Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / August 2004
Cox-2 Inhibitors {anyone read about this} ?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Canada Bob - 02 Jul 2004 13:48 GMT Hi,
Not sure if Cox-2 inhibitors have been discussed recently in here, but some interesting articles {like the one in the link below} seem to offer some hope ?
http://www.cancerfacts.com/Home_News.asp?CancerTypeId=4&NewsId=1688
Canada Bob.
j d - 02 Jul 2004 14:43 GMT j d - 02 Jul 2004 14:54 GMT this was on here awhile back i printed it out and took to the dr. last fri. an oncoligist he said he heard about it at convention in new orleans in june said it was to small a study and felt drug co. was only trying to make money he said you just want off hormones i said yes i said i could buy it off of internet without a prescription he said stay with hormones there working all you will do is waste money and get a upset stomach ??? has anyone else tryed it or talked to a dr. ??? j.d
kastons - 02 Jul 2004 20:47 GMT Interesting article. Having just gone through RRP at Memorial Sloane Kettering in NYC, I was given Celebrex, a Cox-2 inhibitor for the 10 days post hospital. My research, confirmed by my Dr. suggested that it was given as a pain inhibitor. My brother, who had RRP 3 weeks prior, was given Bextra - also a Cox-2 inhibitor. I was told to discontinue use as soon as the catheter was removed.
Sandy K. Age 47 2/03 - PSA 4.9 3/0/04 - Biopsy - 9 of 10 cores malignant Gleason 6, Staging of T2b 6/17/04 - RRP Pathology Report - lymph nodes clean, margins clear Restaged to T3a 6/28/04 - Catheter removed - walking lots and lots
> Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Canada Bob. Just - 04 Jul 2004 01:44 GMT Cox-2 inhibitors may be tempting to try if you have biochemical relapse. Here is the link for the abstract of the pilot study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=14764122
I have a concern however regarding the Cox-2 inhibitors risk of GI bleeding (in that pilot study it was used the maximum recommended dose: 200 mg twice daily). See this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=15144234 I quote from the conclusions: "Our results do not confirm that greater selectivity for COX-2 confers less risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding."
See also: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=15138157 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=12907325
So... some people may be able to reduce / halt PSA progression by using a Cox-2 inhibitor - but for that have to face the risk of potentially fatal bleeding... hard to choose!
Just
>Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Canada Bob. Canada Bob - 05 Jul 2004 11:49 GMT Hi Just,
Thanks for the link, they were quite useful and interesting.
> So... some people may be able to reduce / halt PSA progression by > using a Cox-2 inhibitor - but for that have to face the risk of > potentially fatal bleeding... hard to choose! I guess there is a risk in most things, but Cox-2 inhibitors seem to me to have more on the upside than the downside.
I don't think the risk {of potential fatal bleeding}is enough put me off taking Celebrex, those occurrances are very rare, yet the upside in slowing or even {potentially} killing off the cancer cells/tumours is a bet worth taking in my book.
I've been involved in risk analysis for 35+ years {as an Engineer} and through that work have {shall I say} refined my ability to calculate the odds of catastophic events, and after reading all that I have been able to get on Cox-2 inhibitors I would have little if any {personal} concern over taking them.
I guess Cox-1 inhibitors {Aspirin, et-al} carry a risk, and that risk is more in some individuals than in the general population, but all in all we benefit greatly from Aspirin and the like.
Once we are diagnosed with PCa we are already at risk, and one that we didn't any choice in, any "move" that we make to rid ourselves of {or at least control} PCa carries a risk factor with it, so we have to decide the level of risk that we feel comfortable with.
As an example it seems that in any surgery that lasts over 2 hours around 1 person in 300 dies, and that's down to the length of time under aneasthesia not the type of Operation the surgeon is doing.
A 1 in 300 shot at my head doesn't fill me with comfort of confidence, yet if the problem that I have has a 20% chance of fitting me out with a wooden overcoat then it makes sense to improve your odds as take the operation.
I don't know what all the odds are in all the options that present themselves to us with PCa, but I guess we can try to balance what risk we can tolerate and then take the appropriate action.
