Friday, December 2, 2022

How Did 274,000 Babies End Up on Psychiatric Meds?


This text was beforehand printed September 19, 2019, and has been up to date with new data.

Within the U.S., an estimated 21 million American adults skilled no less than one main depressive episode in 2020.1 The reported numbers for the previous a number of years2 have persistently been highest amongst these aged between 18 and 25.3 Nonetheless, not solely is there proof that despair is vastly overdiagnosed, however there’s additionally proof displaying it is routinely mistreated.

With regard to overdiagnosis, it’s been ongoing for a very long time, with one 2013 examine4 discovering solely 38.4% of individuals with clinician-identified despair truly met the DSM-4 standards for a serious depressive episode, and solely 14.3% of seniors 65 and older met the standards.

As for remedy, the overwhelming majority are prescribed antidepressant medicine, regardless of the actual fact there’s little to no proof to recommend they supply significant assist, and loads of proof displaying the harms are higher than sufferers are being advised.

Based on a 2017 examine,5 1 in 6 People between the ages of 18 and 85 had been on psychiatric medicine, most of them antidepressants, and 84.3% reported long-term use (three years or extra). Out of 242 million U.S. adults, 12% had been discovered to have crammed a number of prescriptions for an antidepressant, particularly, in 2013. By 2021 within the midst of the pandemic, 1 in 4 People over age 18, or 50 million individuals, had been on prescription psychological well being medicine.6

Based on knowledge7 offered by a watchdog group in 2014, a whole lot of 1000’s of toddlers are additionally being medicated with highly effective psychiatric medicine, elevating severe moral questions, together with questions concerning the future psychological and bodily well being of those youngsters.

And, a examine printed in The BMJ in 20138 discovered that “In utero publicity to each SSRIs and non-selective monoamine reuptake inhibitors (tricyclic antidepressants) was related to an elevated threat of autism spectrum problems, notably with out mental incapacity” within the offspring.

Research are additionally shedding a lot wanted gentle on the addictive nature of many antidepressants, and display that the advantages of those medicine have been overblown whereas their uncomfortable side effects — together with suicidal ideation — and have been downplayed and ignored for many years, inserting sufferers at pointless threat.

The Chemical Imbalance Fantasy

One researcher liable for elevating consciousness about these essential psychological well being points is professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, a Danish physician-researcher and outspoken critic of the drug business (as his guide, “Lethal Medicines and Organized Crime: How Massive Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare,”9 suggests).

Gøtzsche helped discovered the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. In 2018, he was expelled by the Cochrane governing board following the publication of a scathing critique of a Cochrane evaluation of the HPV by which he and his coauthors identified a number of methodological flaws and conflicts of curiosity.

Over the previous a number of years, Gøtzsche has printed quite a few scientific papers on antidepressants and media articles and a guide discussing the findings. In a June 28, 2019 article,10 Gøtzsche addresses “the dangerous fantasy” about chemical imbalances — a debunked speculation that continues to drive the usage of antidepressants to at the present time. He writes, partly:11

“Psychiatrists routinely inform their sufferers that they’re unwell as a result of they’ve a chemical imbalance within the mind and they’re going to obtain a drug that fixes this …

Final summer season, one in every of my researchers and I collected details about despair from 39 fashionable web sites in 10 nations, and we discovered that 29 (74%) web sites attributed despair to a chemical imbalance or claimed that antidepressants might repair or right that imbalance …

It has by no means been potential to point out that widespread psychological problems begin with a chemical imbalance within the mind. The research which have claimed this are all unreliable.12

A distinction in dopamine ranges, for instance, between sufferers with schizophrenia and wholesome individuals can not inform us something about what began the psychosis … [I]f a lion assaults us, we get terribly frightened and produce stress hormones, however this doesn’t show that it was the stress hormones that made us scared.

Folks with psychoses have typically suffered traumatic experiences up to now, so we must always see these traumas as contributing causal elements and never cut back struggling to some biochemical imbalance that, if it exists in any respect, is extra prone to be the results of the psychosis moderately than its trigger.13

The parable about chemical imbalance may be very dangerous. It makes individuals consider there’s something critically incorrect with them, and typically they’re even advised that it’s hereditary.

