BOSTON (AP) - Eli Lilly and Co. has settled a lawsuit brought by four sisters who contended their breast cancer was caused by a drug their mother took during pregnancy in the 1950s, a move some believe could trigger financial settlements in scores of other claims brought by women around the country.
A total of 51 women, including the Melnick sisters, filed lawsuits in Boston against more than a dozen companies that made or marketed a synthetic estrogen known as DES.
The Melnick sisters' case was the first to go to trial. The settlement was announced Wednesday on the second day of testimony.
DES, or diethylstilbestrol, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women over three decades to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. It was taken off the market in the early 1970s after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used it. Studies later showed the drug didn't prevent miscarriages.
Attorney Aaron Levine, representing the Melnick sisters, told the jury during opening statements that Eli Lilly failed to test the drug's effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
Lawyer James Dillon, for Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly, told the jury that there was no evidence the drug causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it.
Dillon also said that no medical records show that the mother of the Melnick sisters took DES or that, if she did take it, it was made by Eli Lilly. Leading researchers at the time recommended that DES be used for pregnant women who had consecutive miscarriages, he said.
DES was not patented and was made by many companies.
Boston attorney Andrew Meyer, who's handled numerous medical malpractice cases, said the settlement in this case could signal settlements in other cases.
'When one settles a case, they recognize they can lose it,' he said. 'The reason they can lose it is because there's enough evidence for the plaintiffs to be able to win it. So it's not just optics, it isn't.'
Columbus, Ohio, resident Irene Sawyer also is suing Eli Lilly, alleging that her prenatal exposure to DES caused her breast cancer. She called the settlement 'a huge victory' for DES daughters.
'The bottom line is that this company put out a drug without testing, without knowing the consequences of this drug,' she said.
It's wonderful, she said, that drug companies 'are starting to realize this is not right, that there are consequences.'
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Pa., said they all developed breast cancer in their 40s.
Levine told the jury that their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister and that sister has not developed breast cancer.
The four Melnick sisters also had miscarriages, fertility problems or other reproductive tract problems long suspected of being caused by prenatal exposure to DES. They were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging links between DES and vaginal cancer, cervical cancer and fertility problems. Many of those cases were settled.
___
Associated Press writer Jay Lindsay contributed to this report.
This news article is brought to you by GLOBAL WEATHER NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
APNewsBreak: Deal in Mass. suit on pregnancy drug
BOSTON (AP) - Four sisters who claimed in a lawsuit their breast cancer was caused by synthetic estrogen their mother took during pregnancy in the 1950s have reached a settlement with the drug company Eli Lilly and Co.
Attorney Julie Oliver-Zhang said the settlement, for an undisclosed amount, was reached on Wednesday, the second day of a trial in U.S. District Court in Boston. The sisters had not specified damages sought in the lawsuit.
Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly said it still believes its medication didn't cause the sisters' conditions but a settlement is in its best interest.
The sisters' case was the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have lawsuits pending in U.S. District Court in Boston against more than a dozen companies that made or marketed the drug.
DES, or diethylstilbestrol, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women over three decades to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. It was taken off the market in the early 1970s after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
In an opening trial statement Tuesday, Aaron Levine, another lawyer for the sisters, said Eli Lilly failed to test the drug's effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
James Dillon, a lawyer for Eli Lilly, told the jury there is no evidence the drug causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also said that no medical records show the mother of the four women in the Boston case took DES or that if she did take it that it was made by Eli Lilly.
DES was not patented and was made by many companies.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Pa., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant.
Levine told the jury that their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister and that sister has not developed breast cancer.
The four Melnick sisters also had miscarriages, fertility problems or other reproductive tract problems long suspected of being caused by prenatal exposure to DES. They were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
Dillon said that the doctor who treated the Melnick sisters' mother is now dead, and that there are no records of him prescribing DES. Dillon said Eli Lilly at the time recommended DES for women who had had three or more consecutive miscarriages.
The sisters' mother, he said, did not have consecutive miscarriages, so prescribing it to her would have gone against the company's recommendations. Dillon said leading researchers at the time recommended that DES be used for pregnant women.