Having said that some folks aren't that good at weighing up the odds/risks even when they aren't under pressure, and when they are told they have PCa they are {like me} stressed out, and less likely to be able to think things through.
My thought is that some of us in here will be able to make very good judgements on where we are at, and what we should do, based on all the info we can gather and be able to evaluate.
Those folks may make the right decisions and hopefully get at least a roll back of the PCa clock, if not a complete "cure".
Others will simply be directed by their GP and take whatever option that are presented with, and that may {or may not be} the best thing for them.
But I think this forum benefits us all, we can see what results other folks have had from whatever option they took, that and as I expect many of us are running around looking for the life boats, and some of us may find an option that is new/novel and be able to present that to the rest of us, the more we know the better off we are {for the most part}.
For some folks desperation sets in {hey its had it way with me th last couple of months}, and some folks think that drinking their own urine, or 26 litres of carrot juice or some expensive/exotic weed from China will save the day for us, thank God there aint much of that nonesense in here, we all need to help each other out, not add to the agony and confusion.
It's a desperate club to be in, none of us wanted to join it, but now that we are all here, let's see what we can do to tilt the odds a bit more in our favour.
Thanks for your comments Just, it's good to look at both sides of the coin.
All the Best, from Wigan, England.
Bob.
Robert Austin - 05 Jul 2004 13:58 GMT Good morning, Bob and all -
For those that can take Celebrex or something from the Cox-2 Inhibitors family it can make a world of difference. In my case I started have real stomach problems after just a couple of days, and that was taking the medication with food. My arthritis and back problems will just have to get in line and wait their turn.
The stuff is powerful, there's no doubt about that, but it may be like swatting a fly on your toe with a sledgehammer. If you notice undesirable symptoms while taking this medication, pay attention to what your body is trying to tell you.
Bob Austin
<Snip>
>> So... some people may be able to reduce / halt PSA progression by >> using a Cox-2 inhibitor - but for that have to face the risk of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >in slowing or even {potentially} killing off the cancer cells/tumours >is a bet worth taking in my book. <Snip>
Leonard Evens - 05 Jul 2004 15:39 GMT > Hi Just, > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > around 1 person in 300 dies, and that's down to the length of time > under aneasthesia not the type of Operation the surgeon is doing. You make a lot of sense in what you said here. But there is one thing that puzzles me.
Where did you get the figure for death rates in surgery? The incidence of serious complications from general anesthesia, such as not waking up or dying, is about 1 in 200,000. Those are figures for competent anesthesiologists. So your figures may be for certain kinds of surgery and may have more to do with the surgery than the anesthesia. For radical prostatectomy, it is about 1 in 500 or .2 percent, when done at high quality centers by competent surgeons. And this includes many patients with underlying serious medical problems. It may be quite a bit less for men in good health.
It is very hard to make decisions for low level risks of this nature. Most people just treat them as nonexistent. Of course, from a public health point of view, anything which kills one in 300 people is something to take seriously, but for any given individual, it is not clear he or she should worry about such a risk. It has to be compared to comparable risks incurred in daily life. For example, I think the incidence of accidental death is something like 50 per 100,000 or about 0.2 percent. Few of us consider this when crossing a street or getting into a car. I bicycle regularly on city streets with traffic. I do this partly to maintain good health, but I probably face a risk of something like 1 in 300 of being killed thereby. On balance, it seems worth taking that risk. I figured the same way about surgery to remove my prostate given that I had a moderately aggressive cancer for which there was a reasonable chance of a cure.
> A 1 in 300 shot at my head doesn't fill me with comfort of confidence, > yet if the problem that I have has a 20% chance of fitting me out with [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Bob. Canada Bob - 06 Jul 2004 00:35 GMT Hi Leonard...
> > As an example it seems that in any surgery that lasts over 2 hours > > around 1 person in 300 dies, and that's down to the length of time > > under aneasthesia not the type of Operation the surgeon is doing.
> You make a lot of sense in what you said here. But there is one thing > that puzzles me. > > Where did you get the figure for death rates in surgery? I was given a copy of a study done in the UK where basically it said that for a number of reasons, all of them beyond our control {that's us the patients} around 1 in 300 folks who have major surgery {taken to be lengthy proceedures of a couple of hours or more} there is a mortality rate of 1 in 300.
