Jump to content



Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Jaydee said:


US voters are about to get a lesson in the direct effects of reality.

I imagine all the stats will catch up in due course, spin will spin and the spinners will scream and shout.... in the end, the virus is reality and reality doesn't care. It doesn't give a rats butt about agendas or the number of people at a Trump rally. It will ask the same question others do, WDYTWGTH? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool. CNN reports that hundreds of thousands of people protesting in packed venues across the country has had no effect on rapidly spiking community spread infections. The research was conducted by Gus (the blind goat) and Paint Bros (the paint is paint chemist) of Home Depot fame:

Black Lives Matter protests have not led to a spike in coronavirus cases, research says


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by the Democrats fixation on Trumps rally turn out. It's been ongoing for days now with fact checkers working overtime. I think the count is down to 2 shepherds and a blind goat and their own numbers no longer warrant accusations of Covid impropriety when compared to the density of the protestors they fully support. 

As  always, I find the notion of being right vs winning of interest as it relates to the concept of do the work, earn the win. I look forward to seeing the election results only from a clinical perspective. Nothing in my own experience suggests that winning comes without long hours of preparation and practice, what my grandfather always called "thirsty work." His position was "If it were easy, every damn fool would be doing it."

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go Protesters Go !!!  YOU GOT THIS !!!


California reports more than 7,000 coronavirus cases, biggest daily jump so far

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breaking News:

CNN now thinks that this maybe, might not be strictly as a result of increased testing. Who'd a thunk..... imagine a virus that doesn't care about political agendas, it must be Trump's fault:

'Apocalyptic' coronavirus surges feared in major cities as most populous states hit record numbers

Hold on.....yup, it's clearly Trump's fault, it all comes down to the shepherds and the goat again.

Trump is not just in denial but also indifferent to an unfolding American tragedy

CNN now says "It's a public health train wreck in slow motion." I say WTFDYTWGTH. A couple of days ago they were saying there was no evidence to support the notion that mass demonstrations contribute to community spread.

Maybe grade 9 biology should be mandatory. How is it that a dumb grunt can predict the future but the top political minds in the US are oblivious to reality? Consider that maybe they aren't oblivious, then consider that they damn sure aren't oblivious.... all of them know exactly what's what and if you aren't offended by that, maybe you should be.

I'm pretty sure I can predict future CNN headlines now; you can too.... right?

Not to be outdone, the burning issue of the day at CBC is:

COVID-19: Should I wear a mask when singing?


Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Covid-19 is increasing at warp speed in the US

Opinion by Kent Sepkowitz


Updated 8:46 AM ET, Thu June 25, 2020Kent Sepkowitz is a CNN medical analyst and a physician and infection control expert at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion at CNN.

(CNN)The Covid-19 infection rate in the US is increasing at warp speed, alarming almost everyone outside the White House. About half of US states are in the midst of a substantial uptick compared to their number of reported cases just last week.

Some states however have not seen any increase. For the most part, these are places like New York, New Jersey and Michigan that already went through the nightmare.
Kent Sepkowitz
In fact, they have had a moment to enjoy relative calm and less crowded hospitals. Though never quite stated aloud, there is secret hope among us residents of the already-ransacked that perhaps the epidemic is done with us, that it has had enough.
Unfortunately, Louisiana, which had a huge outbreak in March likely related to Mardi Gras celebrations throughout the state, appears to be demonstrating that the dreaded second wave of infection -- the forceful return of virus to an already extensively affected area -- is a real thing. (There is some controversy about whether this is a true second wave or a return of an incompletely extinguished first wave, but either way, it is a mess).
And Louisiana is not alone among states with a second bump. Florida had a small rise in April, flattened its curve for a while, but has seen a disastrous rise in June. Ditto Georgia.
They opted however to tempt fate and re-open too soon, wasting the weeks of tedious quarantine. This faith-based approach resembles an athlete, after months of grueling rehab from an injury, returning too soon and ending up back at square one after re-injuring the same bone or joint.
The first time around in Louisiana was far more severe than almost anywhere, a true "sky is falling" early spring spike in cases and deaths. They responded methodically and cases plummeted, remaining relatively low for about two months.
In the last weeks though, after progressing from Phase One on May 15 to Phase Two re-opening on June 5, the area has had a surge of cases. Perhaps it was all due to a too-rapid move to Phase Two.
In addition to easing restrictions, though, Louisiana had to deal with an additional problem, a problem of growing national concern. It is surrounded by states that are in the midst of large initial outbreaks that haven't yet been well contained.


