@peypeyneekin No, because the deo can show up on the breast scan to look like calcium deposits. In other words, they can give false positives - they would make the scans look like you have a breast lump when you might not
not everyone has medical insurance card, or a job. Poor women like me who cannot even afford a visit to the health dept for a mammogram. A doctor last year dismissed me from the office with a lump on my breast, I guess they figured I would not have the money for a mammogram or treatments. I am sick, and will die a poor woman with breast cancer. I hurt so bad. I have applied for every job possible, but not all have med insurance.
I don't see why you would think that something is terrible simply because it seems unpleasant or unsightly. Ugliness is not wickedness, and beauty is not righteousness. It's not ineffective just because you don't like the way it looks or feels and expect that "Well, if it's something good, why doesn't it feel good and look great?"
If you insist on exposing yourself to ionizing radiation every year, don't be surprised to eventually find what you're looking for. Cancer rates are higher among screeners, and this is not because of more cases being detected.
I meet women every day who had breast cancer 20-30 years ago, found on mammograms, had lumpectomies and radiation or chemo, still here to tell about it, still have breasts and need mammograms.
I wish no one ever died of breast cancer, but please give your self the best chance of survival. Mammograms are not perfect, but they are the best early detection we have so far.
Mammograms (using X-rays) aren't healthy and there is no solid evidence that they save lives. According to Dr Mercola, thermography or thermal imaging is a much safer option. I wonder how many women have actually developed breast cancer because of routine mammograms...
none. im assuming you dont get your teeth xrayed either do you. there is no solud evidence that the risk of the xray outweighs the risk that you will die of a disease process that might have been caught early with an xray.
Many distinguished researchers disagree w/you. 12/2/09 article...Google: 'Groundbreaking research mammograms cancer.' Granted, its concern was women geneticly prone to breast cancer. Unfortunately, these are the same women who make it a point to get their annual mammogram. Thus, the most likely cancer victims -shouldn't- get mammos, & the rest of us don't need them.
I disagree...and I used to be a X-ray technician. Yes, I try to avoid any X-rays (if possible) but you cannot compare the radiation of mammograms with the radiation you suffer at dentists! And btw, my mother had breast cancer - and eventually died from the traditional treatment and not the disease.
Cancer gets isolated in lymph nodes. Mammos/bioposies/surgeries squeeze cancer into bloodstream. Radiation lowers immunity. Is it coincidence people die soon after detecting cancer? While those who remain unaware stay alive? THE EARLY DETECTION SCAM: If you find cancer 2yrs 'sooner', you have 2yrs more BETWEEN -DETECTION- & DEATH, NOT 2YRS MORE LIFESPAN! (And depending on your treatment, perhaps -less- lifespan.) Doctors need to stop lying to us if they want to be our trusted advisors.
It's sad, but they die virtually the same day they would have w/all the chemo & radiation following early detection. Then the docs claim credit for the so-called 'life extension' : The time between detection & death. You be the judge: Who lived a more desireable life?: Someone who didn't even know they were sick until essentially the end, or someone who underwent all of the painful, de-personalizing, ineffective, & expensive treatments, only to die when they would have with -no- treatment?
@lazur1 Do you have any evidence to back-up your claims that cancer treatments are completely ineffective? I'd need multiple sources, considering the evidence that exists to the contrary.
@TheAd: List "multiple sources" you "need"? "THE" evidence exists to the contrary? I don't have secret sources. Google "mammogram problems", & re-word the search as many ways as you can think of for a few days. A good start. Ask the families of dead patients how they'd do it now if they had another chance. By the time you call "evidence", "THE evidence", I suspect you're fairly entrenched pro-mammogram, so, 1st of all, lose that point of view.
@lazur1 That's all well and good, but, challenging the conventionally held medical beliefs means that the burden of proof is on you. This still hasn't given me any studies, research, or professionals on the subject, you've simply dodged my question.
@TheAdmiral So you refuse to look anything up on your own, unless it confirms your already-held opinion? I gave you my #1 source: Google. I have no further burden of proof. Force all the women in your family to get semi-annual mammograms for all I care.