This varied quite a bit due to the skill or otherwise of the person administrating the anesthesia, they type {depth of anesthesia}, type of gas, general condition and age of the patient and so on.
The thing is {and I'm trying to avoid adding to anyones anxiety} none of us are what you might call in our physical prime, for that let's say we aint 21 any more, and many of us {including me} may well have already had heart or lung problems {I've had 2 minor heart attacks}.
As for me personally I'm 56, an ex cross country runner {30 odd years at that game}, never smoked etc, and had reasonable health until the stress of my work {Aircraft Airworthyness} started to take it Toll on me. long saga attached to that, where I blew the whistle on a company making military and civilian aircraft to the US Gov {et-al} tried to blow me away with 6oz of plastique attached to me car {do a Google for "Norburn Fleet"} to see that event.
Anyway I digress {I'm at that age, sigh}.
Now where was I up to... Oh ! yea, anesthesia mortalities, I also found this one that gives figures and comments for the US, that aren't too far away from the study I was given...
Take a look at...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/06/000626115320.htm
I don't want to dwell on this, as we all have enough excitement already, I was just passing comment of why I saw certain risks that pointed me in directions away from RRP and the like.
>The incidence of serious complications from general anesthesia, such as not >waking up or dying, is about 1 in 200,000. Those are figures for competent
>anesthesiologists. Under the best of circumstances the above figures should be achieveable, but in the real world where things do go wrong, and many patients aren't up to snuff then the odds quickly drop.
Again Leonard, I don't want to labour this, and we have enough to sweat about, and the last thing I'd want to do is put anyone of what could be a life saving Op.
> So your figures may be for certain kinds of surgery > and may have more to do with the surgery than the anesthesia. For > radical prostatectomy, it is about 1 in 500 or .2 percent, when done at > high quality centers by competent surgeons. And this includes many > patients with underlying serious medical problems. It may be quite a > bit less for men in good health. Exactly, but a 1 in 500 shot don't fill me with confidence, in in 200,000 is what I'd be looking for.
> Few of us consider this when crossing a street or getting > into a car. I bicycle regularly on city streets with traffic. I do [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > my prostate given that I had a moderately aggressive cancer for which > there was a reasonable chance of a cure. Well said... Bob.
Canada Bob - 06 Jul 2004 00:52 GMT Back on Track now...
I popped my first Celebrex tonight, and I didn't drop dead on the spot, although I've read of folks who have done, so some anxiety was felt at the pill went down.
All I have to do now is see if this will hold back the progression of my cancer cells, while I rush around trying to find the best treatment option.
Betting on Celebrex is a bit like hoping a pony can win the Triple Crown, come on Seabiscuit {more pinned on hopes/prayers than confidence, sigh}.
Ahwell, I'll keep you guys posted on what happens to me.
I'm curious as to what effect Celebrex might have on my PSA, which hasn't ever been over 4.5, even though I have Gleason 3+4's and 6 {out of 6} biopsies showing 30% cancer.
Loooks like I've had this for YEARS, but I never had ANY warning or symptoms at all, bugger aint it...
Bob.
Heather - 06 Jul 2004 01:47 GMT Just some observations from the 'distaff' side. I took Celebrex way back when it first came out for a frozen shoulder. I had absolutely no side effects and I am that 'one in a hundred' that will get them if there are any.
I can't say that it really had much effect on the shoulder (rather painful, to say the least)......and ended up with a shot of cortisone in the rotator cuff. That worked.......along with about 3 months of physio.
I have allergic reactions to a lot of things......and prescription drugs are a biggie. So rest easy, my Canadian friend......you will be fine.
And we stopped in Stockport overnight about June 11th....stayed in a 'tacky' hotel......shoulda called you, grin!! But had to get parts for Ron's 75 TR-6 at the Moss Motors outlet near the 'glass pyramid'......drove past it 3 times before we found it (blasted roundabouts!!!!).
Cheers from another Canadian.....Heather
> Back on Track now... > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Bob. Deborah Trujillo - 06 Jul 2004 04:05 GMT I took Celebrex after my foot surgery and got a rash.
On 7/5/04 5:47 PM, in article 2kub4bF6e8q5U1@uni-berlin.de, "Heather" <janesmith60@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Just some observations from the 'distaff' side. I took Celebrex way back > when it first came out for a frozen shoulder. I had absolutely no side [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >> >> Bob. Just - 06 Jul 2004 15:13 GMT Some interesting links on COX-2 inhibitors / NSAIDs / statins: http://www.prostate-help.org/cansaid1.htm http://www.prostate-help.org/cansaid.htm http://www.healthsentinel.com/NSAIDs/index.htm
Regarding COX-2 inhibitors only, I quote from last link:
"Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, often referred to as NSAIDS, are assumed to be well tolerated and are widely used as an initial therapy for common inflammation. Everyone is familiar with these types of drugs with millions using them for pain relief. They range from over the counter aspirin and ibuprofen to a whole host of prescription brands. "
"Over 100,000 people are hospitalized for GI bleeding and of those 16,500 die every year. And these values are considered conservative. Also the figures only include prescription NSAIDs used to treat only arthritis and only in the United States. If prescription and over the counter NSAID-related hospitalizations and death rates were counted for not only arthritis, but for all conditions, and throughout the world, the figures would no doubt be enormous."
"Another important observation is that most people have no warning signs that these drugs are causing them internal damage before they ending up in the hospital with a serious medical condition. And as we have seen from the statistics, approximately 10% of these hospitalizations end in death."
"Pharmaceutical companies are now creating a new class of NSAIDs called COX-2 inhibitors that may be less toxic than their earlier creations. But these efforts come at the same time large numbers of needless hospitalizations and deaths are occurring. And considering that these companies originally created such toxic substances can we trust them to create newer drugs to replace their failures? Also, like the original drugs large scale long term studies are not performed before vigorous market campaigns and sales have promoted these new safer drugs. Instead, once again, the people will play guinea pig and years later we will learn the results of their latest experiments."
I have a major personal interest in this issue as my PSA insists on rising and is not far away from biochemical recurrence... but... am I ready to face the risk of potentially fatal bleeding? I do not have an answer... yet...
Just
Eduardo Bronstein - 06 Jul 2004 16:33 GMT | I have a major personal interest in this issue as my PSA insists on | rising and is not far away from biochemical recurrence... but... am I | ready to face the risk of potentially fatal bleeding? I do not have an | answer... yet... | | Just I'll hope that it is useful: http://www.hormonerefractorypca.org/NSAIDS-COX2.htm My situation is similar to yours. Four years after radiotherapy and complete hormonal blockade, my psa has begun to rise. In my previous appointment with oncologist, I gave him several reports on nsaid/Pca. In two weeks I'll have his answer. Regards
Just - 06 Jul 2004 23:32 GMT Hi Eduardo!
Please keep us posted on developments / advice from your doctor.
Good luck.
Just
>I'll hope that it is useful: >http://www.hormonerefractorypca.org/NSAIDS-COX2.htm >My situation is similar to yours. Four years after radiotherapy and complete hormonal blockade, my psa has begun to rise. >In my previous appointment with oncologist, I gave him several reports on nsaid/Pca. In two weeks I'll have his answer. >Regards Canada Bob - 07 Jul 2004 00:06 GMT Hello Just...
Thanks for listing the web sites.
> "Over 100,000 people are hospitalized for GI bleeding and of those > 16,500 die every year. And these values are considered conservative. I'm not sure how many Millions of folks take Cox-2 inhibitors without any adverse effects, but reading from the Patient Info Sheet that came with my little box of Celebrex around 1% of people have GI {or other minor}problems {skin rashes etc}.
Then it goes on to say that 1/1000 might have raised anxiety attacks etc, skin sensitivity to light, lower white blood counts, some loss of hair etc, nothing that {given the odds} would worry me too much.
The way I see it I'm in a battle for me life, and to fight back I may need to carry the odd handgrenade {celebrex}, not something that normally I'd chose to do, but in a desperate plight I'll take my chances.