California's governor sounds the alarm over virus 02:07
Consider Louisiana's neighborhood: to the east is Mississippi where cases have been slowly rising for months. It abuts the greater New Orleans area where the three most populous parishes all have seen a substantial jump in cases in the last two weeks according to a New York Times analysis: Orleans (15 cases a day to 26), Jefferson (33 to 60), and St Tammany (12 to 28).
Arkansas with its calamitous meatpacking plant outbreaks is just north of Louisiana's Bossier (7.6 to 26) and Webster (5.7 to 20) Parishes. And Calcasieu Parish (8.6 cases to 26) sits across the border from Texas, which hit a new daily state record with more than 5,500 cases Wednesday.
Right now Louisiana has identified clusters of cases from high school graduation parties and a bar near LSU. There will be more clusters and more spread; perhaps Louisiana will be able to contain the problem more efficiently than many other states. Or not.
But the problem will remain the same: infectious diseases are infectious. They do what they do regardless of who the governor is or when the nail salon re-opens. They move across state lines with the same ease that they go from hand to hand, something a veteran germaphobe such as the President should understand. Walls -- physical or cartographic --can't keep the problem away.
It appears though that three northeastern states -- New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut -- are going to try the border war approach. They announced this week that they will require a 14-day quarantine for travelers from states with a 10% or greater Covid-19 diagnostic test positivity. As of Wednesday, the measure applies to eight states. Among them are Arkansas and Texas, as well as Florida, a second home for many in the tri-state area.
I personally doubt this lock 'em up approach will work without maintenance of a level of hostility and tough-guy policing that seems at odds with the moment. More importantly though it is really just an attempt to provide a practical work-around because the core problem -- the lack of federal coordination -- is not being addressed.
We currently have a situation where individual governors with different re-opening rules, different priorities and timelines, different assessments of the data, and different levels of governmental commitment are reopening willy-nilly without a consideration of the larger impact. This approach is destined to fail miserably and inevitably will corrode relationships among governors.
Get our free weekly newsletter

The deliberate absence of a coordinated, cautious reopening is in many ways a larger failure of leadership than the disastrous first months of the pandemic, when the United States failed to secure adequate testing, personal protective equipment or a system to ensure ventilators were available where they were needed for its citizens. It is one thing to make a series of bad decisions in the early days of a situation no one had previously encountered. It is another and even more reprehensible problem to refuse to learn the lessons taught by the more than 120,000 people in the US who have died from the disease.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, seeker said:

Marshall, you're slipping.  I already posted this on April 26th and you even gave me a smiley face.  Haha, I'm just razing you - do the same thing myself all the time.

Whoops, deleted....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marshall said:

Whoops, deleted....

No, no, that was not my intent.  I was just taking the opportunity to poke you in the ribs.  A joke between friends.  Put it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries, I felt the poke and knew it was in fun. ?  So since you think the post is worth repeating, I will   replicate it.  Cheers and thanks.  



Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mo32a said:

To mask or not to mask?



Consider the source.  and then the facts:  She is anti mask and also anti vaccination.  Hmmmm   She quotes a case where the mask shot the O2 level down to 86 and how dangerous that was, yet a normal O2 level falls between 80 and 100.  Hmmmmm

O2 levels

These guidelines will help you understand what your result might mean: Normal: A normal ABG oxygen level for healthy lungs falls between 80 and 100 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg). If a pulse ox measured your blood oxygen level (SpO2), a normal reading is typically between 95 and 100 percent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now the truth is coming out about the lies they push on Americans.  Even health care executives are coming clean.