@lazur1 So, I assume that means that you don't have any sources? Though, to be fair, I'll claim that google is also my source. Google up any information about mammograms and breast cancer, and they will encourage you to get a regular mammogram.
@TheAdmiral No, altho Google must be searched thoroughly to get the both sides, it's all in there somewhere. Google CAN'T 'lie', the way 'Wikipedia has potential to do; al it can do it send the 'good' stuff to the 'back of the line', for (lack of) financial considerations. I mean't that YOU LIE when you post that ALL Google info is pro-mammgram.
@lazur1 Of course not all google sources will agree, google isn't an encyclopedia or a source or an authority, it's a search engine. Anyone can post anything on the internet, it doesn't have to be true. You can use google to find sites that claim that the black man is genetically inferior, or that the holocaust never happened, or that America is controlling people's minds through the water. Google is means to find information. Just because you find something online, doesn't mean it's true.
@TheAdmiral Please. Now -your- sources Google are "scientific", & -mine- are "rumors"? (I guess that's a step up from your original LIE: "Everything on Google is pro-mammogram" !). How about you just -try- to find any credible info that you disagree with? It's actually out there!
@lazur1 You say it's out there, but obviously you've been unable to find any and bring it to the discussion. The burden is not on me to prove your point. Furthermore, google is not a source. That's like saying that my source is "the library". It depends on what exactly your source is. Who made these claims? Who proved it? Who agrees? Of course, I can claim anything I like, but, I need evidence to back it up.
@TheAdmiral Cool. What are your sources, by the way? Just you saying the burden of proof is on me doesn't make it so. ..Asking you to push few keys on your computer (while your doing that right now anyway!), is hardly the same as demanding you take ride to the library!
I have had a about 10 of these bloody things. The most recent was last Wednesday I had a long walk to get to the hospital ad was quite sticky as it was a warm day. The technician pulled and dragged my boobs about quite roughly and I am still very sore. I have my left arm in a sling as my shoulder is very painful.
This machine is archaic, noone should have to endure these, there is far better technology available, I think airport scanners would do a better job for starters.
All I can say is your mother must have a capability for standing a lot of pain.
Have just asked a professional and there is no way she will have had dozens of mammograms.
Each time a woman has one she is exposed to Xrays which given constantly can actually cause cancer in some women. It is a very low dose but accumulative.
I can assure you having your boobs squashed absolutely flat, pulls the skin from the rest of the breast and it does really hurt. a lot of women. Like massive Chinese burns
@lazur1 I'm not a doctor, though I am fascinated by medical science. However, no, the anti-vaccination movement seems largely like a conspiracy theory brought about by people with a poor understanding of the science involved.
@TheAdmiral Posted by someone who -has- that understanding, I suppose, and thus can judge the understanding of others? Or are back to: "THE 'evidence' proves what -I - say, therefore I don't have to actually say anything, except that I'm right."
@lazur1 No, I'm not an expert on vaccinations, merely an advocate of the scientific method and of informed discourse and debate. In order to promote any point, particularly one that goes against conventional wisdom, one has to back up that point with evidence. Simply claiming "I'm right" is a weak point that can simply be countered with "No, I'm right". The next step is to say "Well, I have evidence, but I won't/can't/don't need to show you, it's evidence and it says I'm right and you're not"
@TheAdmiral The scientific method is so polluted by financial interests that it's virtually extinct. I apologize for thinking you were corrupt, you're just naive.
@lazur1 Well, we can disagree and I'll simply say that you're not corrupt, you're simply paranoid. The scientific method itself isn't an organization, it's a concept, and therefore, cannot be corrupted. Of course, you could improperly apply the scientific method, or falsify findings, but that's not using the scientific method. Besides, if you're not using the scientific method to come to your conclusions, what are you using?
@TheAdmiral 1/2 Wrong: The scientific method is also -a method-, a -process-, that must be put into action by -people-, with all the flaws, needs, & motives that people, and the organanizations they comprise, have. Corrupt science is headline news lately. Get a newspaper.
this was not about being sensitive, but the fact that is a hassle and uncomfortable. no need for unnecessary whinging and making themselves feel attention over every little thing.