Dillon told the jury that while it is 'terribly unfair' that the four sisters got breast cancer, it is a common disease and doctors still don't understand what causes it.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging links between DES and vaginal and cervical cancer, as well as fertility problems. Many of those cases were settled.
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
Attorney Julie Oliver-Zhang said the settlement, for an undisclosed amount, was reached on Wednesday, the second day of a trial in U.S. District Court in Boston. The sisters had not specified damages sought in the lawsuit.
Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly said it still believes its medication didn't cause the sisters' conditions but a settlement is in its best interest.
The sisters' case was the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have lawsuits pending in U.S. District Court in Boston against more than a dozen companies that made or marketed the drug.
DES, or diethylstilbestrol, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women over three decades to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. It was taken off the market in the early 1970s after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
In an opening trial statement Tuesday, Aaron Levine, another lawyer for the sisters, said Eli Lilly failed to test the drug's effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
James Dillon, a lawyer for Eli Lilly, told the jury there is no evidence the drug causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also said that no medical records show the mother of the four women in the Boston case took DES or that if she did take it that it was made by Eli Lilly.
DES was not patented and was made by many companies.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Pa., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant.
Levine told the jury that their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister and that sister has not developed breast cancer.
The four Melnick sisters also had miscarriages, fertility problems or other reproductive tract problems long suspected of being caused by prenatal exposure to DES. They were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
Dillon said that the doctor who treated the Melnick sisters' mother is now dead, and that there are no records of him prescribing DES. Dillon said Eli Lilly at the time recommended DES for women who had had three or more consecutive miscarriages.
The sisters' mother, he said, did not have consecutive miscarriages, so prescribing it to her would have gone against the company's recommendations. Dillon said leading researchers at the time recommended that DES be used for pregnant women.
Dillon told the jury that while it is 'terribly unfair' that the four sisters got breast cancer, it is a common disease and doctors still don't understand what causes it.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging links between DES and vaginal and cervical cancer, as well as fertility problems. Many of those cases were settled.
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
APNewsBreak: Settlement in suit on pregnancy drug
BOSTON (AP) - Four sisters who claimed in a lawsuit their breast cancer was caused by synthetic estrogen their mother took during pregnancy in the 1950s have reached a settlement with the drug company Eli Lilly and Co., a lawyer for the sisters said Wednesday.
Attorney Julie Oliver-Zhang said the settlement, for an undisclosed amount, was reached on the second day of a trial in U.S. District Court in Boston. They had not specified damages sought in the lawsuit.
Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
The sisters' case was the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have lawsuits pending in U.S. District Court in Boston against more than a dozen companies that made or marketed the drug.
DES, or diethylstilbestrol, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women over three decades to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. It was taken off the market in the early 1970s after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
In his opening trial statement Tuesday, Aaron Levine, another lawyer for the sisters, said Eli Lilly failed to test the drug's effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
James Dillon, a lawyer for Eli Lilly, told the jury there is no evidence the drug causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also said no medical records show the mother of the four women in the Boston case took DES, or that if she did take it, that it was made by Eli Lilly.
DES was not patented and was made by many companies.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Pa., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant.
Levine told the jury that their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister, and that sister has not developed breast cancer.
The four Melnick sisters also had miscarriages, fertility problems or other reproductive tract problems long suspected of being caused by prenatal exposure to DES. They were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
Dillon said that the doctor who treated the Melnick sisters' mother is now dead, and that there are no records of him prescribing DES. Dillon said Eli Lilly at the time recommended DES for women who had had three or more consecutive miscarriages.
The sisters' mother, he said, did not have consecutive miscarriages, so prescribing it to her would have gone against the company's recommendations. Dillon said leading researchers at the time recommended that DES be used for pregnant women.
Dillon told the jury that while it is 'terribly unfair' that the four sisters got breast cancer, it is a common disease and doctors still don't understand what causes it.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging links between DES and vaginal and cervical cancer, as well as fertility problems. Many of those cases were settled.
This news article is brought to you by PARENTING KIDS - where latest news are our top priority.
Attorney Julie Oliver-Zhang said the settlement, for an undisclosed amount, was reached on the second day of a trial in U.S. District Court in Boston. They had not specified damages sought in the lawsuit.
Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
The sisters' case was the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have lawsuits pending in U.S. District Court in Boston against more than a dozen companies that made or marketed the drug.
DES, or diethylstilbestrol, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women over three decades to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. It was taken off the market in the early 1970s after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
In his opening trial statement Tuesday, Aaron Levine, another lawyer for the sisters, said Eli Lilly failed to test the drug's effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
James Dillon, a lawyer for Eli Lilly, told the jury there is no evidence the drug causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also said no medical records show the mother of the four women in the Boston case took DES, or that if she did take it, that it was made by Eli Lilly.
DES was not patented and was made by many companies.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Pa., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant.
Levine told the jury that their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister, and that sister has not developed breast cancer.
The four Melnick sisters also had miscarriages, fertility problems or other reproductive tract problems long suspected of being caused by prenatal exposure to DES. They were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
Dillon said that the doctor who treated the Melnick sisters' mother is now dead, and that there are no records of him prescribing DES. Dillon said Eli Lilly at the time recommended DES for women who had had three or more consecutive miscarriages.
The sisters' mother, he said, did not have consecutive miscarriages, so prescribing it to her would have gone against the company's recommendations. Dillon said leading researchers at the time recommended that DES be used for pregnant women.
Dillon told the jury that while it is 'terribly unfair' that the four sisters got breast cancer, it is a common disease and doctors still don't understand what causes it.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging links between DES and vaginal and cervical cancer, as well as fertility problems. Many of those cases were settled.
This news article is brought to you by PARENTING KIDS - where latest news are our top priority.
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Mass. women at trial: Pregnancy drug caused cancer
BOSTON (AP) - A lawyer for four sisters who believe their breast cancer was caused by a drug their mother took during pregnancy says the drug maker failed to test its effect on fetuses before promoting it as a way to prevent miscarriages.
The sisters are suing Eli Lilly and Co. They allege the company urged doctors to prescribe the synthetic estrogen known as DES without proof that it prevented miscarriages and other reproductive problems.
A lawyer for Eli Lilly told the jury Tuesday that there is no evidence that DES causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also says no medical records show the mother of the women took DES, or that if she did take it, that it was made by Eli Lilly. Many companies made the drug.
This news article is brought to you by GOING GREEN NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
The sisters are suing Eli Lilly and Co. They allege the company urged doctors to prescribe the synthetic estrogen known as DES without proof that it prevented miscarriages and other reproductive problems.
A lawyer for Eli Lilly told the jury Tuesday that there is no evidence that DES causes breast cancer in the daughters of women who took it. He also says no medical records show the mother of the women took DES, or that if she did take it, that it was made by Eli Lilly. Many companies made the drug.
This news article is brought to you by GOING GREEN NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Testimony set to begin in pregnancy drug case
BOSTON (AP) - Testimony is set to begin in a federal lawsuit brought by four sisters who believe their breast cancer was caused by a drug their mother took during pregnancy in the 1950s.
The case involves a synthetic estrogen known as DES, diethylstilbestrol, which was prescribed to millions of pregnant women between the late 1930s and early 1970s to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Penn., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant. They say their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister, and that sister has not developed breast cancer. They are suing Eli Lilly and Co., seeking unspecified damages.
Opening statements and testimony are expected Tuesday in U.S. District Court.
The sisters' case is the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have DES lawsuits pending in Boston against more than a dozen drug companies that made or marketed DES.
The drug companies argue that no firm link has been established between breast cancer and DES. It was eventually taken off the market after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Eli Lilly argues in court documents that there is no evidence that the Melnick sisters' mother even took DES. She and her doctor are dead, and the drug company says there are no medical records documenting her treatment. A company spokesman said Eli Lilly believes the claims are without merit and is prepared to defend against them vigorously.
The Melnick sisters were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
The trial is expected to last several weeks.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
The case involves a synthetic estrogen known as DES, diethylstilbestrol, which was prescribed to millions of pregnant women between the late 1930s and early 1970s to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems. Studies later showed the drug did not prevent miscarriages.