The results of that is that sufferers proceed to take dangerous medicine, 12 months after 12 months, maybe even for the whole thing of their lives. They worry what would occur in the event that they stopped, notably when the psychiatrists have advised them that their state of affairs is like sufferers with diabetes needing insulin.”

Actual Reason behind Despair Is Usually Ignored

Based on Gøtzsche, there is no such thing as a recognized psychological well being subject that’s brought on by an imbalance of mind chemical compounds. In lots of circumstances, the true trigger is unknown, however “fairly often, it’s a response to unhealthy dwelling situations,” he writes.14

He additionally cites the guide,15 “Nervousness — The Inside Story: How Organic Psychiatry Acquired It Unsuitable,” written by Dr. Niall McLaren, by which the writer reveals that anxiousness is a significant component in and set off of most psychiatric problems.

“A psychiatrist I respect extremely, who solely makes use of psychiatric medicine in uncommon circumstances … has stated that most individuals are depressed as a result of they dwell miserable lives,” Gøtzsche writes.

“No drug may also help them dwell higher lives. It has by no means been proven in placebo-controlled trials {that a} psychiatric drug can enhance individuals’s lives — e.g., assist them return to work, enhance their social relationships or efficiency in school, or forestall crime and delinquency. The medicine worsen individuals’s lives, no less than in the long term.16

Gøtzsche rightfully factors out that antipsychotic medicine create chemical imbalances; they do not repair them. As a gaggle, they’re additionally considerably misnamed, as they don’t deal with psychotic states. Reasonably, they’re tranquilizers, rendering the affected person passive. Nonetheless, calming the affected person down doesn’t truly assist them heal the underlying trauma that, in lots of circumstances, is what triggered the psychosis within the first place.

As famous in a single 2012 meta-analysis17 of research childhood trauma — together with sexual abuse, bodily abuse, emotional/psychological abuse, neglect, parental dying and bullying — and subsequent threat of psychosis:

“There have been important associations between adversity and psychosis throughout all analysis designs … Sufferers with psychosis had been 2.72 occasions extra prone to have been uncovered to childhood adversity than controls … The estimated inhabitants attributable threat was 33% (16%-47%). These findings point out that childhood adversity is strongly related to elevated threat for psychosis.”

Economic system of Affect in Psychiatry

A associated article,18 written by investigative journalist Robert Whitaker in 2017, addresses the “economic system of affect” driving the usage of antidepressant medicine in psychiatric remedy — and the “social harm” that outcomes. As famous by Whitaker, psychological problems had been initially categorized in line with a illness mannequin in 1980 by the American Psychiatric Affiliation.

“We’re all aware of the second ‘economic system of affect’ that has exerted a corrupting affect on psychiatry — pharmaceutical cash — however I consider the guild affect is actually the larger downside,” he writes.

Whitaker particulars the corruption inside the APA in his guide “Psychiatry Beneath the Affect,” one aspect of which is “the false story advised to the general public about medicine that mounted chemical imbalances within the mind.” Different types of corrupt conduct embody:

  • The biased designs of scientific trials to realize a predetermined end result
  • Spinning outcomes to help preconceived conclusions
  • Hiding poor long-term outcomes
  • Increasing diagnostic classes for the aim of business achieve
  • Creating scientific trial tips that promote drug use

In his article, Whitaker goes on to dissect a 2017 evaluation19 printed within the American Journal of Psychiatry, which Whitaker claims “defends the occupation’s present protocols for prescribing antipsychotics, which incorporates their common long-term use.”

As Whitaker factors out, there’s ample proof displaying antipsychotic medicine worsen outcomes over the long run in these identified with psychotic problems akin to schizophrenia.

The evaluation in query, led by American psychiatrist Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, was geared toward answering persistent questions raised by the mounting of such proof. Alas, their conclusions dismissed issues that the present drug paradigm is perhaps doing extra hurt than good.