OK Buddy, would you put your tackle into a machine that squashed it flat and gave out Xrays? Particularly when you are aware of all the wonderful technological advancements in the world since the 1960's when this bloody instrument of torture was first used. You know there are better more accurate methods like ultrasound and thermal imaging (used in airports) yet we women have to get this done when we know it can actually cause cancer...
Well, then this should defintely be brought up with the medical community. If ultrasounds are as effective, then they should defnitely be used. But, still, no difference. No need for whinging. Guys have their procedures which are equally not as comfortable.
Damnit.... Really? I thought this was gonna be by shane? This shit sux
yolieamaro1 1 month ago
Second video watched and now i'm more scared....please tell me this is a dated video and i won't be sitting in a room full of gowned women...
jlt1984 3 months ago
u cant wear perfume or deodorant?
peypeyneekin 4 months ago
@peypeyneekin No, because the deo can show up on the breast scan to look like calcium deposits. In other words, they can give false positives - they would make the scans look like you have a breast lump when you might not
Urbanfire123 3 months ago
@roccoxxvii Dawson
Shanedawsonluvr11493 5 months ago
Y r they like dancin
IwillDie4Ubabe 5 months ago
What the hell! I wanted TITS not Interpretative Dance!!! DX
gOtHiCxAnGeLxox 5 months ago
Shane Dawnson.... :)
roccoxxvii 5 months ago
Also - I'd be a little freaked out if my mammography tech winked at me.
Kimmy1621 5 months ago
Just so you all know - you do have to participate in a ritual mammo dance while you wait your turn for your exam.
Kimmy1621 5 months ago
shane sent me here
Countchrisdo 5 months ago
Whats up with the stupid dance xD?
ripmichaeljackson186 5 months ago
Damnit Shane wtf dude????
pinballwizard413 5 months ago
okay people. shane dawson DID NOT send you here so stop saying he did.
peatmosslover 6 months ago
Yes yes u did
xXbunnymassacareXx 6 months ago
Did i really just waste 7 mins of my life?!
MissyNat1209 6 months ago
Wtf did I just watch
cupcakespaz123 6 months ago
This is the most random shite I have ever seen ps. Shane
MrInTeRvEnTiOnKiLlEr 6 months ago
@getrealthen that's horrible I hope you have had a good life and I hope you find a job to help you don't give up
Tadgycow 6 months ago
SHHHHAAAAANNNNEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:( i dont want a mammogram
MultiPeople100 6 months ago
Shanee:D
KarnivorousKeisha1 6 months ago
Shane.
Melaniee143 6 months ago
shane... :)
misscam2005 6 months ago
Shane :)
Taylyndsayedwards 6 months ago
Shane
lindsey842 6 months ago
Haha yep Shane Dawson!
TheTarSec 6 months ago
thumbs up if shane dawson sent you here!
xXRockyCoCoXx 6 months ago 4
WHAT THE FUCK?
lukebenwardgirl56 6 months ago
Shane sent me here…didn't enjoy
crystalcute72 6 months ago
great, this made tits gay
steakmaster69 6 months ago
Erm...thanks, Shane.
PenguinsHaveProblems 6 months ago
>:( >:( >:) >:( pervs
409lexi 6 months ago
DANCING ?!??! dont avoid the situation ladies , ur tata's are gonna get squeezed till the kill u , like bree :/
TheeHeroNamedZero 6 months ago
Comment removed
mrtaterhed 7 months ago
the side of her right boob is shoing at 2:08
mrtaterhed 7 months ago
i think i saw her tit
stiliqn007 7 months ago
what is a mammogram???!!!!!!!
Ansaf01 7 months ago
@Ansaf01 they scan your tits to see if they are healthy LOL
titoshinigami 6 months ago
Dude... WTF IS THIS?!?!?!?
rubymarlowe10 7 months ago
Poor bree
RobloxTv1234 7 months ago
Thumbs up if shane sent you here.
RobloxTv1234 7 months ago 5
Me cud of shane 2
breweryhouse 7 months ago
here cuz of shane!
periwinks416 7 months ago
@periwinks416 same :P
TheMaroon5luver 7 months ago
shane brought me here xDD
juicyfruit61 7 months ago
why did the magazine come to life tho.. wtf
FrancineMarieee 7 months ago
Everyone from shane
JDProductionsNZ 7 months ago
i know what i wanna be when i grow up!!!
MrDemon4700 7 months ago
ohhh this is a mammogram shane sent me here
MrDemon4700 7 months ago
whos here cuz of shanes final destination vid
pizzap132 7 months ago 2
yay everyone got here from shane!!!!
MrArmadillo85 7 months ago
thumbs up if shan bout u here
scopio123abc 7 months ago
Yep from shane :)
123PrincesG321 7 months ago
lol same got it from shane dawson
obesityissad12 7 months ago
I was curious about a real mammogram saw it from Shane Dawson XD ANyone else?
WiLLEDprototype 7 months ago 3
i didn't get it
x0xbabyxgirlx0x 7 months ago
@fatderda same here XD
MusicAddon 7 months ago
tits at 2:32!
popboneh8 7 months ago
@swirlybuns12 me 3
usernameofthel 7 months ago
Theres really a breast film festival? WTF.
Isypup 7 months ago
shane send me here.. xD
fatderda 7 months ago 167
@fatderda lol same here xD
swirlybuns12 7 months ago
@fatderda ME TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
JordanAbers 7 months ago
@fatderda
that is EXACTLY how i got here
lol :)
theberdman115 7 months ago
best job ever?
MetaIhead89 8 months ago
not everyone has medical insurance card, or a job. Poor women like me who cannot even afford a visit to the health dept for a mammogram. A doctor last year dismissed me from the office with a lump on my breast, I guess they figured I would not have the money for a mammogram or treatments. I am sick, and will die a poor woman with breast cancer. I hurt so bad. I have applied for every job possible, but not all have med insurance.
getrealthen 1 year ago
nice at 2:07
sideslide23 1 year ago 4
wtf i wanted to see her tits
Lizardthrowup 1 year ago 53
wtf??
adams826 1 year ago 2
wtf?
TheMikeHawkener 1 year ago
thats happens when you smocking crack...
everything...
aboutblanksucks 1 year ago
@aboutblanksucks
devi3476 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aboutblanksucks YEA!!!LOL
devi3476 1 year ago
wow.. I'm getting my first mammogram tomorrow.. and I'm 16 >>
MrsCreatureComforts 1 year ago
Let's see a man have his privates tested in the machine! Wouldn't it be worth the pain he'd have to endure to know he doesn't have nut cancer?
rainingshoes 1 year ago 2
I don't see why you would think that something is terrible simply because it seems unpleasant or unsightly. Ugliness is not wickedness, and beauty is not righteousness. It's not ineffective just because you don't like the way it looks or feels and expect that "Well, if it's something good, why doesn't it feel good and look great?"
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
why was this made? what kind of project is this? It is very well done!
humbertsin1994 1 year ago
i love your idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sergioapuzzo 1 year ago
If you insist on exposing yourself to ionizing radiation every year, don't be surprised to eventually find what you're looking for. Cancer rates are higher among screeners, and this is not because of more cases being detected.
NativeInterface 1 year ago
I meet women every day who had breast cancer 20-30 years ago, found on mammograms, had lumpectomies and radiation or chemo, still here to tell about it, still have breasts and need mammograms.
I wish no one ever died of breast cancer, but please give your self the best chance of survival. Mammograms are not perfect, but they are the best early detection we have so far.
mkk5329 1 year ago
Mammograms (using X-rays) aren't healthy and there is no solid evidence that they save lives. According to Dr Mercola, thermography or thermal imaging is a much safer option. I wonder how many women have actually developed breast cancer because of routine mammograms...
behlec 2 years ago
none. im assuming you dont get your teeth xrayed either do you. there is no solud evidence that the risk of the xray outweighs the risk that you will die of a disease process that might have been caught early with an xray.
katykimball 2 years ago
Many distinguished researchers disagree w/you. 12/2/09 article...Google: 'Groundbreaking research mammograms cancer.' Granted, its concern was women geneticly prone to breast cancer. Unfortunately, these are the same women who make it a point to get their annual mammogram. Thus, the most likely cancer victims -shouldn't- get mammos, & the rest of us don't need them.