Amid America's #COVID19 disaster, I must come clean about a lie I spread as a health insurance exec: We spent big $$ to push the idea that Canada's single-payer system was awful & the U.S. system much better. It was a lie & the nations' COVID responses prove it. The truth: (1/6)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further to the above:


The stark differences in how the coronavirus pandemic has unfolded in the U.S. and in Canada show the flaws in for-profit health care, according to a former U.S. health insurance executive who now advocates for medicare.

“You learn a lot about a health-care system when a global crisis hits (and) different nations have different results. Canada’s single-payer system is saving lives,” Wendell Potter said in a series of tweets Thursday.

“The U.S. profit-driven corporate model is failing. I’ll regret slandering Canada’s system for the rest of my life.”

Potter, a former communications vice-president with U.S. insurer Cigna who now leads an organization called Medicare for All Now!, said insurance companies have spent big on attempts to discredit the Canadian system.

“It was a lie (and) the nations’ COVID responses prove it,” he wrote. “The truth: Canada’s doing much better than the U.S. when it comes to COVID-19 testing and treatment.

“On a per capita basis, more Canadians are being tested (and) fewer getting sick (and) dying. This may shock Americans who still believe the lies I told about the Canadian health care system.”

Amid America's #COVID19 disaster, I must come clean about a lie I spread as a health insurance exec: We spent big $$ to push the idea that Canada's single-payer system was awful & the U.S. system much better. It was a lie & the nations' COVID responses prove it. The truth: (1/6)

— Wendell Potter (@wendellpotter) June 25, 2020


Cigna did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday afternoon. Nor did the industry group America’s Health Insurance Plans, which Potter accused of supplying insurance executives with “cherry-picked data (and) anecdotes” to encourage the perception that Canadians face unreasonable wait times.

In an interview, Potter said he wanted to draw attention to the reality north of the border, and “what can happen when you have a system that is better organized” than in the United States.

COVID-19 has claimed more than 8,500 lives in Canada as of Thursday. In the U.S., which has a population nearly nine times greater than Canada’s, there have been more than 122,000 fatalities, according to figures compiled by Johns Hopkins University.

For every 100,000 people, Canada has had 23 deaths, while the U.S. has had about 37, according to the university researchers’ calculations.

[ Sign up for our Health IQ newsletter for the latest coronavirus updates ]

Canada has also tested a greater proportion of its residents. On average, the U.S. has tested 56 people per 100,000 daily, while Canada has tested 65 per 100,000, Johns Hopkins data shows.

In past interviews with Global News, experts have pointed to a number of factors that could be behind the differences in how the pandemic is playing out in Canada versus the U.S.

They pointed to differences in pandemic policy and response co-ordination, as well health care and factors such as population density.

Potter’s comments were shared widely on the social media platform, though they attracted criticism as well.

A 2019 report from the Canadian Institute for Health Information found that most Canadians are getting timely access to urgent procedures, but that about 30 per cent of those needing cataract surgery or hip or knee replacements did not receive those procedures within the recommended timeframes.

Research shows, however, that the U.S. spends far more on health care yet has the lowest life expectancy and highest infant mortality rates out of 11 high-income countries including Canada.

Potter worked as a journalist prior to switching to communications and started at Cigna in 1993.

What he called a crisis of conscience over his work — and “vilifying the Canadian system” — prompted Potter to leave the industry more than a decade ago.

“I was very ashamed of what I was doing. I became very ashamed,” he said.

Amid the coronavirus crisis, Potter said he believes the U.S. is at a turning point when it comes to support for health-care reform, and U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden will face public pressure on that issue.

“I think it’s just a matter of time before we ultimately have a system that’s more like yours,” he said.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Planning to travel to the US?   You may find the following of interest.


Reported cases and deaths

The figures below are based on data from the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering. These numbers are updated every 15 minutes but may differ from other sources due to differences in reporting times. For up-to-the-minute updates, follow our live coverage.

