WhiteBlaze Pages
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
$10 for printed copy. $6 for PDF.
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 105
  1. #81

    Default

    Since I can't edit... what do you use as a carbohydrate source on the trail, dogwood?

  2. #82
    Registered Offender
    Join Date
    01-12-2015
    Location
    Displaced/Misplaced/Out of Place
    Posts
    359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by colorado_rob View Post
    My question is this: have others actually closely monitored their actual calorie intake and weight? I have, hence my claim that 5000 is a bit exaggerated, except for fairly unfit folks, or those carrying a good deal of extra body weight.
    Don't forget the young males, a category which includes which most AT thru-hikers. The group I hiked with, all (loaded) young guns, were consistently assimilating those sort of numbers (5,000+ calories). As a quick example, the Half Gallon Challenge alone was 2,200 calories (for a true half gallon and not the bogus quart and a half container sold at the Pine Grove Furnace State Park) and no one missed a beat with the rest of the day's calories. Our metabolisms slow with age, eventually to the point they stop altogether! And eating can also increase your metabolism, when constant duress is undertaken.

  3. #83
    Leonidas
    Join Date
    04-26-2016
    Location
    Birmingham, Alabama
    Posts
    1,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by colorado_rob View Post
    that's probably a decent rule of thumb.

    I did 18-19 MPD regularly on the AT (except in NH and ME!), and I burned in the low 3000's, plus the extra calories in town stops that brings the total close to 4000. My question is this: have others actually closely monitored their actual calorie intake and weight? I have, hence my claim that 5000 is a bit exaggerated, except for fairly unfit folks, or those carrying a good deal of extra body weight. I did this study some years back when planning for a couple long (2-3 week), un-resupplied mountaineering expeditions, because every ounce counts on those trips. I was downright anal about accuracy. I carried this data forward when I did the AT and closely monitored stuff for a good part of my AT hike, the first 700 miles.
    I have tracked intake, exercise and such for 2-3 years pretty meticulously. Exercise has been tracked at least for the gym-side of it for much longer. Extended hiking days though I don't have data for past my recent 8-18 mile training hikes. I'm not too concerned with losing some weight in an 8-10 day span but I still like to have as much information to use as a base as possible.

  4. #84
    Registered User
    Join Date
    04-14-2016
    Location
    Peachtree City, Georgia
    Age
    69
    Posts
    6
    Journal Entries
    12

    Default

    I was just wandering WhiteBlaze and came upon SGTJones' post. Anyone planning a bit of long distance exercise, like me, would well to mull over his observation and suggestions. I am married to a personal chef (a recently acquired, well-paying hobby) who, over our 37-year marriage, has always kept our meals balanced, nutritious and enjoyable. Friends marvel at her skills - and my weight. I am back to my HS wrestling weight with no intent to do so. Well, meals aren't the only factor; we both exercise regularly and know when to push away from the table. (We abide by the 'Body for Life' program.) That said, as I target my 22 Feb 2017 start from Springer, I admit to being absolutely clueless about a developing a balanced diet/menu - and my chef will not be there to assess/modify my intake. So you can bet your/my life that I will take SGTJones' observation to heart in planning and executing a thru hike. (I previously sent a week's menu to the Bride for comment.) Although, I likely will balk on the butter...! Many other comments in this thread are helpful - like the Krave Jerky suggestion (now on order) and another who answered the question I had about a planned menu I saw that had cheese at two different meals in the same day. Thanks, SGTJones. OBTW, great photos on your link.

  5. #85
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-28-2007
    Location
    Georgia and Hawaii
    Posts
    18,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalebJ View Post
    Interesting that you've had bad experiences with spikes and crashes with malto. I use it specifically to avoid them (there's no longer anything in my normal food bag that contains significant added sugars). I initially bought a jar of pure malto specifically for putting together homemade energy gels for long training runs.
    We'll get Malto chiming in shortly to offer his opinion who probably has far more positive experiences with maltodextrin than myself. Note this is what happens to me, what I do, and is not intended for everyone or my experiences dictate how everyone's body might behave. Dietary lifestyle choices have so many personal specifics surrounding outcomes that get ignored in Forums like this. The bonking I get from maltodextrin gels is less of a falling off the cliff crash such as if consuming pure simple refined white sugar but it certainly happens.