lazur1 2 years ago
I disagree...and I used to be a X-ray technician. Yes, I try to avoid any X-rays (if possible) but you cannot compare the radiation of mammograms with the radiation you suffer at dentists! And btw, my mother had breast cancer - and eventually died from the traditional treatment and not the disease.
behlec 2 years ago
I'm all for breast health but wtf did I just watch??? haha
ProcureEminence 2 years ago
Cancer gets isolated in lymph nodes. Mammos/bioposies/surgeries squeeze cancer into bloodstream. Radiation lowers immunity. Is it coincidence people die soon after detecting cancer? While those who remain unaware stay alive? THE EARLY DETECTION SCAM: If you find cancer 2yrs 'sooner', you have 2yrs more BETWEEN -DETECTION- & DEATH, NOT 2YRS MORE LIFESPAN! (And depending on your treatment, perhaps -less- lifespan.) Doctors need to stop lying to us if they want to be our trusted advisors.
lazur1 2 years ago
then how about those who are only diagnosed because they are on their deathbeds with stage 4 cancers.
katykimball 2 years ago
It's sad, but they die virtually the same day they would have w/all the chemo & radiation following early detection. Then the docs claim credit for the so-called 'life extension' : The time between detection & death. You be the judge: Who lived a more desireable life?: Someone who didn't even know they were sick until essentially the end, or someone who underwent all of the painful, de-personalizing, ineffective, & expensive treatments, only to die when they would have with -no- treatment?
lazur1 2 years ago
@lazur1 Do you have any evidence to back-up your claims that cancer treatments are completely ineffective? I'd need multiple sources, considering the evidence that exists to the contrary.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAd: List "multiple sources" you "need"? "THE" evidence exists to the contrary? I don't have secret sources. Google "mammogram problems", & re-word the search as many ways as you can think of for a few days. A good start. Ask the families of dead patients how they'd do it now if they had another chance. By the time you call "evidence", "THE evidence", I suspect you're fairly entrenched pro-mammogram, so, 1st of all, lose that point of view.
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 That's all well and good, but, challenging the conventionally held medical beliefs means that the burden of proof is on you. This still hasn't given me any studies, research, or professionals on the subject, you've simply dodged my question.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral So you refuse to look anything up on your own, unless it confirms your already-held opinion? I gave you my #1 source: Google. I have no further burden of proof. Force all the women in your family to get semi-annual mammograms for all I care.
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 So, I assume that means that you don't have any sources? Though, to be fair, I'll claim that google is also my source. Google up any information about mammograms and breast cancer, and they will encourage you to get a regular mammogram.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral RE: Google: That's a flat-out lie, good-bye.
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 If google is a lie and an unreliable source, doesn't that make your argument equally invalid?
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral No, altho Google must be searched thoroughly to get the both sides, it's all in there somewhere. Google CAN'T 'lie', the way 'Wikipedia has potential to do; al it can do it send the 'good' stuff to the 'back of the line', for (lack of) financial considerations. I mean't that YOU LIE when you post that ALL Google info is pro-mammgram.
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 Of course not all google sources will agree, google isn't an encyclopedia or a source or an authority, it's a search engine. Anyone can post anything on the internet, it doesn't have to be true. You can use google to find sites that claim that the black man is genetically inferior, or that the holocaust never happened, or that America is controlling people's minds through the water. Google is means to find information. Just because you find something online, doesn't mean it's true.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral Please. Now -your- sources Google are "scientific", & -mine- are "rumors"? (I guess that's a step up from your original LIE: "Everything on Google is pro-mammogram" !). How about you just -try- to find any credible info that you disagree with? It's actually out there!
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 You say it's out there, but obviously you've been unable to find any and bring it to the discussion. The burden is not on me to prove your point. Furthermore, google is not a source. That's like saying that my source is "the library". It depends on what exactly your source is. Who made these claims? Who proved it? Who agrees? Of course, I can claim anything I like, but, I need evidence to back it up.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral Cool. What are your sources, by the way? Just you saying the burden of proof is on me doesn't make it so. ..Asking you to push few keys on your computer (while your doing that right now anyway!), is hardly the same as demanding you take ride to the library!
lazur1 1 year ago
DAMM this is gettin Hot XD this is so LAME i only watch 30seconds of this crap
hottyhottyhottyguy 2 years ago
This is a serious exam you perv.