Location Cases ...per 100K people Deaths ...per 100K people
New York 390,415 2,007 31,301 161
California 201,114 509 5,806 15
New Jersey 170,196 1,916 14,872 167
Illinois 139,434 1,100 6,810 54
Texas 134,558 464 2,317 8
Florida 114,018 531 3,327 15
Massachusetts 107,837 1,565 7,962 116
Pennsylvania 88,141 688 6,557 51
Georgia 71,095 670 2,745 26
Michigan 68,989 691 6,133 61
Maryland 65,777 1,088 3,129 52
Arizona 63,281 869 1,495 21
Virginia 59,946 702 1,675 20
North Carolina 57,472 548 1,336 13
Louisiana 53,415 1,149 3,164 68
Ohio 47,651 408 2,772 24
Connecticut 45,994 1,290 4,298 121
Indiana 43,655 648 2,586 38
Tennessee 38,034 557 567 8
Minnesota 34,123 605 1,441 26
Alabama 33,206 677 896 18
Colorado 31,463 546 1,669 29
Washington 30,367 399 1,300 17
South Carolina 29,022 564 693 13
Iowa 27,473 871 701 22
Wisconsin 26,227 450 766 13
Mississippi 24,516 824 1,016 34
Missouri 19,746 322 996 16
Utah 19,374 604 164 5
Nebraska 18,346 948 260 13
Arkansas 18,062 599 240 8
Rhode Island 16,640 1,571 920 87
Nevada 14,859 482 495 16
Kentucky 14,617 327 546 12
Kansas 13,107 450 262 9
Oklahoma 11,948 302 375 9
New Mexico 11,192 534 485 23
Delaware 10,980 1,128 507 52
District of Columbia 10,159 1,439 543 77
Oregon 7,568 179 197 5
Puerto Rico 6,922 217 151 5
South Dakota 6,479 732 87 10
New Hampshire 5,638 415 357 26
Idaho 4,865 272 90 5
North Dakota 3,393 445 78 10
Maine 3,070 228 103 8
West Virginia 2,694 150 92 5
Wyoming 1,326 229 20 3
Vermont 1,191 191 56 9
Hawaii 851 60 17 1
Alaska 813 111 12 2
Montana 803 75 21 2
Guam 231   5  
Other 152   3  
US Virgin Islands 80   6  
Northern Mariana Islands 30   2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Headline of the day award.... seems like a no brainer to me. Lost in all of this is context which has fallen victim to narrative, thoughtful people might conclude that both maybe, might possibly, perhaps, be problematic. You'd never come to that conclusion by digesting the swill on offer from the likes of CNN though:

Cuomo, de Blasio wrong to limit worship services, condone mass protests: federal judge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

Headline of the day award.... seems like a no brainer to me. Lost in all of this is context which has fallen victim to narrative, thoughtful people might conclude that both maybe, might possibly, perhaps, be problematic. You'd never come to that conclusion by digesting the swill on offer from the likes of CNN though:

Cuomo, de Blasio wrong to limit worship services, condone mass protests: federal judge

Of course removing limits, condoning mass protests etc might just allow "Darwin" to work to the benefit of those who survive.   (thinning out the herd)  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took a federal judge to point out simple reality to the denizens of Stupidville. 

The downstream effects of this are both cumulative and destructive. It seems people are willing to carry the banner of their narratives into the gates of hell with no consideration for how they may like the new neighbourhood. Turn the seatbelt sign off and let em dance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another scientific reason for the spiking cases...


New research explores how conservative media misinformation may have intensified the severity of the pandemic

The three studies paint a picture of a media ecosystem that entertains conspiracy theories and discourages audiences from taking steps to protect themselves and others

Coronavirus infections have surged in a number of states, setting the United States on a markedly different pandemic trajectory than other wealthy nations.

There are many reasons our response to the pandemic tied to more than 120,000 U.S. deaths has faltered, experts say, including the lack of a cohesive federal policy, missteps on testing and tracing, and a national culture emphasizing individualism.


