Home » STAT+ » Page 24
Tag:

STAT+

Health

Trump Administration Targets Coalition for Health AI Amidst Amazon Withdrawal

by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health
written by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health


Trump Administration Targets Health AI Coalition, Sparking Regulatory Debate

Washington D.C. – The Trump administration is intensifying its scrutiny of the Coalition for Health AI (CHAI),a prominent group comprised of leading technology and healthcare organizations,including google,OpenAI,Microsoft,and the Mayo Clinic. Officials are expressing anxieties that the coalition could potentially establish a restrictive regulatory environment, hindering innovation and competition within the rapidly evolving field of artificial intelligence in healthcare.

Growing Concerns Over Industry Influence

Table of Contents

Health and human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. publicly voiced his opposition too CHAI, labeling it a potential “regulatory cartel” on his social media platform, X, this week. This statement echoed a recently published opinion piece penned by Deputy Health Secretary jim O’Neill and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary, which criticized the industry-led group’s potential influence. the administration asserts that large technology companies may prioritize self-interest over the responsible advancement and deployment of AI in healthcare.

The core of the dispute centers on the fear that CHAI’s regulatory recommendations might create barriers for smaller startups and competitors. Critics argue that such a scenario could stifle innovation and ultimately limit patient access to cutting-edge healthcare solutions. This concern taps into a broader debate about the balance between fostering innovation and ensuring responsible technological advancement.

Shifting Corporate Support

Alongside the public criticism, indications suggest that support for CHAI among some of its key member companies might potentially be waning. While details remain limited, sources indicate a growing internal debate within these organizations regarding the benefits and potential drawbacks of close collaboration with the coalition. This shift could further weaken CHAI’s position as a leading voice in the shaping of AI healthcare policy.

Did You No? The global artificial intelligence in healthcare market is projected to reach $187.95 billion by 2030,according to a report by Grand View Research,highlighting the immense economic and transformative potential of the technology.

The Stakes for AI in Healthcare

The debate surrounding CHAI comes at a critical juncture for artificial intelligence in healthcare. AI technologies are poised to revolutionize diagnostics, treatment plans, drug finding, and patient care. However, realizing this potential requires careful consideration of ethical implications, data privacy concerns, and the need for robust regulatory frameworks.

Pro Tip: Stay informed about the latest developments in AI healthcare regulations by regularly consulting resources from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Organization Role in CHAI Key Focus Area
Google Founding Member AI-powered diagnostics and research
OpenAI Founding Member Generative AI for drug discovery
Microsoft Founding Member Cloud computing and data analytics for healthcare
Mayo Clinic Founding Member Clinical implementation and validation of AI tools

The Evolving Landscape of AI Regulation

The ongoing discussion surrounding CHAI underscores the complexities of regulating emerging technologies. Governments worldwide are grappling with how to strike a balance between promoting innovation and mitigating potential risks. The European Union, for example, is implementing the AI Act, a extensive regulatory framework for artificial intelligence, which emphasizes risk-based assessments and transparency requirements. Similar discussions are underway in other regions,creating a dynamic and evolving landscape for AI governance.

Frequently Asked Questions About AI and Healthcare Regulation

  • What is the primary concern regarding the Coalition for Health AI? The main concern is that the coalition might create regulations that favor large companies and hinder competition from smaller startups.
  • Who is opposing CHAI and why? The Trump administration, led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is opposing CHAI, fearing the creation of a “regulatory cartel.”
  • What impact could these regulations have on patients? Restrictive regulations could potentially limit patient access to innovative AI-powered healthcare solutions.
  • What are the ethical considerations surrounding AI in healthcare? Ethical concerns include data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the potential displacement of healthcare professionals.
  • How is the European Union regulating artificial intelligence? The EU is implementing the AI Act, a risk-based framework emphasizing transparency and accountability.
  • What role does the FDA play in regulating AI-powered medical devices? The FDA is responsible for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of AI-powered medical devices before they can be marketed to the public.
  • What is the projected growth of the AI in healthcare market? The global market is projected to reach $187.95 billion by 2030.

What are your thoughts on the role of industry coalitions in shaping healthcare regulations? Do you believe greater government oversight is necessary to ensure fair competition and protect patient interests? Share your viewpoint in the comments below.


How might teh Trump governance’s increased scrutiny of health AI impact the pace of innovation in the health tech sector?

Trump Administration Targets Coalition for Health AI Amidst Amazon Withdrawal

The Shifting Landscape of Health AI Regulation

the recent withdrawal of Amazon from the Coalition for Health AI (CHAI) has coincided with increased scrutiny from the Trump administration, signaling a potential shift in the regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence in healthcare. This advancement raises critical questions about the future of health tech innovation, data privacy, and the role of government oversight. The administration’s focus appears to be on ensuring AI ethics and preventing potential biases within machine learning algorithms used in medical applications.

Amazon’s Departure and the Coalition’s Response

Amazon’s decision to leave CHAI, a multi-stakeholder group formed to develop best practices for responsible AI development in healthcare, was framed as a strategic realignment. While Amazon cited a desire to focus on internal initiatives, industry analysts suggest concerns over the coalition’s direction and potential regulatory implications may have played a role.

* CHAI’s stated goals include:

* Developing a common framework for AI safety in healthcare.

* Promoting data interoperability and secure data sharing.

* Addressing algorithmic bias and ensuring fairness in AI applications.

* Following Amazon’s exit, CHAI released a statement reaffirming its commitment to its core principles and emphasizing the importance of collaboration between industry, government, and academia.

Trump Administration’s Concerns: A Deep Dive

The Trump administration has consistently voiced concerns about the potential risks associated with unchecked AI development. