Coronavirus and related publications

See below for publications on the 1918 influenza pandemic

 Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) |

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) | CDC

Naming the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and the virus that causes it – World Health Organization

Disease coronavirus disease (COVID-19)

Virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)

Resources to various COVID-19 related studies and articles:


U.S. National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine” (NIH) PubMed Central® (PMC) is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Resource Center” by The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)

Coronavirus (Covid-19)” by New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)

The Lancet COVID-19 Resource Centre,” by The Lancet

COVID-19 MDPI Open Access Articles/Studies” by Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

COVID-19 – Science” by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)”

Also see: “COVID-19 Articles” by GMWatch and “Independent Science News”. Both websites publish articles with expert scientific viewpoints that may not always be represented by mainstream media (MSM) outlets.

Omission of certain legitimate expert scientific views can be contrary to the “Code of Ethics,” outlined by the Society of Professional Journalists. For an interesting discussion on the need for better journalism in science, see the Op-ed published in the Columbia Journalism Review, “Covering science at dangerous speeds,” by Ivan Oransky, May 4, 2020.

Articles that of interest that highlight issues that tend to be overlooked by mainstream media:

Evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is genetically engineered,” by Claire Robinson, GMWatch; May 12, 2020

Expert attacks EcoHealth Alliance’s involvement in ‘really risky’ bat coronavirus research in Wuhan labs,” by Jonathan Matthews, GMWatch; May 5, 2020

The Long History of Accidental Laboratory Releases of Potential Pandemic Pathogens Is Being Ignored In the COVID-19 Media Coverage,” by Sam Husseini, Independent Science News; May 5, 2020

SARS-CoV-2 could have escaped from a lab – and the US is in the frame,” by Claire Robinson, GMWatch; May 4, 2020

Summary of evidence that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, China,” by GMWatch; May 3, 2020

This article briefly discusses “Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged From a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China” by Project Evidence which states, in part:

“The goal of this document is to examine evidence that may prove that (1) the SARS-CoV-2 virus was present at a biolaboratory in Wuhan, China, and (2) the SARS-CoV-2 virus was introduced into the greater Wuhan population by an infected lab worker or animal. These claims from this point on will be referred to as Claim 1 and Claim 2.

This document does not attempt to provide a concrete conclusion on whether either claim is factually true. Rather, it examines the probability that each claim is true to allow the reader to make his or her own conclusions. While either claim cannot be irrevocably proven true, an attempt has been made to ensure the evidence used to support these claims is as factual as possible.

Furthermore, this document does not attempt to investigate claims that SARS-CoV-2 is a ‘man-made bioweapon’ or whether its release was intentional.”


Lab-Made? SARS-CoV-2 Genealogy Through the Lens of Gain-of-Function Research,” by Yuri Deigin, Medium; April 22, 2020

Was the COVID-19 virus genetically engineered?” by Claire Robinson, GMWatch; April 22, 2020

COVID-19: A wake-up call for biosafety,” by Jonathan Matthews, GMWatch; April 13, 2020

Top U.S. Intelligence Official Calls Gene Editing a WMD Threat,” by Antonio Regalado; MIT Technology Review; February 9, 2016

Asymptomatic Transmission, the Achilles’ Heel of Current Strategies to Control Covid-19,” by Monica Gandhi, M.D., M.P.H., Deborah S. Yokoe, M.D., M.P.H., and Diane V. Havlir, M.D., NEJM; April 24, 2020 (3 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Presymptomatic Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 – Singapore, January 23–March 16, 2020,” by Wycliffe E. Wei et al, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR); Vol. 69, No. 14; April 10, 2020 (5 pages)  This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

A Genomic Perspective on the Origin and Emergence of SARS-CoV-2,” by Yong-Zhen Zhang and Edward C. Holmes, Cell, Vol. 181, No. 2; April 16, 2020 (5 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19,” by Xi He et al, Nature Medicine, April 15, 2020 (10 pages) . This publication can also be accessed HERE.