IHearts646 2 years ago 2
I have had a about 10 of these bloody things. The most recent was last Wednesday I had a long walk to get to the hospital ad was quite sticky as it was a warm day. The technician pulled and dragged my boobs about quite roughly and I am still very sore. I have my left arm in a sling as my shoulder is very painful.
This machine is archaic, noone should have to endure these, there is far better technology available, I think airport scanners would do a better job for starters.
I will not go again.
Rozrr 2 years ago
Really? my mom had dozens of these & she said that they don't even pinch & it just feels weird
IHearts646 2 years ago
All I can say is your mother must have a capability for standing a lot of pain.
Have just asked a professional and there is no way she will have had dozens of mammograms.
Each time a woman has one she is exposed to Xrays which given constantly can actually cause cancer in some women. It is a very low dose but accumulative.
I can assure you having your boobs squashed absolutely flat, pulls the skin from the rest of the breast and it does really hurt. a lot of women. Like massive Chinese burns
Rozrr 2 years ago
Oh my god. That is barbaric!
Spiderweb127 2 years ago
@Rozrr Do you also not get shots because they are painful, or not get cavities filled because the procedure is unpleasant?
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral I guess you're not in agreement with the anti-vaccination faction either, huh Doctor?
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 I'm not a doctor, though I am fascinated by medical science. However, no, the anti-vaccination movement seems largely like a conspiracy theory brought about by people with a poor understanding of the science involved.
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral Posted by someone who -has- that understanding, I suppose, and thus can judge the understanding of others? Or are back to: "THE 'evidence' proves what -I - say, therefore I don't have to actually say anything, except that I'm right."
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 No, I'm not an expert on vaccinations, merely an advocate of the scientific method and of informed discourse and debate. In order to promote any point, particularly one that goes against conventional wisdom, one has to back up that point with evidence. Simply claiming "I'm right" is a weak point that can simply be countered with "No, I'm right". The next step is to say "Well, I have evidence, but I won't/can't/don't need to show you, it's evidence and it says I'm right and you're not"
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral The scientific method is so polluted by financial interests that it's virtually extinct. I apologize for thinking you were corrupt, you're just naive.
lazur1 1 year ago
@lazur1 Well, we can disagree and I'll simply say that you're not corrupt, you're simply paranoid. The scientific method itself isn't an organization, it's a concept, and therefore, cannot be corrupted. Of course, you could improperly apply the scientific method, or falsify findings, but that's not using the scientific method. Besides, if you're not using the scientific method to come to your conclusions, what are you using?
TheAdmiral 1 year ago
@TheAdmiral 1/2 Wrong: The scientific method is also -a method-, a -process-, that must be put into action by -people-, with all the flaws, needs, & motives that people, and the organanizations they comprise, have. Corrupt science is headline news lately. Get a newspaper.
lazur1 1 year ago
whats the big deal. its a medical checkup. Men have theirs too.
daanimalboy 3 years ago
since women are generally more sensitive than men, they remember their loved ones when they go through the same thing.
voldemort2123 2 years ago
this was not about being sensitive, but the fact that is a hassle and uncomfortable. no need for unnecessary whinging and making themselves feel attention over every little thing.
daanimalboy 2 years ago
sorry was basing it off the description because my audio was off.
voldemort2123 2 years ago
OK Buddy, would you put your tackle into a machine that squashed it flat and gave out Xrays? Particularly when you are aware of all the wonderful technological advancements in the world since the 1960's when this bloody instrument of torture was first used. You know there are better more accurate methods like ultrasound and thermal imaging (used in airports) yet we women have to get this done when we know it can actually cause cancer...
Rozrr 2 years ago
Well, then this should defintely be brought up with the medical community. If ultrasounds are as effective, then they should defnitely be used. But, still, no difference. No need for whinging. Guys have their procedures which are equally not as comfortable.
daanimalboy 2 years ago
I Had one recently, they're not that bad
IHearts646 2 years ago 2