    Exactly, for training runs of 2 hrs (I'm only a part time runner, not a super star runner by any stretch of the imagination) two gels, a nutritional bar(can of worms too as what most perceive as nutritional bars I would consider candy bars or super high unnecessary protein/'body building' bars), and electrolyte water is OK for me to sustain energy levels for this activity. And, some who do long runs like Ultras do opt for things like gels perhaps successfully so.

    Quote Originally Posted by CalebJ View Post
    Since I can't edit... what do you use as a carbohydrate source on the trail, dogwood?
    On backpacking treks of which the majority are LD hikes where I'm actually moving 14-16 hrs every 24 hrs with the occasional 20 hr straight hiking day/night I'm a complex carb and fiber eater with what most would define as abnormally high "good fat" percentage of total daily caloric intake. Good fats coming from sardines, wild salmon(jerky, candy(yum yum), mackerel, high quality fish oil supplementation, olive oil, coconut/coconut oil(more limited off trail when not needing 5000+ cal/day)/coconut milk, nuts/nut and seed butters, seeds(don't forget chia(SABA), flax, hemp, poppy, pumpkin, sesame, sunflower, etc), legumes(beans), high quality dark chocolate(bars, powder, nibs), and a few vegetables(moderate omega 3's). I'll go in and out of a ketogenic state on trail depending where I am with my body. This is part of how I can sustain myself with high fat content low overall wt food on trail. I'm burning fat for energy not just carbs. Simple carbs/highly refined carbs, added high sugar content, additives, are avoided both on and off trail. It works for me because I'm observing my energy levels and adapting my diet as I see the need. My exact dietary choices on trail for a extended hikes are not static. Protein levels are very moderate. Carbs mostly come from minimally processed whole foods(foods as close to or in their most "natural" state). I always have a trail bag containing whole foods always with something "alive" such as growing fresh sprouts on trail, buying fresh produce(asst greens make sense yr round), green onions, small carrot, one small yam, garlic, fresh turmeric, fresh ginger, small apple, even an avocado for the first night out, etc.

    Since many of the LD hikes in the U.S. have well researched resupply options I have based my trail food approach as it pertains to volume, wt, and total caloric load by more often choosing to resupply more often allowing me to resupply partially with heavier bulkier fresh whole foods like produce. It also helps that I'm doing 25+ mile days. Best of all overall trail food bag is still UL. It may not be for everyone but it works for me.


    It works for me because I'm observing my energy levels and adapting my diet as I see the need. My dietary choices don't arise out of a static approach. One of the most significant things people should take from this thread IMO is that each has to consider a wide range of personally specific aspects in order for dietary choices to work optimally. It's the same for each hiker. Things are always in motion. One has to observe and adapt. It's key, particularly on extended outings.

  6. #86
    Registered User
    Join Date
    01-16-2011
    Location
    On the trail
    Posts
    3,789
    Images
    3

    Default

    ^^^ I have experiemented with all sorts of carbs from pure sugar to the most complex of the complex. I have not experienced a crash from any of it but it is likely do to moving continuously and metering in the calories on going. I have seen reports from several other mile mirage hikers that talk about the crash and burn. I have just been lips my enough not to experience it while hiking.
    enemy of unnecessary but innovative trail invention gadgetry

  7. #87
    Registered User egilbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-18-2014
    Location
    Lewiston and Biddeford, Maine
    Age
    58
    Posts
    2,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    ^^^ I have experiemented with all sorts of carbs from pure sugar to the most complex of the complex. I have not experienced a crash from any of it but it is likely do to moving continuously and metering in the calories on going. I have seen reports from several other mile mirage hikers that talk about the crash and burn. I have just been lips my enough not to experience it while hiking.
    Auto correct hates you

  8. #88

  9. #89
    Registered User colorado_rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-20-2012
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Age
    64
    Posts
    4,528
    Images
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    ^^^ I have experiemented with all sorts of carbs from pure sugar to the most complex of the complex. I have not experienced a crash from any of it but it is likely do to moving continuously and metering in the calories on going. I have seen reports from several other mile mirage hikers that talk about the crash and burn. I have just been lips my enough not to experience it while hiking.
    Seems like we all really do process carbs/sugars quite differently. I definitely peak and crash quickly if I eat a lot of soft carbs/sugars at once, others obviously do not.