This publication is cited in this article: “COVID-19 patients may be most contagious one to two days before symptoms appear, study finds,” by N’dea Yancey-Bragg, USA Today; April 17, 2020

Projecting the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 through the postpandemic period,” by Stephen M. Kissler, Christine Tedijanto, Edward Goldstein, Yonatan H. Grad & Marc Lipsitch, Science: eabb5793, April 14, 2020 (18 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Universal Screening for SARS-CoV-2 in Women Admitted for Delivery,” by Dena Goffman, M.D. et al, New England Journal of Medicine; April 13, 2020 (2 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Study shows pangolins may have passed new coronavirus from bats to humans,” by Yang Zhang, Chengxin Zhang and Wei Zheng, The Conversation; April 10, 2020

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 73,” by World Health Organization, as of April 2, 2020 (13 pages)

From Bats to Human Lungs, the Evolution of a Coronavirus,” by Carolyn Kormann, The New Yorker; March 27, 2020

Excerpt: Outside a host, in parasitical purgatory, a virus is inert, not quite alive, but not dead, either. A hundred million coronavirus particles could fit on the head of a pin—typically, thousands or tens of thousands are necessary to infect an animal or a person—and they might remain viable for long stretches. Researchers at the Virus Ecology Unit of Rocky Mountain Laboratories, in Montana, a facility connected to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, have found that the virus can linger on copper for four hours, on a piece of cardboard for twenty-four hours, and on plastic or stainless steel for as long as three days. They also found that the virus can survive, for three hours, floating through the air, transmitted by the tiny respiratory droplets an infected person exhales, sneezes, or coughs out. (Other research suggests the virus might be able to exist as an aerosol, but only in very limited conditions.) Most virus particles, though, seem to lose their virulency fairly quickly. The infection window is highest in the first ten minutes. Still, the risk of infection has turned many of us, understandably, into germophobes.

Was the COVID-19 virus genetically engineered?” by Claire Robinson, GMWatch; April 22, 2020. ➡  In this article, molecular geneticist Dr. Michael Antoniou points out that the assertion that COVID-19 was not genetically engineered (see below, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2”) is inconclusive and should be reevaluated; this does not suggest that it was, but that there was an insufficient amount of data and limited examination of other factors that should have been taken into account before this assertion was accepted as conclusive. 

The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” by Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes & Robert F. Garry, Nature Medicine, Vol. 26; March 17, 2020 (3 pages). This publication can also be accessed HERE and in HTML format HERE and HERE.


This publication is cited in this article: “COVID-19: the genetic quest to understand the virus,” by Marcus Strom, The University of Sydney; March 27, 2020

Excerpt: Just last week Nature Medicine published research co-authored by Professor Holmes with scientists from Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla California, the University of Edinburgh, Columbia University in New York and Tulane University, New Orleans.

That paper has dispelled the fanciful idea that the novel coronavirus was a manufactured biological agent.

Using comparative analysis of genomic data, the scientists show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.

Professor Holmes said: “There is simply no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 – the cause of COVID-19 – came out of a lab. In reality, this is the sort of natural disease emergence event that researchers in the field like myself have been warning about for many years.”

That paper has quickly become the highest ranked academic study of all time as measured by Altmetric, a company that monitors media coverage of research papers.

“The high Altmetric is a strong indication of the remarkable global interest in this topic,” Professor Holmes said.

And today, Professor Holmes publishes a commentary in the journal Cell [*] with his colleague Professor Yong-Zhen Zhang from the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre and the School of Life Science at Fudan University, Shanghai.

[*] “A Genomic Perspective on the Origin and Emergence of SARS-CoV-2,” by Yong-Zhen Zhang and Edward C. Holmes, Cell, Vol. 181, No. 2; April 16, 2020 (5 pages)

In that article they outline our current knowledge of what the genomic data reveals about the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 virus and discuss the gaps in our knowledge.

This includes taking samples from the Wuhan wet market where it is believed the virus originated. The paper says that “genome sequences of ‘environmental samples’ – likely surfaces – from the market have now been obtained and phylogenetic analysis reveals that they are very closely related to viruses sampled from the earliest Wuhan patients”.

However, Professor Holmes and Professor Zhang are quick to point out that as “not all of the early [COVID-19] cases were market associated, it is possible that the emergence story is more complicated than first suspected”.

Note: Since its publication in Nature Medicine, a number of scientists and publications have refuted many of the conclusions asserted in “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2”. It’s very unusual for a journal to refuse to publish any “Matters Arising commentary, which the journal defines as presenting ‘challenges or clarifications’ to an original published work. Nature Medicine refused to publish them on the grounds that ‘we do not feel that they advance or clarify understanding’ of the original article.” (source). Nothing could be further from the truth: this stifling of the scientific debate is contrary to the scientific process and an affront to scientific integrity. As a response, some scientists (some of whom have chosen to remain anonymous) have turned to alternative publication methods. Among the publications that provide extensive scientific and analytical criticisms are:

