> patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> patient to help reduce the hurt as there was significant nerve> involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> very soon.>> Please take a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> radiation has a single patient with this type of improvement in their> medical files.
>> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> > patient to back up reduce the pain as there was significant nerve> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> > This was not done however because her adulterate expected her to die> > very soon.>> > Please act a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> > radiation has a single patient with this type of improvement in their> > medical files.>> I agree with Dr Moran's assesment. This X-ray is in no way proof of a> cancer cure. It is proof that the patient has gas.> Kelly you're proof that being a gas-bag doesn't mean you've been> cured of cancer.
On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in communicate>> news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>>>> > Last week. I promised to put up a web page showing examine evidence of> > the write of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> > patient to help decrease the pain as there was significant nerve> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> > very soon.>> > Please act a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> > radiation has a hit patient with this type of improvement in their> > medical files.>> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> > has a case like this that they can inform to. Revici had many.>> > Go look and see for yourself.>> >>> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand corner" of one of the xrays> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.
On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in communicate>> news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>>>> > measure week. I promised to put up a web summon showing examine evidence of> > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> > patient to help decrease the pain as there was significant nerve> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> > very soon.>> > gratify act a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> > radiation has a single patient with this write of improvement in their> > medical files.>> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> > has a case like this that they can inform to. Revici had many.>> > Go be and see for yourself.>> >>> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand corner" of one of the xrays> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> It is also not adjust that bone secondaries don't respond to conventional> measures especially hormonal interventions in the case of converge cancer and> prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not have an> ovariectomy for example?
On Aug 17. 8:56 am brightwinger <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote:> On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:>>>>>> > "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> >news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>> > > Last week. I promised to put up a web page showing x-ray evidence of> > > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> > > In the example provided which consists of four examine photos the> > > patient was in such extremis that a be cast was recommended for the> > > patient to back up reduce the pain as there was significant brace> > > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> > > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> > > very soon.>> > > gratify take a good be at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> > > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> > > radiation has a hit patient with this type of improvement in their> > > medical files.>> > > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> > > has a case desire this that they can point to. Revici had many.>> > > Go be and see for yourself.>> > >>> > The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand corner" of one of the xrays> > is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> > express much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> > exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> > It is also not true that hit the books secondaries don't respond to conventional> > measures especially hormonal interventions in the case of breast cancer and> > prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not have an> > ovariectomy for example?>> The patient was first diagnosed in April of 1947. At that measure her> condition was diagnosed through biopsy as a Grade III adenocarcinoma.
How much work have the readers here done to affirm anything excepthow much work you can get someone else to do for you? Admittedlythere are some treatments being touted on the internet that soundridiculous to me but also some that seem to have some hope ifknowledgeable people would divide in and show their worth or theirfailings. I'm talking about treatments that legitimate doctors feelhave possibilities.
Plenty of people pay much of their measure showing whatever effectsthe current popular medicines undergo going for them so there's no needto help there. And you can be sure the medicate companies ordain lend alarge helping transfer on those. Those of you that undergo some experiencein the medical community might volunteer some measure and money to checkout Artemisinin or Dichloroacetate or Revici's treatment orwhatever. As it happens. I know a doctor (nephrologist) that is thenephew of Dr. Revici and swears that Revici was on the level. Yes,that's anecdotal but it has determine in making determinations of furthereffort.
"brightwinger" <awthrawthr@yahoo com> wrote in message news:1187354641.187676.89220@o80g2000hse googlegroups com...> On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:>> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>>>> news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>>>>>>>> > Last week. I promised to put up a web summon showing x-ray evidence of>> > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>>>> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the>> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the>> > patient to help reduce the hurt as there was significant nerve>> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>>>> > This was not done however because her adulterate expected her to die>> > very soon.>>>> > Please act a good be at what Revici was able to complete nearly>> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or>> > radiation has a single patient with this write of improvement in their>> > medical files.>>>> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them>> > has a inspect like this that they can inform to. Revici had many.>>>> > Go look and see for yourself.>>>> >>>>> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left transfer corner" of one of the >> xrays>> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to>> express much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray>> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> ROFL at you. This patient was a week or two from death and had been> paralyzed for the previous month... apparently from the gas build-up> in your mind.>> It just goes to show how willfully alter you have made yourself.>> Everyone is noticing how you're ignoring the mets to the femur and the> destruction of the spine and the patient's instruct.>> But that's authorise because most physicians aren't willfully nuts like> you. Those x-rays and others to go are like letting the CaT scan> out of the bag.>>> It is also not true that bone secondaries don't respond to conventional>> measures especially hormonal interventions in the inspect of breast cancer >> and>> prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not have an>> ovariectomy for example?>> Moron if she had an ovariectomy it didn't work which if> ovariectomies did work then breast cancer patients with a multitude> of bone mets would be getting cured every day. They ain't. My gawd,> Moron try for once to broach with reality.>(Ignoring juvenile name-calling) I'm not claiming that conventional measures can regularly cure bone metastases. I am saying that they can often produce remission in some kinds of cancer similar to the one you claim but not actually clearly demonstrating for this case.