In recent weeks, three studies have focused on conservative media’s role in fostering confusion about the seriousness of the coronavirus. Taken together, they paint a picture of a media ecosystem that amplifies misinformation, entertains conspiracy theories and discourages audiences from taking concrete steps to protect themselves and others.

The end result, according to one of the studies, is that infection and mortality rates are higher in places where one pundit who initially downplayed the severity of the pandemic — Fox News’s Sean Hannity — reaches the largest audiences.


“We are receiving an incredible number of studies and solid data showing that consuming far-right media and social media content was strongly associated with low concern about the virus at the onset of the pandemic,” said Irene Pasquetto, chief editor of the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, which published one of the studies.

Misinformation and conspiracy theories

In April, Kathleen Hall Jamieson of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and Dolores Albarracin of the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign published a peer-reviewed study examining how Americans’ media diets affected their beliefs about the coronavirus.

Administering a nationally representative phone survey with 1,008 respondents, they found that people who got most of their information from mainstream print and broadcast outlets tended to have an accurate assessment of the severity of the pandemic and their risks of infection. But those who relied on conservative sources, such as Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, were more likely to believe in conspiracy theories or unfounded rumors, such as the belief that taking vitamin C could prevent infection, that the Chinese government had created the virus, and that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exaggerated the pandemic’s threat “to damage the Trump presidency.”


These findings held even after controlling for viewers’ political affiliation, education, gender and age.

The authors pinpoint several examples of misinformation circulating in conservative media. For example, on March 6, Fox medical contributor Marc Siegel stated on Hannity’s popular evening program that “the virus should be compared to the flu. Because at worst, at worst, worst-case scenario it could be the flu.”

Similarly, in February, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) appeared on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures” to suggest, without evidence, that the virus was connected to a research laboratory in Wuhan, China.

Beliefs lead to actions

A working paper posted by the National Bureau of Economic Research in May examined whether these incorrect beliefs affected real-world behavior.


The authors used anonymous location data from millions of cellphones to explore how the popularity of Fox News in a given Zip code related to social distancing practices there. By March 15, they found, a 10 percent increase in Fox News viewership within a Zip code reduced its residents’ propensity to stay home, in compliance with public health guidelines, by about 1.3 percentage points.


Given total stay-at-home behavior increased by 20 percentage points during the study period, that effect size is “pretty large,” said Andrey Simonov, the study’s lead author. It’s comparable to Fox’s persuasive effect on voting behavior, as identified in a 2017 paper by a different team.

“The effect that we measure could be driven by the long-term message of Fox News, which is that the mainstream media often report ‘fake news’ and have a political agenda,” Simonov said. “This could result in lowering trust in institutions and experts, including health experts in the case of the pandemic.”


It’s plausible, of course, that this difference in behavior could be attributed to other characteristics of Fox viewers, such as their age or political ideology. To control for these factors, the authors used “the quasi-random assignment of each news channel’s relative position across cable markets” as an instrumental variable.


Because TV stations with lower channel numbers tend to be watched more than those with higher numbers, and because those numbers are assigned in a more-or-less random way across TV markets, the authors were able to measure exposure to Fox News driven not by personal tastes, but by differences in channel lineups. Rather than asking “How does Fox News viewership affect social distancing,” the analysis asked “How does viewership of Fox News due to low channel position affect social distancing.”

While a big step beyond simple correlation, this type of analysis was nonetheless unable to definitively say that Fox programming caused viewers to be less compliant with social distancing guidelines.

How conservative media consumers’ behavior could worsen the pandemic

Another recent working paper, by economists at the University of Chicago and other institutions, similarly finds that Fox News viewers are less likely to comply with public health guidelines than consumers of other media. But their paper takes the analysis two steps further: It finds that Fox viewers aren’t a monolith, with fans of some media personalities acting distinctly from others. It also provides evidence that those behavioral differences are contributing to the spread of the coronavirus and mortality rate of covid-19 the disease it causes, in certain areas.


The study focuses specifically on the differences in how Fox’s Tucker Carlson and Hannity discussed the pandemic during its early days.