Lab-Made? SARS-CoV-2 Genealogy Through the Lens of Gain-of-Function Research,” by Yuri Deigin, Medium; April 22, 2020

RaTG13 – the undeniable evidence that the Wuhan coronavirus is man-made,” May 2, 2020

Logistical and Technical Exploration into the Origins of the Wuhan Strain of Coronavirus (COVID-19),” by Harvard to the Big House, posted on January 31, 2020


Substantial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV2),” by Ruiyun Li, Sen Pei, Bin Chen, Yimeng Song, Tao Zhang, Wan Yang and Jeffrey Shaman, Science: eabb3221; March 16, 2020 (9 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Coronavirus: China’s first confirmed Covid-19 case traced back to November 17,” by Josephine Ma, South China Morning Post; March 13, 2020

Why we need worst-case thinking to prevent pandemics,” by Toby Ord, The Guardian; March 6, 2020


Excerpt: This progress is continuing at a rapid pace. The past 10 years have seen major qualitative breakthroughs, such as the use of the gene editing tool Crispr to efficiently insert new genetic sequences into a genome, and the use of gene drives to efficiently replace populations of natural organisms in the wild with genetically modified versions.

This progress in biotechnology seems unlikely to fizzle out anytime soon: there are no insurmountable challenges looming; no fundamental laws blocking further developments. But it would be optimistic to assume that this uncharted new terrain holds only familiar dangers.

To start with, let’s set aside the risks from malicious intent, and consider only the risks that can arise from well-intentioned research. Most scientific and medical research poses a negligible risk of harms at the scale we are considering. But there is a small fraction that uses live pathogens of kinds that are known to threaten global harm. These include the agents that cause the Spanish flu, smallpox, SARS and H5N1 or avian flu. And a small part of this research involves making strains of these pathogens that pose even more danger than the natural types, increasing their transmissibility, lethality or resistance to vaccination or treatment.


Clinical characteristics of 24 asymptomatic infections with COVID-19 screened among close contacts in Nanjing, China,” by Zhiliang Hu, et al. Science China Life Sciences; March 4, 2020 (6 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding,” by Roujian Lu et al, The Lancet, Vol 395, No. 10224; February 22, 2020 (10 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE and in HTML format HERE and HERE.


Excerpt: Epidemiologically, eight of the nine patients in our study had a history of exposure to the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, suggesting that they might have been in close contact with the infection source at the market. However, one patient had never visited the market, although he had stayed in a hotel near the market before the onset of their illness. This finding suggests either possible droplet transmission or that the patient was infected by a currently unknown source. Evidence of clusters of infected family members and medical workers has now confirmed the presence of human-to-human transmission. Clearly, this infection is a major public health concern, particularly as this outbreak coincides with the peak of the Chinese Spring Festival travel rush, during which hundreds of millions of people will travel through China.

As a typical RNA virus, the average evolutionary rate for coronaviruses is roughly 10−4 nucleotide substitutions per site per year, with mutations arising during every replication cycle. It is, therefore, striking that the sequences of 2019-nCoV from different patients described here were almost identical, with greater than 99·9% sequence identity. This finding suggests that 2019-nCoV originated from one source within a very short period and was detected relatively rapidly. However, as the virus transmits to more individuals, constant surveillance of mutations arising is needed.

Phylogenetic analysis showed that bat-derived coronaviruses fell within all five subgenera of the genus Betacoronavirus. Moreover, bat-derived coronaviruses fell in basal positions in the subgenus Sarbecovirus, with 2019-nCoV most closely related to bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21, which were also sampled from bats. These data are consistent with a bat reservoir for coronaviruses in general and for 2019-nCoV in particular. However, despite the importance of bats, several facts suggest that another animal is acting as an intermediate host between bats and humans. First, the outbreak was first reported in late December, 2019, when most bat species in Wuhan are hibernating. Second, no bats were sold or found at the Huanan seafood market, whereas various non-aquatic animals (including mammals) were available for purchase. Third, the sequence identity between 2019-nCoV and its close relatives bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21 was less than 90%, which is reflected in the relatively long branch between them. Hence, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21 are not direct ancestors of 2019-nCoV. Fourth, in both SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, bats acted as the natural reservoir, with another animal (masked palm civet for SARS-CoVand dromedary camels for MERS-CoV) acting as an intermediate host, with humans as terminal hosts. Therefore, on the basis of current data, it seems likely that the 2019-nCoV causing the Wuhan outbreak might also be initially hosted by bats, and might have been transmitted to humans via currently unknown wild animal(s) sold at the Huanan seafood market. [Citations omitted]

A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China,” by Fan Wu et al, Nature, Vol. 579, No. 7798; Published online February 3, 2020 (20 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.