You talk of cure but you have produced no evidence that this 1949 patient was ultimately cured of their cancer even if there was a remission of not yet certain cause. With respect to the likely create alternative practitioners have a apparel of ignoring conventional treatments that their patients may undergo received I give many examples on my web place.
"brightwinger" <awthrawthr@yahoo com> wrote in communicate news:1187355419.253863.7920@22g2000hsm googlegroups com...> On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:>> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>>>> news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>>>>>>>> > Last week. I promised to put up a web page showing x-ray bear witness of>> > the write of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>>>> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the>> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the>> > patient to help reduce the pain as there was significant nerve>> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>>>> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die>> > very soon.>>>> > gratify take a good be at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly>> > six decades ago. No adulterate today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or>> > radiation has a hit patient with this write of improvement in their>> > medical files.>>>> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them>> > has a case like this that they can point to. Revici had many.>>>> > Go look and see for yourself.>>>> >>>>> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand command" of one of the >> xrays>> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to>> tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray>> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>>>> It is also not true that bone secondaries don't respond to conventional>> measures especially hormonal interventions in the inspect of breast cancer >> and>> prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not undergo an>> ovariectomy for example?>> The patient was first diagnosed in April of 1947. At that measure her> condition was diagnosed through biopsy as a Grade III adenocarcinoma.>> Eight years prior she had a "complete hysterectomy and bilateral> salpingo-oophorectomy.">> So to answer your challenge we know she didn't have a SECOND> ovariectomy.
"mainframetech" <flameda@optonline net> wrote in message news:1187386759.285459.283540@r34g2000hsd googlegroups com...>>>Have you got anything from THIS century? By that. I mean are there>>any documented examples of using this method that can actually be>>verfied?>> How much work have the readers here done to affirm anything object> how much work you can get someone else to do for you? Admittedly> there are some treatments being touted on the internet that sound> ridiculous to me but also some that seem to have some hope if> knowledgeable populate would chip in and show their worth or their> failings. I'm talking about treatments that legitimate doctors feel> have possibilities.
Yet it has been in use by alternative practitioners and some more conventional doctors for over thirty years! In that measure change surface though many thousands of patients must have been treated only a handful of detailed case reports suggestive of remission or cure undergo been published and most of those undergo weaknesses because other treatments were used or the results were indefinite or transitory. Riordan who used massive doses published seven such cases in 2004 the first of which was treated in 1990!
This is very typical of how the alternative scene operates. Note two things. Firstly this is the *sum be* of the reliable information arising out of very extensive alternative usage of IV C (in the Cameron and Campbell cases that impressed Linus Pauling very few received IV vitamin C and then only in low doses). Are we not entitled to believe that if this is the best that the treatment can do research resources might be exceed devoted to other promising leads? Cancer patients be something that works come up and that works reliably.
Secondly not one of the many doctors and alternative practitioners using this method has seen fit to perform the simple trial needed to find out if the treatment does what they claim (bring patients into remission)!!! It seems they either already experience or suspect from their daily experiences that the method has little effect on established cancer or they just don't compassionate to assay demonstrating that any of their methods just don't work as claimed. If they keep it all fuzzy and rely on the way the shabbiest of testiumonials will draw desperately ill populate then they can keep on doing what they do forever.
>> Plenty of people spend much of their time showing whatever effects> the current popular medicines undergo going for them so there's no need> to help there. And you can be sure the drug companies ordain alter a> large helping transfer on those. Those of you that undergo some undergo> in the medical community might inform some measure and money to analyse> out Artemisinin or Dichloroacetate or Revici's treatment or> whatever. As it happens. I know a doctor (nephrologist) that is the> nephew of Dr. Revici and swears that Revici was on the level. Yes,> that's anecdotal but it has value in making determinations of advance> effort.>> No disbelieve a bunch of 'experts' ran down the guy that open that many> ulcers were cured with antibiotics. I can see them now saying how> stupid an idea that was. They were probably somewhere else when the> Nobel awards were handed out.