“In a subsequent press launch and a video for a Medscape commentary, Lieberman has touted it as proving that antipsychotics present an ideal profit, psychiatry’s protocols are simply high-quality, and that the critics are ‘nefarious’ people intent on doing hurt,” Whitaker writes.20

The Scientific Bias of Psychiatric Remedy

5 of the eight researchers listed on the evaluation have monetary ties to drug firms, three are audio system for a number of drug firms and all eight are psychiatrists, “and thus there’s a ‘guild’ curiosity current on this evaluation, provided that they’re investigating whether or not one in every of their remedies is dangerous over the long-term,” Whitaker notes.21

Not surprisingly, the evaluation ignored research displaying unfavourable results, together with research displaying antipsychotics have a detrimental impact on mind quantity. What’s extra, whereas withdrawal research help the usage of antipsychotics as upkeep remedy over the long run, these research don’t deal with how the medicine have an effect on sufferers’ long-term well being.

“They merely reveal that after an individual has stabilized on the remedy, going abruptly off the drug is prone to result in relapse,” Whitaker writes.22 “The main target on long-term outcomes, no less than as offered by critics, gives proof that psychiatry ought to undertake a selective-use protocol.

If first-episode sufferers should not instantly put on antipsychotics, there’s a important share that can get better, and this ‘spontaneous restoration’ places them onto long-term course. As for sufferers handled with the drugs, the purpose can be to attenuate long-term use, as there’s proof that antipsychotics, on the entire, worsen long-term outcomes.”

Huge Majority of Psychotic Sufferers Are Harmed, Not Helped

In his deconstruction of Lieberman’s evaluation, Whitaker particulars how biased pondering influenced the evaluation’s conclusions. It is a moderately lengthy article, however effectively value studying via if you wish to perceive how a scientific evaluation will be skewed to accord with a preconceived view.

Particulars I wish to spotlight, nevertheless, embody findings regarding the quantity wanted to deal with (NNT) and the share of sufferers harmed by the routine use of antipsychotic medicine as a first-line remedy.

As famous by Whitaker, whereas placebo-controlled research reveal the effectiveness of a drug in comparison with an inert substance, they don’t successfully reveal the ratio of profit versus hurt among the many affected person inhabitants. NNT refers back to the variety of sufferers that should take the drug as a way to get one constructive response.

A meta-analysis cited in Lieberman’s evaluation had an NNT of 6, which means that six sufferers should take the drug to ensure that one to learn from the remedy. The remaining 5 sufferers — 83% — are doubtlessly harmed by the remedy. As famous by Whitaker:23

“The purpose … is that this: reviewers in search of to advertise their drug remedy as efficient will look solely at whether or not it produces a superior response to placebo. This results in a one-size-fits-all protocol.

Reviewers that wish to assess the benefit-harm impact of the remedy on all sufferers will have a look at NNT numbers. On this occasion, the NNT calculations argue for selective use of the medicine …”

Antidepressants Are Not Helpful within the Lengthy Time period

Whereas sometimes not as damaging as antipsychotics, antidepressants additionally depart a path of destruction of their wake. A scientific evaluation24 by Gøtzsche printed in 2019 discovered research assessing hurt from selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) fail to supply a transparent and correct image of the harms, and due to this fact “can’t be used to analyze persistent harms of antidepressants.”

On this evaluation, Gøtzsche and colleagues sought to evaluate “harms of SSRIs … that persist after finish of drug consumption.” The first outcomes included mortality, purposeful outcomes, high quality of life and core psychiatric occasions. In all, 22 papers on 12 SSRI trials had been included. Gøtzsche discovered a number of distinct issues with these trials. For starters, solely two of the 12 trials had a drop-out charge under 20%.

Gøtzsche and his crew additionally be aware that “Consequence reporting was much less thorough throughout follow-up than for the intervention interval and solely two trials maintained the blind throughout follow-up.” Importantly, although, the entire 22 papers got here to the conclusion that “the medicine weren’t useful in the long run.”

One other essential discovering was that each one trials both “reported harms outcomes selectively or didn’t report any,” and “Solely two trials reported on any of our major outcomes (college attendance and variety of heavy consuming days).”

A number of years later, in April 2022, a examine utilizing knowledge from the USA’ Medical Expenditures Panel Survey for sufferers who had despair discovered, “The actual-world impact of utilizing antidepressant drugs doesn’t proceed to enhance sufferers” health-related high quality of life (HRQoL) over time.25

Antidepressants Are Extra Addictive Than Admitted

In a June 4, 2019, article,26 “The Despair Capsule Epidemic,” Gøtzsche writes that antidepressant medicine:

“… shouldn’t have related results on despair; they improve the danger of suicide and violence; they usually make it harder for sufferers to dwell regular lives.27 They need to due to this fact be averted.

We’ve got been fooled by the drug business, corrupt medical doctors on business payroll, and by our drug regulators.28 Absolutely, many sufferers and medical doctors consider the drugs are useful, however they can’t know this, as a result of individuals are likely to develop into a lot better with time even when they aren’t handled.29

For this reason we’d like placebo-controlled trials to seek out out what the medicine do to individuals. Sadly, nearly all trials are flawed, exaggerate the advantages of the medicine, and underestimate their harms.”30

Addictive Nature of Antidepressants Skews Outcomes

In his article,31 Gøtzsche critiques a number of of the methods utilized in antidepressant drug trials to magnify advantages and underestimate the harms. One little-known fact that helps skew examine ends in the drug’s favor is the truth that antidepressants are typically much more addictive than formally admitted. He explains how this conveniently hides the skewing of outcomes as follows:32

“Just about all sufferers within the trials are already on a drug just like the one being examined towards placebo. Due to this fact, because the medicine are addictive, a number of the sufferers will get abstinence signs … when randomized to placebo …

These abstinence signs are similar to these sufferers expertise once they attempt to cease benzodiazepines. It’s no surprise that new medicine outperform the placebo in sufferers who’ve skilled hurt because of chilly turkey results.

To learn how lengthy sufferers have to proceed taking medicine, so-called upkeep (withdrawal) research have been carried out, however such research are also compromised by chilly turkey results. Main psychiatrists do not perceive this, or they fake they do not.

Most interpret the upkeep research of despair drugs to imply that these medicine are very efficient at stopping new episodes of despair and that sufferers ought to due to this fact proceed taking the medicine for years and even for all times.”

Scientific Literature Helps Actuality of Consumer Complaints

Over time, a number of research on the dependence and withdrawal reactions related to SSRIs and different psychiatric medicine have been printed, together with the next:

In a 2011 paper33 within the journal Habit, Gøtzsche and his crew regarded on the distinction between dependence and withdrawal reactions by evaluating benzodiazepines and SSRIs. Benzodiazepines are recognized to trigger dependence, whereas SSRIs are stated to not be addictive.

Regardless of such claims, Gøtzsche’s crew discovered that “discontinuation signs had been described with related phrases for benzodiazepines and SSRIs and had been very related for 37 of 42 recognized signs described as withdrawal reactions,” which led them to conclude that:

“Withdrawal reactions to selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors look like just like these for benzodiazepines; referring to those reactions as a part of a dependence syndrome within the case of benzodiazepines, however not selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors, doesn’t appear rational.”

Two years later, in 2013, Gøtzsche’s crew printed a paper34 within the Worldwide Journal of Danger & Security in Medication, by which they analyzed “communications from drug companies about benzodiazepine and SSRI withdrawal reactions over time.”

By looking the web sites of drug companies in Europe, the U.S., U.Okay. and Denmark, they discovered that it took years earlier than drug regulators lastly acknowledged the truth of benzodiazepine dependence and SSRI withdrawal reactions and started informing prescribers and sufferers about these dangers.

A big a part of the issue, they discovered, is that drug companies rely on spontaneous reporting of antagonistic results, which “results in underestimation and delayed details about the issues.”

In conclusion, they state that “Given the expertise with the benzodiazepines, we consider the regulatory our bodies ought to have required research from the producers that would have elucidated the dependence potential of the SSRIs earlier than advertising and marketing authorization was granted.”

A 2019 paper35 within the Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences journal notes “It took virtually 20 years after the SSRIs entered the marketplace for the primary systematic evaluation to be printed.” It additionally factors out that critiques claiming withdrawal results to be gentle, transient in length and uncommon “was at odds with the sparse however rising proof base.”

In actuality, “What the scientific literature reveals is in shut settlement with the 1000’s of service person testimonies accessible on-line in massive boards. It means that withdrawal reactions are fairly widespread, that they might final from a couple of weeks to a number of months and even longer, and that they’re typically extreme.”

Antidepressants Enhance Your Danger of Suicide and Violence

In his June 2019 article,36 Gøtzsche additionally stresses the truth that antidepressants will be deadly. In one in every of his research,37 printed in 2016, he discovered antidepressants “double the incidence of occasions that may result in suicide and violence in wholesome grownup volunteers.”

Different analysis38 has proven they “improve aggression in youngsters and adolescents by an element of two to three — an essential discovering contemplating the various college shootings the place the killers had been on despair drugs,” Gøtzsche writes.

In middle-aged girls with stress urinary incontinence, the selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) duloxetine, which can also be used to deal with incontinence, has been proven to double the danger of a psychotic episode and improve the danger of violence and suicide 4 to 5 occasions,39 main the authors to conclude that harms outweighed the advantages.

“I’ve described the soiled tips and scientific dishonesty concerned when drug firms and main psychiatrists attempt convincing us that these medicine defend towards suicide and different types of violence,”40 Gøtzsche writes.41 “Even the FDA was compelled to offer in when it admitted in 2007, no less than not directly, that despair drugs could cause suicide and insanity at any age.

There is no such thing as a doubt that the huge use of despair drugs is dangerous. In all nations the place this relationship has been examined, the sharp rise in incapacity pensions as a consequence of psychiatric problems has coincided with the rise of psychiatric drug utilization, and despair drugs are these that are used probably the most by far. This isn’t what one would anticipate if the medicine had been useful.”

Drugmaker Lied About Paxil’s Suicide Danger

In 2017, Wendy Dolin was awarded $3 million by a jury in a lawsuit towards GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of Paxil. Dolin’s husband dedicated suicide six days after taking his first dose of a Paxil generic, and proof introduced forth within the case convincingly confirmed his suicide was the results of the drug, not emotional stress or psychological sickness.42

The authorized crew behind that victory, Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman, additionally represented different victims of Paxil-induced violence and dying. On the time, legal professional R. Brent Wisner stated:43

“The Dolin verdict despatched a transparent message to GSK and different drug producers that hiding knowledge and manipulating science won’t be tolerated … Should you create a drug and know that it poses severe dangers, no matter whether or not customers use the model identify or generic model of that drug, you will have an obligation to warn.”

GSK’s personal scientific placebo-controlled trials truly revealed topics on Paxil had practically 9 occasions the danger of making an attempt or committing suicide than the placebo group. To achieve drug approval, GSK misrepresented this stunning knowledge, falsely reporting the next variety of suicide makes an attempt within the placebo group and deleting a number of the suicide makes an attempt within the drug group.

An inside GSK evaluation of its suicide knowledge additionally confirmed that “sufferers taking Paxil had been practically seven occasions extra prone to try suicide than these on placebo,” Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman stories, including:44

“Jurors within the Dolin trial additionally heard from psychiatrist David Healy, one of many world’s foremost specialists on Paxil and medicines in its class … Healy advised the jurors that Paxil and medicines like it may well create in some individuals a state of maximum ’emotional turmoil’ and intense inside restlessness often called akathisia …

‘Folks have described it like a state worse than dying. Demise will probably be a blessed reduction. I wish to bounce out of my pores and skin,’ Dr. Healy stated. Wholesome volunteer research have discovered that akathisia can occur even to individuals with no psychiatric situation who take the drug …

One other Paxil aspect impact recognized to extend the danger of suicide is emotional blunting … apathy or emotional indifference … [E]motional blunting, mixed with akathisia, can result in a psychological state by which a person has ideas of harming themselves or others, however is ‘numbed’ to the implications of their actions. Medication within the Paxil class also can trigger somebody to ‘go psychotic, develop into delirious,’ Dr. Healy defined.”