Coronavirus reverse genetic systems: Infectious clones and replicons,” by Fernando Almazán et al, Virus Research, Vol. 189; August 30, 2014 (9 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE and HERE.

Miscellaneous Related Publications:


Bill Gates Gives to the Rich (Including Himself),” by Tim Schwab, The Nation; March 17, 2020

This article is of particular interest in the context of the manner in which every mainstream media outlet has represented Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation. Almost every MSM source has neglected to investigate the Gates Foundation in depth (if at all). Independent journalist Tim Schwab noted on Twitter: “News media is now writing entire stories around what ‘Bill Gates believes….’ No context. No counterpoints. No independent voices. Are we transcribers or journalists?” There is a great deal to examine about the science projects that Gates has promoted and the inherent flaws and negative consequences of the projects that have gone completely ignored. This is a horrendous oversight by journalists. For example, even as interviewers praise Bill Gates, his white paper “Pandemic 1” completely downplays the importance of the need for widespread asymptomatic testing, a view that is not only contrary to that of medical experts but because of his power and influence over policy makers worldwide, makes Bill Gates more like a threat, and less like a prophet.


Building a factory farmed future, one pandemic at a time,” by GRAIN; March 3, 2020

New research suggests industrial livestock, not wet markets, might be origin of Covid-19,” by GRAIN; March 30, 2020 [Note: A civet [civet cat] is “a small, lean, mostly nocturnal mammal native to tropical Asia and Africa, especially the tropical forests. The term civet applies to over a dozen different mammal species”; A pangolin is described as a “scaly anteater”]

The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus,” by Botao Xiao and Lei Xiao, February 2020 (archive)

Sowing the Seeds of a Pandemic? Mammalian Pathogenicity and Transmissibility of H1 Variant Influenza Viruses from the Swine Reservoir,” by Joanna A. Pulit-Penaloza et al, Tropical medicine and infectious disease, Vol. 4, No. 1; February 27, 2019 (21 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE and HERE.

We Need to Connect the 2019-nCoV Coronavirus to Agriculture,” by Rob Wallace, Independent Science News; February 17, 2020

Global hotspots and correlates of emerging zoonotic diseases,” by Toph Allen, Kris A. Murray, Carlos Zambrana-Torrelio, Stephen S. Morse, Carlo Rondinini, Moreno Di Marco, Nathan Breit, Kevin J. Olival1 & Peter Daszak, Nature Communications, Vol. 8, No. 1124; October 24, 2017 (10 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE.

This publication is cited in this article: “Pandemic shines harsh light on Trump’s failure to protect pangolins,” by Jimmy Tobias, The Guardian; April 15, 2020 [A pangolin is described as a “scaly anteater”]



The Growing Threat of Pandemics: Enhancing Domestic and International Biosecurity,” Scowcroft Institute of International Affairs, March 2017 (50 pages)


Pandemic Playbook for Early Response to High-Consequence Emerging Infectious Disease Threats and Biological Incidents,” the White House, 2016 (69 pages).


If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory

Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research,” by Declan Butler, Nature News & Comment, November 15, 2015

Pandemic Impacts to Lifeline Critical Infrastructure,” Department of Homeland Security; July 30, 2015 (11 pages)

Estimates of the Demand for Mechanical Ventilation in the United States During an Influenza Pandemic,” by Martin I. Meltzer, Anita Patel, Adebola Ajao, Scott V. Nystrom & Lisa M. Koonin, | Clinical Infectious Diseases, Vol. 60, Issue suppl_1, May 2015, Pages S52–S57 (6 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Report of the Inadvertent Cross-Contamination and Shipment of a Laboratory Specimen with Influenza Virus H5N1,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); August 15, 2014 (16 pages)

The Consequences of a Lab Escape of a Potential Pandemic Pathogen,” by Lynn C. Klotz and Edward J. Sylvester, Frontiers in Public Health, Vol. 2, No. 116; August 2014 (3 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE.