The Melnick sisters, who grew up in Tresckow, Penn., say they all developed breast cancer in their 40s after their mother took DES while pregnant. They say their mother did not take DES while pregnant with a fifth sister, and that sister has not developed breast cancer. They are suing Eli Lilly and Co., seeking unspecified damages.
Opening statements and testimony are expected Tuesday in U.S. District Court.
The sisters' case is the first to go to trial out of scores of similar claims filed in Boston and around the country. A total of 51 women have DES lawsuits pending in Boston against more than a dozen drug companies that made or marketed DES.
The drug companies argue that no firm link has been established between breast cancer and DES. It was eventually taken off the market after it was linked to a rare vaginal cancer in women whose mothers used DES.
Eli Lilly argues in court documents that there is no evidence that the Melnick sisters' mother even took DES. She and her doctor are dead, and the drug company says there are no medical records documenting her treatment. A company spokesman said Eli Lilly believes the claims are without merit and is prepared to defend against them vigorously.
The Melnick sisters were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2003 and had treatments ranging from lump-removal surgery to a full mastectomy, radiation and chemotherapy.
The trial is expected to last several weeks.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Trial set to begin in Boston over pregnancy drug
BOSTON (AP) - Trial is set to begin Friday in a lawsuit brought by four sisters who say their breast cancer was caused by a drug their mother took during the 1950s when she was pregnant.
Jury selection is scheduled in federal court in Boston in case involving DES, or diethylstilbestrol (dahy-eth-uhl-stil-BEST-trawl). Millions of pregnant women were prescribed the drug between the 1930s and the early 1970s to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems.
Drug companies argue that no firm link between DES and breast cancer has been established.
The Melnick sisters say they all developed breast cancer after their mother took DES during pregnancy. They say their mother was not on DES while pregnant with a fifth sister. And that sister has not gotten breast cancer.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Jury selection is scheduled in federal court in Boston in case involving DES, or diethylstilbestrol (dahy-eth-uhl-stil-BEST-trawl). Millions of pregnant women were prescribed the drug between the 1930s and the early 1970s to prevent miscarriages, premature births and other problems.
Drug companies argue that no firm link between DES and breast cancer has been established.
The Melnick sisters say they all developed breast cancer after their mother took DES during pregnancy. They say their mother was not on DES while pregnant with a fifth sister. And that sister has not gotten breast cancer.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Video games fail to stoke kids' appetite for fruit
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Healthy food advertising in the form of online games doesn't make kids crave more wholesome snacks, according to a new study from the Netherlands.
Researchers expected children to choose to eat fruit after playing games promoting fruit, given that previous research has shown so-called 'advergames' to be effective marketing tools. In fact, kids in the experiment did eat more snacks after playing, but no more fruit than their peers.
'I think that the game elicits hunger, and children like (high calorie) snacks more than fruit snacks, so they chose the (high calorie) snacks,' said the study's lead author Frans Folkvord.
Based on his group's results, Folkvord added, parents should be cautious about the effect of such online games, even if they think they are there to promote healthy eating.
'Children are not aware of the intentions of the marketers,' said Folkvord, a graduate student at the University of Amsterdam. 'Parents have to teach their children to be skeptical about those games.'
'The association between having fun and seeing the product is designed to get you to influence your view of the product,' said Sandra Calvert, a professor at Georgetown University who was not involved in the Dutch study.
Popular fast food chains and cereal and juice drink brands, to name a few, have online games tailored for kids on their websites, including McDonald's, Cap'n Crunch cereal and Juicy Juice.
To see if such marketing could work in favor of healthy foods, Folkvord and his colleagues presented video memory games to 201 elementary school students.
The kids were split into three groups: one that played a game promoting candy, another that played a game promoting fruit and a third whose game promoted a non-food toy.
Another 69 children did not play any games.
After five minutes of gaming, the kids were allowed to have a snack, which could be chosen from two bowls of candy and two bowls of fruit.
The researchers found that the kids who played either of the games marketing food ended up eating more calories than the kids who played the game that promoted a toy or who didn't play a game at all.
For instance, the kids who played the candy game ate 202 calories afterward and those who played the fruit game ate 183 calories.