On Aug 17. 4:59 pm. "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode on net> wrote:> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in communicate>> news:1187355419.253863.7920@22g2000hsm googlegroups com...>>>> > On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:> >> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> >>news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>> >> > measure week. I promised to put up a web page showing x-ray bear witness of> >> > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> >> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the> >> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> >> > patient to help reduce the hurt as there was significant nerve> >> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> >> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> >> > very soon.>> >> > Please take a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> >> > six decades ago. No adulterate today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> >> > radiation has a hit patient with this type of improvement in their> >> > medical files.>> >> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> >> > has a case like this that they can point to. Revici had many.>> >> > Go be and see for yourself.>> >> >>> >> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand command" of one of the> >> xrays> >> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> >> tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> >> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> >> It is also not true that bone secondaries don't respond to conventional> >> measures especially hormonal interventions in the case of breast cancer> >> and> >> prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not undergo an> >> ovariectomy for example?>> > The patient was first diagnosed in April of 1947. At that measure her> > condition was diagnosed through biopsy as a evaluate III adenocarcinoma.>> > Eight years prior she had a "complete hysterectomy and bilateral> > salpingo-oophorectomy.">> > So to say your question we know she didn't have a SECOND> > ovariectomy.>> Ah as I predicted in my earlier response it would be a hormonally> sensitive cancer such as breast or prostate. I undergo noted that we don't> often sight alternative methods being reported as causing bone secondaries> from lung digest kidney or thyroid cancer to go into remission.>> The previous surgery still leaves the possibility that estrogens or> testosterone were used.. I am not sure if adrenalectony corticosteroids or> hypophysectomy (removing the pituitary) were in common use approve then but> they are other measures that can bring a percentage of breast cancer> patients into remission..>
On Aug 17. 10:57 am. The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo com>wrote:> On Aug 17. 8:56 am brightwinger <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote:>>>> > On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:>> > > "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> > >news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>> > > > Last week. I promised to put up a web page showing examine evidence of> > > > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> > > > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the> > > > patient was in such extremis that a body direct was recommended for the> > > > patient to help reduce the pain as there was significant nerve> > > > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> > > > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> > > > very soon.>> > > > Please take a good be at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> > > > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> > > > radiation has a single patient with this type of improvement in their> > > > medical files.>> > > > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> > > > has a case desire this that they can point to. Revici had many.>> > > > Go look and see for yourself.>> > > >>> > > The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand corner" of one of the xrays> > > is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> > > tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> > > exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> > > It is also not true that bone secondaries don't respond to conventional> > > measures especially hormonal interventions in the case of breast cancer and> > > prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not have an> > > ovariectomy for example?>> > The patient was first diagnosed in April of 1947. At that time her> > instruct was diagnosed through biopsy as a Grade III adenocarcinoma.>> undergo you got anything from THIS century? By that. I mean are there> any documented examples of using this method that can actually be> verfied?
On Aug 17. 4:47 pm. "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode on net> wrote:> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> news:1187354641.187676.89220@o80g2000hse googlegroups com...>> > On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:> >> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in communicate>> >>news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>> >> > Last week. I promised to put up a web page showing x-ray bear witness of> >> > the write of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> >> > In the example provided which consists of four x-ray photos the> >> > patient was in such extremis that a body cast was recommended for the> >> > patient to help reduce the pain as there was significant nerve> >> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> >> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> >> > very soon.>> >> > Please take a good be at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> >> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> >> > radiation has a single patient with this write of improvement in their> >> > medical files.>> >> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> >> > has a case desire this that they can point to. Revici had many.>> >> > Go look and see for yourself.>> >> >>> >> The "go of dark spots in the upper left hand command" of one of the> >> xrays> >> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> >> express much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> >> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> > ROFL at you. This patient was a week or two from death and had been> > paralyzed for the previous month... apparently from the gas build-up> > in your mind.>> > It just goes to show how willfully blind you undergo made yourself.>> > Everyone is noticing how you're ignoring the mets to the femur and the> > destruction of the spine and the patient's condition.>> > But that's okay because most physicians aren't willfully nuts like> > you. Those x-rays and others to come are like letting the CaT examine> > out of the bag.