    So, since I do peak/crash myself, I simply meter my sugar intake while on the trail, nibbling on sugars nearly constantly with a pocket full of jelly beans or M&M's, crakers or whatever, maybe to the tune of about ~150 calories per hour, something like that. This keeps up my hiking energy all day perfectly. This is another reason I have never done the "lunch" thing, even in "civilian" life off the trail. Basically, some of us are meal-eaters, others of us are grazers.

    By the way: that maltodextrine (sp?) stuff is amazing; quickest blood-sugar boost available, I believe. I use it in topping out on big peaks, I eat a pack of shot blocks (200 cal) with 1000 feet to go, they are like a jet-pack.

    Also: I still cry BS on folks claiming they consume 5000+ calories a day on the trail, unless they are large or badly out of shape, age not withstanding. I just don't believe it, but whatever! I doubt those folks that claim it actually carefully track their intake. Sure, 2200 cal. half gallons if ice cream will do it for that day. I promise I won't argue the point anymore.

  10. #90
    Registered User colorado_rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-20-2012
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Age
    64
    Posts
    4,528
    Images
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uriah View Post
    Don't forget the young males, a category which includes which most AT thru-hikers. The group I hiked with, all (loaded) young guns, were consistently assimilating those sort of numbers (5,000+ calories). As a quick example, the Half Gallon Challenge alone was 2,200 calories (for a true half gallon and not the bogus quart and a half container sold at the Pine Grove Furnace State Park) and no one missed a beat with the rest of the day's calories. Our metabolisms slow with age, eventually to the point they stop altogether! And eating can also increase your metabolism, when constant duress is undertaken.
    Interesting point about the age thing, you're certainly right that 20-somethigns are the single largest demographic, though there are sure a lot of us old farts too (what's missing are the 30-40's folks).

    So, does metabolism actually decrease with age? Probably, but not a whole lot. Here's a quote from an article:

    "A study evaluating total energy expenditure (TEE) the sum of calories burned from the basal metabolic rate (metabolism), the energy required to digest and absorb food, and physical activity confirmed what most people already know: energy expenditure decreases with age. Basal metabolic rate, which accounts for about 50 to 70 percent of TEE, is thought to decrease about one to two percent per decade. That is, after a person reaches 20 years old, daily energy expenditure decreases about 150 calories per decade. The decline is probably due to decreased muscle mass (which is highly metabolically-active) and increased fat mass (which is relatively metabolically-inactive)."

    So, this says about 150 calories decrease per decade, meaning 20-something to 50-something, say 60 (me) is maybe 500 calories/day. I wonder though how much this applies to constant all-day, but fairly modest, exercise like when long distance hiking? My 60-year-old muscles are certainly starting to atrophy and are getting smaller, but assuming we hike at the same total weight, we're both doing the same actual physical work going up and don those PUD's all day on the AT, seems like your younger, larger muscles would be more efficient than mine, hence I would actually burn more for the same work.

    Who knows, I certainly don't, but in any case, you make a very good point. So, maybe my carefully measured 4000 cal/day average (including town stops) ain't that far different from your claimed 5000 cal/day after all. I'll shut up now, I promise.

  11. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seattleboatguy View Post
    I'm an older hiker, and my doctor is pestering me to lower my cholesterol. If you were concerned about cholesterol levels, what (if anything) would you change in your trail diet?
    I think your doctor needs to catch up with the times. I believe that cholesterol levels is more of a nutrition problem. Look at grass fed cows vs grain fed cows in terms of cholesterol. Grain fed has much higher omega 6 and higher cholesterol. Grain products plus lack of proper nutrition makes you arteries hard and raises cholesterol. Cholesterol is your body's spackling compound for hard arteries.