In comparison, kids who played the toy-promoting game ate 130 calories of the snacks and kids who didn't play at all ate 106 calories, the team reports in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
'I think these advergames promote hunger,' Folkvord told Reuters Health.
Contrary to his expectations, however, they didn't always promote the food that was presented in the game.
The kids who played the food games ate the same amount of fruit afterward - 32 or 33 calories - regardless of whether the game was marketing candy or fruit. So most of the snack calories both groups consumed came from candy.
Calvert said that although the current study didn't result in a preference for fruit, advergames could still work to promote healthier eating in the right context.
Her own study on the topic, published in 2009, involved a Pac-Man game promoting fruit and found that after playing, kids selected fruit over chips.
'It might have to do with the game,' she said. 'He's a very famous and familiar icon and he gets rewarded for eating healthy food and punished for eating unhealthy food.'
Her game also lasted 10 minutes, compared to Folkvord's five minutes.
'The same mechanisms work to get you to want an unhealthy food as a healthy food, but we have to be a little bit more convincing to get kids to want the healthy food,' she told Reuters Health.
Calvert said it's important that parents monitor which websites kids are using to play games, because they can influence kids' food choices.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/131b5m3 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, online December 26, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE 201 - where latest news are our top priority.
Researchers expected children to choose to eat fruit after playing games promoting fruit, given that previous research has shown so-called 'advergames' to be effective marketing tools. In fact, kids in the experiment did eat more snacks after playing, but no more fruit than their peers.
'I think that the game elicits hunger, and children like (high calorie) snacks more than fruit snacks, so they chose the (high calorie) snacks,' said the study's lead author Frans Folkvord.
Based on his group's results, Folkvord added, parents should be cautious about the effect of such online games, even if they think they are there to promote healthy eating.
'Children are not aware of the intentions of the marketers,' said Folkvord, a graduate student at the University of Amsterdam. 'Parents have to teach their children to be skeptical about those games.'
'The association between having fun and seeing the product is designed to get you to influence your view of the product,' said Sandra Calvert, a professor at Georgetown University who was not involved in the Dutch study.
Popular fast food chains and cereal and juice drink brands, to name a few, have online games tailored for kids on their websites, including McDonald's, Cap'n Crunch cereal and Juicy Juice.
To see if such marketing could work in favor of healthy foods, Folkvord and his colleagues presented video memory games to 201 elementary school students.
The kids were split into three groups: one that played a game promoting candy, another that played a game promoting fruit and a third whose game promoted a non-food toy.
Another 69 children did not play any games.
After five minutes of gaming, the kids were allowed to have a snack, which could be chosen from two bowls of candy and two bowls of fruit.
The researchers found that the kids who played either of the games marketing food ended up eating more calories than the kids who played the game that promoted a toy or who didn't play a game at all.
For instance, the kids who played the candy game ate 202 calories afterward and those who played the fruit game ate 183 calories.
In comparison, kids who played the toy-promoting game ate 130 calories of the snacks and kids who didn't play at all ate 106 calories, the team reports in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
'I think these advergames promote hunger,' Folkvord told Reuters Health.
Contrary to his expectations, however, they didn't always promote the food that was presented in the game.
The kids who played the food games ate the same amount of fruit afterward - 32 or 33 calories - regardless of whether the game was marketing candy or fruit. So most of the snack calories both groups consumed came from candy.
Calvert said that although the current study didn't result in a preference for fruit, advergames could still work to promote healthier eating in the right context.
Her own study on the topic, published in 2009, involved a Pac-Man game promoting fruit and found that after playing, kids selected fruit over chips.
'It might have to do with the game,' she said. 'He's a very famous and familiar icon and he gets rewarded for eating healthy food and punished for eating unhealthy food.'
Her game also lasted 10 minutes, compared to Folkvord's five minutes.
'The same mechanisms work to get you to want an unhealthy food as a healthy food, but we have to be a little bit more convincing to get kids to want the healthy food,' she told Reuters Health.
Calvert said it's important that parents monitor which websites kids are using to play games, because they can influence kids' food choices.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/131b5m3 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, online December 26, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE 201 - where latest news are our top priority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)