A whole bunch of 1000’s of Toddlers on Psychiatric Medication

Contemplating the various severe psychological and bodily dangers related to psychiatric medicine, it is stunning to be taught that a whole lot of 1000’s of American toddlers are on them. In 2014, the Residents Fee on Human Rights, a psychological well being watchdog group, highlighted knowledge displaying that in 2013:45

  • 274,000 infants aged 1 and youthful got psychiatric medicine — Of those, 249,699 had been on anti-anxiety meds like Xanax; 26,406 had been on antidepressants akin to Prozac or Paxil, 1,422 had been on ADHD medicine akin to Ritalin and Adderall, and 654 had been on antipsychotics akin to Risperdal and Zyprexa
  • Within the toddler class (2- to 3-year-olds), 318,997 had been on anti-anxiety medicine, 46,102 had been on antidepressants, 10,000 had been prescribed ADHD medicine and three,760 had been on antipsychotics
  • Amongst youngsters aged 5 and youthful, 1,080,168 had been on psychiatric medicine

These are stunning figures that problem logic. How and why are so many youngsters, infants even, on addictive and dangerously mind-altering drugs? Contemplating these statistics are 6 years previous, likelihood is they’re even larger as we speak. Simply what is going to occur to all of those children as they develop up? As talked about within the article:46

“In terms of the psychiatric medicine used to deal with ADHD, these are known as ‘kiddie cocaine’ for a motive. Ritalin (methylphenidate), Adderall (amphetamine) and Concerta are all thought of by the federal authorities as Schedule II medicine — probably the most addictive.

ADHD medicine even have severe uncomfortable side effects akin to agitation, mania, aggressive or hostile conduct, seizures, hallucinations, and even sudden dying, in line with the Nationwide Institutes of Well being …

So far as antipsychotics, antianxiety medicine and antidepressants, the FDA and worldwide drug regulatory companies cite uncomfortable side effects together with, however not restricted to, psychosis, mania, suicidal ideation, coronary heart assault, stroke, diabetes, and even sudden dying.”

Kids More and more Prescribed Psych Medication Off-Label

Making issues even worse, latest analysis reveals the variety of youngsters being prescribed remedy off-label can also be on the rise. An instance supplied by StudyFinds.org,47 which reported the findings, is “a physician recommending antidepressant remedy for ADHD signs.”

The examine,48 printed within the journal Pediatrics, checked out developments in off-label drug prescriptions made for youngsters below the age of 18 by office-based physicians between 2006 and 2015. Findings revealed:

“Physicians ordered ≥1 off-label systemic drug at 18.5% of visits, normally (74.6%) due to unapproved situations. Off-label ordering was commonest proportionally in neonates (83%) and in absolute phrases amongst adolescents (322 orders out of 1000 visits).

Off-label ordering was related to feminine intercourse, subspecialists, polypharmacy, and power situations. Charges and causes for off-label orders diversified significantly by age. Relative and absolute charges of off-label orders rose over time. Amongst widespread lessons, off-label orders for antihistamines and several other psychotropics elevated over time …

US office-based physicians have ordered systemic medicine off label for youngsters at rising charges, most frequently for unapproved situations, regardless of latest efforts to extend proof and drug approvals for youngsters.”

The researchers had been greatly surprised by the findings, and expressed severe concern over this pattern. Whereas authorized, lots of the medicine prescribed off-label haven’t been correctly examined to make sure security and efficacy for younger youngsters and adolescents.

As famous by senior writer Daniel Horton, assistant professor of pediatrics and pediatric rheumatologist at Rutgers Robert Wooden Johnson Medical Faculty, “We don’t all the time perceive how off-label drugs will have an effect on youngsters, who don’t all the time reply to drugs as adults do. They might not reply as desired to those medicine and will expertise dangerous results.”

In 2020 psychological well being specialists and reviewers had been nonetheless at-odds over prescribing these medicine for youngsters, but hesitant to name a cease to it:49

“Antidepressants are prescribed for the remedy of quite a few psychiatric problems in youngsters and adolescents, nevertheless there’s nonetheless controversy about whether or not they need to be used on this inhabitants …

Remedy choices must be tailor-made to sufferers on a person foundation, so we advocate clinicians, sufferers and coverage makers to check with the proof offered within the current meta-review and make choices about the usage of antidepressants in youngsters and adolescents considering quite a few scientific and private variables.”

Educate Your self Concerning the Dangers

Should you, your baby or one other member of the family is on a psychiatric drug, I urge you to teach your self concerning the true dangers and to contemplate switching to safer options. In terms of youngsters, I can not fathom a state of affairs by which a toddler would wish a psychiatric drug and I discover it stunning that there are such a lot of medical doctors on the market that, based mostly on a subjective analysis, would deem a psychiatric drug vital.



Related Articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

0FansLike
17FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest Articles