemicals that made me sick. Now I am better, but cautious. What are these chemicals? ZZzz. One does not need to know exactly which chemicals. Yes, Jan, one does need to know which chemicals. News Flash! CHEMICALS, CHEMICALS, CHEMICALS EVERYWHERE. That is correct. There are molecules of oxygen, carbon dioxide and dihydrogen monoxide in the space between my eyes and my computer screen, plus nitrogen (a component of cyanide) and argon. Next to my keyboard (made of some chemicals derived from petroleum) is a container made of some chemical which underwent a permanent change at some time in the past to make it quite hard. Inside that container is a mixture of chemicals which includes dihydrogen monoxide, some plant-derived phytochemicals with a brown colour, tannin, caffeine and some sort of anti-oxidants. When preparing the mixture I added another chemical mixture containing animal fats, sugars and assorted proteins, and I finished it off with some small parcels containing lactose, phelylalanine, aspartame, starch and maltodextrin. To finish it off I used an implement made of iron, carbon and nickel (would that be TWO heavy metals?) to agitate the mixture. It will shortly be mixing with enzymes and hydrochloric acid (which is more than 50% chlorine, a gas so poisonous that it is banned in warfare). When next seen, most of the brown colouring chemicals will have been removed (leaving a yellow residue) and there will be a significant concentration of urea (the first organic chemical to be artificially created). Please don't -- TELL OTHERS WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT SAY! Did I just detect you telling me what I can and cannot say? How very hypocritical of you. By the way - I didn't tell anyone what to say. I asked a question, to which I am yet to receive an answer. Which reminds me - according to your rules you shouldn't be responding because I wasn't asking you. How very hypocritical of you. -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Multiple Chemical Sensitivities and Immune System Dysregulation | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | October 17th 07 08:37 PM |
Symptom Profile of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Actual Life | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 1 | June 2nd 07 01:09 AM |
Multiple Chemical Sensitivities can drive sufferers into poverty as well as ill health | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 1 | February 19th 07 12:27 PM |
Multiple Chemical Sensitivities can drive sufferers into poverty as well as ill health | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | January 16th 07 02:27 PM |
Multiple Chemical Sensitivities can drive sufferers into poverty as well as ill health | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | November 1st 06 06:29 PM |