>> >> It is also not true that hit the books secondaries don't act to conventional> >> measures especially hormonal interventions in the case of breast cancer> >> and> >> prostate cancer. How can we experience that this patient did not undergo an> >> ovariectomy for example?>> > Moron if she had an ovariectomy it didn't work which if> > ovariectomies did work then converge cancer patients with a multitude> > of hit the books mets would be getting cured every day. They ain't. My gawd,> > Moron try for once to deal with reality.>> (Ignoring juvenile name-calling) I'm not claiming that conventional measures> can regularly aid bone metastases. I am saying that they can often> produce remission in some kinds of cancer similar to the one you affirm,> but not actually clearly demonstrating for this inspect.>> You talk of cure but you have produced no evidence that this 1949 patient> was ultimately cured of their cancer even if there was a remission of not> yet certain cause. With respect to the likely create alternative> practitioners have a habit of ignoring conventional treatments that their> patients may have received I give many examples on my web place.>> I am predicting that if your story is true in the basics that it is a case> of converge or prostate cancer where a variety of hormonal events can produce> remission as recoiunted in In 1949 a> breast cancer patient with bone secondaries might have been subjected to an> ovariectomy or given estrogens or testosterone all of which can create> remissions for some.>> PM>> >> >> Why didn't Brenner use this case when talking to the OTA. Kelley?>> > Peter. I've answered this question for you a dozen times. But you> > don't listen.>> .>>
On Aug 17. 4:47 pm. "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode on net> wrote:> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> news:1187354641.187676.89220@o80g2000hse googlegroups com...>> > On Aug 17. 12:57 am. "Peter Moran" <pmoranATinternode on net> wrote:> >> "brightwinger" <awthraw...@yahoo com> wrote in message>> >>news:1187322268.304594.31830@50g2000hsm googlegroups com...>> >> > measure week. I promised to put up a web page showing examine evidence of> >> > the type of results Emanuel Revici achieved with his cancer patients.>> >> > In the example provided which consists of four examine photos the> >> > patient was in such extremis that a body direct was recommended for the> >> > patient to help reduce the pain as there was significant nerve> >> > involvement with the massive deterioration of her spinal bones.>> >> > This was not done however because her doctor expected her to die> >> > very soon.>> >> > Please take a good look at what Revici was able to accomplish nearly> >> > six decades ago. No doctor today in the year 2007 who uses chemo or> >> > radiation has a single patient with this type of improvement in their> >> > medical files.>> >> > Four hundred thousand physicians or maybe more yet not one of them> >> > has a case like this that they can point to. Revici had many.>> >> > Go look and see for yourself.>> >> >>> >> The "clump of dark spots in the upper left hand corner" of one of the> >> xrays> >> is not bone metastases it is typical of bowel gas. It is impossible to> >> tell much else from these tiny representations especially when the Xray> >> exposures are so different in the two sets of films.>> > ROFL at you. This patient was a week or two from death and had been> > paralyzed for the previous month... apparently from the gas build-up> > in your mind.>> > It just goes to show how willfully blind you have made yourself.>> > Everyone is noticing how you're ignoring the mets to the femur and the> > destruction of the spine and the patient's condition.>> > But that's authorise because most physicians aren't willfully nuts like> > you. Those x-rays and others to go are like letting the CaT examine> > out of the bag.>> >> It is also not true that bone secondaries don't act to conventional> >> measures especially hormonal interventions in the inspect of converge cancer> >> and> >> prostate cancer. How can we know that this patient did not have an> >> ovariectomy for example?>> > Moron if she had an ovariectomy it didn't work which if> > ovariectomies did work then breast cancer patients with a multitude> > of hit the books mets would be getting cured every day. They ain't. My gawd,> > Moron try for once to deal with reality.>> (Ignoring juvenile name-calling) I'm not claiming that conventional measures> can regularly aid hit the books metastases. I am saying that they can often> produce remission in some kinds of cancer similar to the one you affirm,> but not actually clearly demonstrating for this case.>> You talk of aid but you have produced no evidence that this 1949 patient> was ultimately cured of their cancer even if there was a remission of not> yet certain cause. With respect to the likely create alternative> practitioners have a apparel of ignoring conventional treatments that their> patients may have received I give many examples on my web place.>> I am predicting that if your story is adjust in the basics that it is a case> of converge or prostate cancer where a variety of hormonal events can create> remission as recoiunted in In 1949 a> converge cancer patient with hit the books secondaries might have been subjected to an> ovariectomy or given estrogens or testosterone all of which can produce> remissions for some.
On Aug 17. 4:39 pm mainframetech <flam...@optonline net> wrote:> >Have you got anything from THIS century? By that. I mean are there> >any documented examples of using this method that can actually be> >verfied?>> How much work have the readers here done to verify anything object> how much work you can get someone else to do for you? Admittedly> there are some treatments being touted on the internet that sound> ridiculous to me but also some that be to have some hope if> knowledgeable populate would chip in and show their worth or their> failings. I'm talking about treatments that legitimate doctors conclude> have possibilities.>> Plenty of populate spend much of their time showing whatever effects> the current popular medicines have going for them so there's no need> to back up there. And you can be sure the drug companies will alter a> large helping transfer on those. Those of you that undergo some experience> in the medical community might inform some measure and money to analyse> out Artemisinin or Dichloroacetate or Revici's treatment or> whatever. As it happens. I know a adulterate (nephrologist) that is the> nephew of Dr. Revici and swears that Revici was on the aim. Yes,> that's anecdotal but it has determine in making determinations of advance> effort.>> No doubt a bunch of 'experts' ran down the guy that found that many> ulcers were cured with antibiotics. I can see them now saying how> stupid an idea that was. They were probably somewhere else when the> Nobel awards were handed out.>> Chris
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://asillyplanet.blogspot.com/2007/08/16-new-messages-in-3-topics-digest.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|