Laboratory Escapes and ‘Self-fulfilling Prophecy’ Epidemics,” by M. Furmanski MD, Scientist’s Working Group on Chemical and Biological Weapons, 2014 (17 pages)

Isolation of a Novel Coronavirus from a Man with Pneumonia in Saudi Arabia,” by Ali M. Zaki, M.D., et al, NEJM, Vol. 367, No. 19; October 17, 2012 (7 pages)

Emerging Human Coronaviruses — Disease Potential and Preparedness,” by Larry J. Anderson, M.D., and Ralph S. Baric, Ph.D., NEJM; October 22, 2012 (3 pages)

Future Global Shocks: Pandemics,” by Harvey Rubin, MD, PhD University of Pennsylvania; January 14, 2011 (87 pages)

Analysis of the Threat of Genetically Modified Organisms for Biological Warfare,” by Jerry Warner, James Ramsbotham, Ewelina Tunia and James J. Valdes, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, May 2011 (37 pages)

Pandemic Ventilator Rationing and Appeals Processes,” by Daniel Patrone & David Resnik, Health Care Analysis, Vol. 19, No. 2; June 2011 (13 pages) This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Pandemic Influenza Preparedness and Response Guidance for Healthcare Workers and Healthcare Employers,” OSHA, 2009 (103 pages)

Pandemic Preparedness: The Need for a Public Health – Not a Law Enforcement/National Security – Approach,” by George J. Annas, Wendy K. Mariner and Wendy E. Parmet, ACLU, January 2008 (41 pages)

Emerging Infectious Diseases,” by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Vol. 12, No. 1, January 2006 (189 pages)

Interim Pre-Pandemic Planning Guidance: Community Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Mitigation in the United States,” CDC; February 2007 (97 pages)

The National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza – Implementation Plan,” Homeland Security, 2006 (233 pages)
SARS 3- are we ready?” by David Bevan, Clinical and Investigative Medicine, Vol. 26, Iss. 6, (Dec 2003)


Leaking From The Lab? The ‘Contained’ Use of Genetically Modified Micro-organisms in the UK,” by GeneWatch UK, June 27, 1999 (54 pages)


Biohazard: The Chilling True Story of the Largest Covert Biological Weapons Program in the World – Told from Inside by the Man Who Ran It,” by Ken Alibek, 1999 (333 pages)

1918 Spanish Flu:

The 1918 influenza pandemic did not, as many people believed, originate in Spain.

Why Was It Called the ‘Spanish Flu?’” by Evan Andrews, History; March 27, 2020

The 1918 influenza pandemic: 100 years of questions answered and unanswered,” by Jeffery K. Taubenberger, MD, PhD., John C. Kash and David M. Morens, Science Translational Medicine, Vol. 11, Issue 502, eaau5485; July 24, 2019 (16 pages)

Origins of the 1918 Pandemic: Revisiting the Swine ‘Mixing Vessel’ Hypothesis,” by Martha I. Nelson and Michael Worobey, American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 187, No. 12; December 2018 (5 pages) DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy150  This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

The Mother of All Pandemics Is 100 Years Old (and Going Strong)!” by David M. Morens, MD and Jeffery K. Taubenberger, MD, PhD., American Journal of Public Health, Vol 108, No. 11; November 2018 (6 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE and in HTML format HERE and HERE.

Influenza Cataclysm, 1918,” by David M. Morens, MD and Jeffery K. Taubenberger, MD, PhD., New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 379, No. 24; December 13, 2018 (5 pages) DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1814447 This publication can also be accessed in HTML format HERE.

Reviewing the History of Pandemic Influenza: Understanding Patterns of Emergence and Transmission,” by Patrick R. Saunders-Hastings and Daniel Krewski, Pathogens, Vol. 5, No. 4; December 6, 2016 (19 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE in HTML format

No evidence of 1918 influenza pandemic origin in Chinese laborers/soldiers in France,” by G. Dennis Shanks, Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, Vol. 79, No. 1; January 2016 (3 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE in HTML format.

Paths of Infection: The First World War and the Origins of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic,” by Mark Osborne Humphries, War in History, Vol 21, No. 1; January 8, 2014 (27 pages) This publication was cited in this article, however more recent publications with new data demonstrate this assumption is no longer supported: “1918 Flu Pandemic That Killed 50 Million Originated in China, Historians Say,’” by Dan Vergano, National Geographic; January 24, 2014

Autopsy series of 68 cases dying before and during the 1918 influenza pandemic peak,” by Zong-Mei Sheng et al, Proceeding of the National Academies of Science, Vol. 108, No. 39; September 27, 2011 (6 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE and in HTML format HERE and HERE.

The site of origin of the 1918 influenza pandemic and its public health implications,” by John M. Barry, Journal of Translational Medicine, Vol. 2, No. 1; January 2004 (4 pages) This publication can also be accessed HERE and in HTML format.


Stay safe.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s