    Doors the high pressure side of your water system get clogged? The old school of thought here does not make logical sense.

    Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

  12. #92
    Clueless Weekender
    Join Date
    04-10-2011
    Location
    Niskayuna, New York
    Age
    65
    Posts
    3,876
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seattleboatguy View Post
    I'm an older hiker, and my doctor is pestering me to lower my cholesterol. If you were concerned about cholesterol levels, what (if anything) would you change in your trail diet?
    Are you already an active hiker, or do you aspire to be one?

    I found that the best thing I ever did for my blood numbers was: get back to hiking after too many years away from it. Improved weight, cholesterol, HDL, ... tremendously, with no other lifestyle changes. I call it the "keep hiking and eat what I damned please" plan, and my doc says I'm doing something right.
    I always know where I am. I'm right here.

  13. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    04-26-2016
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Age
    34
    Posts
    63
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by colorado_rob View Post
    Interesting point about the age thing, you're certainly right that 20-somethigns are the single largest demographic, though there are sure a lot of us old farts too (what's missing are the 30-40's folks).

    So, does metabolism actually decrease with age? Probably, but not a whole lot. Here's a quote from an article:

    "A study evaluating total energy expenditure (TEE) – the sum of calories burned from the basal metabolic rate (metabolism), the energy required to digest and absorb food, and physical activity – confirmed what most people already know: energy expenditure decreases with age. Basal metabolic rate, which accounts for about 50 to 70 percent of TEE, is thought to decrease about one to two percent per decade. That is, after a person reaches 20 years old, daily energy expenditure decreases about 150 calories per decade. The decline is probably due to decreased muscle mass (which is highly metabolically-active) and increased fat mass (which is relatively metabolically-inactive)."

    So, this says about 150 calories decrease per decade, meaning 20-something to 50-something, say 60 (me) is maybe 500 calories/day. I wonder though how much this applies to constant all-day, but fairly modest, exercise like when long distance hiking? My 60-year-old muscles are certainly starting to atrophy and are getting smaller, but assuming we hike at the same total weight, we're both doing the same actual physical work going up and don those PUD's all day on the AT, seems like your younger, larger muscles would be more efficient than mine, hence I would actually burn more for the same work.

    Who knows, I certainly don't, but in any case, you make a very good point. So, maybe my carefully measured 4000 cal/day average (including town stops) ain't that far different from your claimed 5000 cal/day after all. I'll shut up now, I promise.
    Energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate depends a lot on the amount of lean body mass a person holds. Lean body mass declines with age(unless a person is actively working to maintain it).

    A 20 something might hold 150-160lbs of lean body mass without much effort while a 50 year old would be looking at a 25-40% decline from that number with a resulting similar 25-40% decline in their energy expenditure. Not everyone though. But i think that's where the main metabolic discrepancy comes from, a overall decline in skeletal muscle mass as we age.

  14. #94
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-28-2007
    Location
    Georgia and Hawaii
    Posts
    18,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    ^^^ I have experiemented with all sorts of carbs from pure sugar to the most complex of the complex. I have not experienced a crash from any of it but it is likely do to moving continuously and metering in the calories on going. I have seen reports from several other mile mirage hikers that talk about the crash and burn.
    What all are you metering in? Is it pretty much a large amount of maltodextrin you're regularly flooding your blood stream with on those back to back to back 40+ mile days over 10-14 hr/day hiking durations?

    Quote Originally Posted by colorado_rob View Post
    Seems like we all really do process carbs/sugars quite differently. I definitely peak and crash quickly if I eat a lot of soft carbs/sugars at once, others obviously do not.

    So, since I do peak/crash myself, I simply meter my sugar intake while on the trail, nibbling on sugars nearly constantly with a pocket full of jelly beans or M&M's, crakers or whatever, maybe to the tune of about ~150 calories per hour, something like that. This keeps up my hiking energy all day perfectly. This is another reason I have never done the "lunch" thing, even in "civilian" life off the trail. Basically, some of us are meal-eaters, others of us are grazers.