“Carlson warned viewers that the coronavirus might pose a serious threat from early February,” the researchers wrote, “while Hannity first ignored the topic on his show and then dismissed the risks associated with the virus, claiming that it was less concerning than the common flu and insisting that Democrats were using it as a political weapon to undermine the president.”

To quantify this claim, the authors recruited people via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk [MTurk] service to rate the seriousness with which the hosts discussed the virus. The coders consistently rated Carlson’s coverage as significantly more serious than either Hannity’s or other Fox hosts, particularly in February. The tones began converging in March; by the middle of the month, Hannity, Carlson and other Fox hosts were discussing the outbreak in similar terms.


Then they identified media markets where Hannity is more popular than Carlson to determine whether this coverage influenced people’s behavior. Like Simonov and his colleagues, they used an instrumental variable to sidestep the inherent demographic differences in the show’s two audiences: in this case, variations in local sunset times, which influence how likely people are to stay up later to watch “Hannity,” which typically airs later than “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”


They then fielded a survey to Fox News viewers 55 and older to see how their behavior differed in areas where Hannity’s show is more or less popular than Carlson’s program.

They found that Hannity viewership was associated with changing pandemic-related behaviors (like hand-washing and canceling travel plans) four days later than other Fox News viewers, while Carlson viewership was associated with changing behaviors three days earlier.

Given the importance of individual behavior in curbing the spread of the coronavirus, it stands to reason that places where people were slower to take preventive steps might see more severe outbreaks. That’s exactly what the final step of their analysis shows.


“Our results indicate that a one standard deviation increase in relative viewership of Hannity relative to Tucker Carlson Tonight is associated with approximately 32 percent more COVID-19 cases on March 14 and approximately 23 percent more COVID-19 deaths on March 28,” the authors write. They further note that those differences fade beyond March, as the two hosts’ coverage had largely converged by then.


In a statement, provided to news outlets writing about these studies, a Fox News spokesman said: “as this timeline proves, Hannity has covered Covid-19 since the early days of the story. The ‘study’ almost completely ignores his coverage and repeated, specific warnings and concerns from January 27-February 26 including an early interview with Dr. Fauci in January. This is a reckless disregard for the truth.”

In response, the study’s lead author Leonardo Bursztyn noted that their analysis encompasses the entirety of Fox’s prime-time coverage through the end of March, including Hannity’s interview with Fauci. “There’s no ‘cherry-picking’ possible because our independent MTurk coders read every transcript between late January and late March.”


* * *

“If the results hold, the research demonstrates the influence that broadcast media can have on behavior,” said Jevin West, director of the Center for an Informed Public at the University of Washington.


It’s important to stress that the Simonov and Bursztyn papers have not yet gone through a formal peer-review process, which typically assesses whether the evidence presented in the research supports the claims made. And as with much social science research, definitively proving causality — that Fox News coverage caused people to change behavior, which in turn caused the pandemic to spread more — is beyond the scope of the methods used.

“The results are suggestive of this but not conclusive,” West said. “It could be, for example, that long-standing mistrust of government or influence from current political leaders were the main drivers.”

However, the studies took a number of steps — including controlling for demographic factors, using instrumental variables to sidestep known and unknown confounders, and running tests for alternative explanations — to strengthen their claims. The University of North Carolina’s Zeynep Tufekci, who has written extensively on the American response to the pandemic, praised the Bursztyn study for its rigor.

Nevertheless, not all researchers who have seen these studies have been persuaded. The University of Chicago’s Anthony Fowler has written an op-ed critical of one of the study’s methods, and said in an email that he’s “skeptical” of the findings of the other two papers.

“I think there are good studies showing that different news outlets do have different ideological slants and that these slants can affect beliefs and behaviors,” he said. But he said he’s not convinced by these particular ones.

In the view of Pasquetto, the Harvard editor, the balance of evidence presented in the recent studies is strong. “Given all the data we have seen, and all the studies we are reviewing, we can say that empirical evidence clearly shows that this social group [those who routinely watch, read, and follow far-right media and social media] tended to take the disease less seriously and delayed their own response to the virus,” she said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...