Another way of looking at it is {I think}, the Celebrex is more likely to harm the cancer cells than to harm me, so I'll take that gamble.
> "Another important observation is that most people have no warning > signs that these drugs are causing them internal damage before they > ending up in the hospital with a serious medical condition. And as we > have seen from the statistics, approximately 10% of these > hospitalizations end in death." Not wanting to disrespect your comments Just, I do value them, but I wonder how many folks have similar adverse reactions {including death} to peanuts each year, or to other things that most of us have a tolerance to {driving the car for instance} ?
> "Pharmaceutical companies are now creating a new class of NSAIDs > called COX-2 inhibitors that may be less toxic than their earlier > creations. But these efforts come at the same time large numbers of > needless hospitalizations and deaths are occurring. All in all I appreciate what you quote above, but in a life or death situation I have enought faith/trust in the FDA to take what they say are more likely to help rather than harm me.
> I have a major personal interest in this issue as my PSA insists on > rising and is not far away from biochemical recurrence... but... am I > ready to face the risk of potentially fatal bleeding? I do not have an > answer... yet... Good Luck Just, wish I could wave the majic wand over all of us...
Canada Bob aka Wigan Bob [from time to time}.
Just - 07 Jul 2004 16:14 GMT Hi Bob!
I do not want to sound to pessimistic. What concerns me mostly regarding GI bleeding is that it can come without any warning whatsoever. And it can be fatal - meaning that when you realise you have it, it can be to late.
Good luck to you to.
Just
>Hello Just... > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > >Canada Bob aka Wigan Bob [from time to time}. Canada Bob - 27 Jul 2004 05:01 GMT Hi Just...
> I do not want to sound to pessimistic. What concerns me mostly > regarding GI bleeding is that it can come without any warning > whatsoever. And it can be fatal - meaning that when you realise you > have it, it can be to late. Latest update on the Celebrex that I'm taking.
I'm now knocking back 800mg a day, 400mg at 10:00am then 400mg at 10:00pm.
So far I have had no problems at all, no cramps, no bleeding, nothing at all, now I know my experience isn't statistically useful, what happens to me {one way or the other} is simply just what happens to me, but in the hope that it may help you or others feel more at ease taking Celebrex I thought I'd let you know how I'm doing on it.
Other than having no ill effects {well none that I'm aware of} my PSA seems to have gone down by around 20%, from around 4.5 to 3.6, but again I don't know for sure if that really indicates anything significant, but lets say that I'm thrilled that it hasn't gone up at all, so that helps me cope a bit better with this rotten condition.
Canada Bob.
Bill Denton - 27 Jul 2004 15:16 GMT Bob, was the Celebrex prescribed by your urologist/oncologist, are you in a trial, or what? I have arthritis and take Naprosyn anyway so I am going to ask my rheumatologist about switching to Celebrex. Is 400mg. 2X the standard dose for PCa?
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 Memphis
Canada Bob - 28 Jul 2004 03:41 GMT Hello Bill..
> Bob, was the Celebrex prescribed by your urologist/oncologist, are you > in a trial, or what? I'm afraid it comes under the "or what" category Bill.
Being in this lousy situation I have done a lot of Goolgling and came across some research {I'll try to dig it up for you} where they found that Celebrex interferes with the ability of tumours to get a supply of blood {to mainatin their growth}, hang on, let me see if I can find a couple of links for you...
Here goes, check out...
http://www.cancerwise.org/March_2001/
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/88/100019.htm
You may find more on this topic via Google serches and the like, but the webmd.com site indicates {what could be} an effective doseage.
I know {as Justine pointed out} with any medication there can be side effects, and Celebrex isn't tolerated by everyone {neither are aspirins or peanuts though}, so being on the safe side after speaking with my GP in Manchester, England, he was supportive and wrote me the prescription, I took 200mg twice a day for a week to see if I popped my clogs, and then when I didn't I moved up to 600 mg and then 800 mg a day {split over 12 hour periods} and all has gone well for me, no known side effects or indication of any problems and a drop of 20% in 3 weeks of my PSA.
Again I want to say {loud and clear} that my experience is nothing more or less than what is happening to me, it may be / should be {statistically} the same for you, but it won't be for everyone.
The thing is Bill, I feel that if there is any risk the risk is more to the cancer cells than it is to me. I'll be having liver and kidney function tests in the next week or so to make sure that nothing is going wrong there, but that is just to be on the safe side, as mentioned I have no indication at all of any problems {yea, I know, famous last words}, but I feel more comfortable and more secure taking Celebrex than CASODEX, but that's not much more than my feelings on this front, nothing that you could take to the bank if you know what I mean.
>I have arthritis and take Naprosyn anyway so I am going to ask my >rheumatologist about switching to Celebrex. Is 400mg 2X the standard dose for >PCa?
Seems to be Bill, but I feel that Celebrex is a temporary coverage until you/me/et-al decide on what treatment we feel is best for us.
On that topic IF I could have had HIFU that's the path I would have chosen, none invasive, can be done without a general anesthetic, no blood shed or transfused etc etc, around 1% incontinence and no greater risk of impotence than other more standard options.
Plan A was HIFU but due to a build up of calcium in my prostate HIFU wouldn't have been as effective, so Plan B is now Cryo.
Should any of you guys in the US/CANADA or beyond wish to know more about options available to you in the UK then I'm your man, just ask and I'll do all I can to bring you up to speed. HIFU via Dr Suarez of Florida {but actually done in the Dominican Republic or more recently in Mexico} will cost you around $20,000, while the same treatment is available to you as a private patient in the UK/France/Germany et-al would cost no more than $10,000 and that could include the cost of your flights etc [if you shop around}.
Cryo is also available in the UK at a cost of around $15,000 plus.
Having said that, the standard procedures of surgery etc are also available to non residents, long as you have the cash they will find a place for you. It's hellish that this is the way it is, it's my belief that no one needing medical attention should need to worry if they can find the money to pay for it, or die if they can't find the cash, but this is a sad fact of life {and death} these days.
Other options seem to be the vaccines that they have developed in Queensland Australia, they seem to be world leaders in this type of "cure".
Good Luck Bill, let me know if I can help in any way.
Canada Bob aka when I lapse into the vernacular, as Wigin Bob, 53:35N x 2:40 W.
Canada Bob - 08 Aug 2004 04:15 GMT Here's a bit more on Cox 2 inhibitors and the like, interesting stuff hey...
Click on the link below.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040806095453.htm
Canada Bob.
John $ - 09 Aug 2004 16:41 GMT CanadaBob,
Here's a related ASCO abstract on Cox 2 inhibitors.
http://www.asco.org/asco/publications/abstract_print_view/1,1148,_12-002636-00_1 8-0026-00_19-00333,00.html
> Here's a bit more on Cox 2 inhibitors and the like, interesting stuff hey... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Canada Bob. Canada Bob - 18 Aug 2004 00:04 GMT Well, here's my update on my PSA values over the last 3 months, since I've been taking 800mg of Celebrex each day.
2 months ago I had a PSA level of 4.5, then after 4 weeks on Celebrex I was at 3.6, now 4 weeks later I have my latest PSA numbers, and I'm at 3.77.
I don't know for sure if this is really as good as it looks, but...
The Dark Clouds seem to be less ominous right now, and I'll take any relief that I can get, even if it turns out to be nae more that psychological ?
On the other hand it does look on the surface of it that Celebrex is helping out, I don't think you can ignore that lower PSA levels, but as long as I don't jump up 2 points before I get the Cryo {now slated for 4th October} then I think I have a fighting chance.
As far as any side effects, well no obvious ones anyway, and according to the other tests that came back today I don't have any liver/kidney complications either.
All in all I'd say I'm relieved to say the least that I went on Celebrex, if I'd not done then maybe {just maybe} my PSA would have been 6 or more, and that would have given me some sleepless nights.
I hope this helps, and maybe opens up some options for folks out there.
All the Best to ALL of you,
Canada Bob {right now, but Wigan Bob in 4 weeks time, when we return to the Untidy Kingdom}.
|
|
|