    By the way: that maltodextrine (sp?) stuff is amazing; quickest blood-sugar boost available, I believe. I use it in topping out on big peaks, I eat a pack of shot blocks (200 cal) with 1000 feet to go, they are like a jet-pack…
    I rarely ever need a fast acting artificial sweetener boost from a gel or other sugary food because I aim to never allow myself to get into such a deficient energy state. There are better ways to keep up energy than heavily depend on a highly processed quick acting quick crashing artificial sweetener as maltodextrin OR SUGAR to keep up energy levels particularly over the long term such as on multi day backpacking trips. We can just as well be mindful to meter slower burning LONGER ENERGY LASTING less processed complex carbs in WHOLE FOODS that contain a wider spectrum of nutrients and have our bodies be provided energy by burning good fats.

    The artificial sweetener Maltodextrin and gels containing it as the primary ingredient does get into the blood EXTREMELY quickly AS DOES REFINED SIMPLE SUGAR though acting a bit differently in some ways. Maltodextrin gets into the blood stream so fast as a result of having a higher rating on the Glycemic Index than raw sugar. It provides a blood sugar jolt…that has to be quickly and regularly addressed to maintain it to avoid a quickly ensuing energy crash! What might the complexity and consequences be of attempting to maintain this?

    The energy provides a quick pick me up as you say CR for possibly getting up that last 1000 ft to a summit where at the top you're possibly crashing by sitting around enjoying the view OR under the scenario of a several hr race OR strenuous short duration workout(NOT the kind of sustained long duration of multi day backpacking) consuming several gels for convenience CONSTANTLY CEASELESSLY metering IN MORE as Malto says to avoid the crash. BUT the quick burst of polysaccharide(sugar) energy is short lived! People's energy crashes more readily with maltodextrin use. Maltodextrin consumption is a spin off of a highly processed highly concentrated sugar consumption process well known but tweaked. The processing and consequences of assimilating maltodextrin are actually quite uniform across a broad spectrum of maltodextrin gel users - quick energy high followed by a rather quick energy valley. You're on a energy roller coaster. That's what generally happens. Gel manufacturers know this. This is why virtually all maltodextrin containing gels state to consume a maltodextrin gel about 15 mins before the quick energy (rocket fuel) needed AND THEN CONSUMING ABOUT 2 MORE GELS EVERY HR TO AVOID THE ENERGY CRASH. If one is to avoid the crash as directed THAT'S A DAMN LOT OF MALTODEXTRIN TO CONSUME in a 12 hr hiking day! That's a darn lot of sugar your body is contending with having who knows what consequences on systems like the gastrointestinal tract! AND, attempting to meter in the quick acting energy from maltodextrin containing gels with other slower burning complex carbs and fats in trail foods over long(Not done in a day) backpacking durations can get complex to accomplish sustained energy. That's why I don't consume maltodextrin as a constant.

    Less regular sugary food like substances need, less meticulous metering of maltodextrin gels, and incorporating gels into other trail snack foods in a long hiking day long duration backpacking trip, and less potential for energy valleys grazing regularly with slower burning complex carbs from real food. My idea is TO NEVER get into such a low energy state to begin with that I need to consume an artificial rocket fuel sugar for a quick burst of energy where I then have to contend with a quickly ensuing energy crash. We have better ways to allow for energy needs than heavily relying regularly on sugar highs.

  15. #95
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10-29-2014
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Age
    39
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Hello everyone! Been here a long time and want to thank everyone for all the great information you have taught me and others. I've only walked yards of the AT during family trips to Gatlinburg as a child and have been intrigued ever since. Now 35, life happened and getting to even do some section hiking is going to be a while. Looking forward to that day. Until then I will keep learning and walking the local woods.

    Really love this topic and have enjoyed the conversation. Fat has gotten a bad wrap over the years because...well its call fat! Fat does not make you fat. The hormone insulin makes you fat. Whenever you eat carbs (sugars and grains), the pancreas puts out insulin either way to get the sugar out of the blood and start storing it in fat cells. Great book titled Why We Get Fat by Gary Tuabes does a much better job than I of explaining. Actually fat is a much....much better source of energy for your body and brain you just have to get through the "crash" of all the glucose/fructose being gone from your blood. If you pretty much eliminate your carbs to leafy green vegetables your liver will then start producing ketones, putting your body in a state of ketosis, which is the ultimate source of energy not only for your body but brain. Please don't confuse ketosis with the serious condition of ketoacidosis. Many of your ultra marathon runners usually rely just on ketones as their energy source so I think that would be much more stress on your body! I eat a lot of fat in my diet, moderate protein, and low carbs. Never a whole stick....but butter in most things because I want a 2-1 ratio of fat to protein. Another good source of fat that could be used on the trail I didn't see mentioned is MCT oil (Medium Chain Triglyceride).

    Also saw some worries about cholesterol mentioned. Cholesterol has also gotten a crummy wrap over the years. Your body makes about 2000 grams a day because we need it to survive. There is a lot of research now focusing on inflammation (caused by carbs) as the source of heart disease and other neurological disorder like Alzhemiers. Years ago cholesterol was at the scene of the crime holding the gun and it quickly became the enemy. Now research is moving towards the combination of cholesterol and inflammation. Again some good reads on this would be Cholesterol Clarity by Jimmy Moore and Grain Brain by David Perlmutter.

    Anyways.....again thanks for all the wisdom....great stuff here and have enjoyed the reading.

    Cheers!

  16. #96
    Registered User Venchka's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-20-2013
    Location
    Upper East Side of Texas
    Age
    75
    Posts
    8,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Connie View Post
    I think ramen is particularly damaging to health, because the oil easily gets rancid: even a little rancidity is harmful to health and nutrition.

    Whenever a hiker says they are relying on ramen, I can pretty much know they are gorging food in town. Nevertheless, they never catch up with their nutritional needs because rancidity of oils or fats interferes with nutrients in other food items. It is a lose - lose situation.

    In fact, ramen was a WWII post-war "invention" to have "the public" "feel full" before there were agricultural food crops available again.

    Udon noodles are better.



    Old. Slow. "Smarter than the average bear."
    Eddie Valiant: "That lame-brain freeway idea could only be cooked up by a toon."
    https://wayne-ayearwithbigfootandbubba.blogspot.com
    FlickrMyBookTwitSpaceFace



  17. #97
    Registered User Venchka's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-20-2013
    Location
    Upper East Side of Texas
    Age
    75
    Posts
    8,428

    Default

    Grrrr.....

    Stupid phone keyboard.
    I was trying to discard all but the last sentence and add:

    I have been saying that for some time. Nobody pays any attention.
    Specifically, the Japanese noodles made in Australia. They "cook" in a few minutes, taste great and are good for you.
    Nobody needs Ramen.

    Wayne


    Old. Slow. "Smarter than the average bear."
    Eddie Valiant: "That lame-brain freeway idea could only be cooked up by a toon."
    https://wayne-ayearwithbigfootandbubba.blogspot.com
    FlickrMyBookTwitSpaceFace



  18. #98

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,869
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    People like ramen....because its precooked it cooks fast .
    But so is minute rice...hint hint.

    The big problem with Ramen, is its very bulky for the few calories. Health aspects aside. A brick has a lot of air space in it.

  19. #99
    Registered User ChuckT's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-17-2013
    Location
    Cocoa, FL
    Age
    75
    Posts
    828

    Default

    "Japanese noodles made in Australia". ???
    Could you share some specific brands that might be available in the continental US?

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
    Miles to go before I sleep. R. Frost

  20. #100
    Registered User DownEaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-15-2017
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Age
    65
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daveiniowa View Post
    How about too much sodium? Any one getting too much sodium on the trail?
    "Too much sodium" is a nutritional concern based on conjecture, not science. See here.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •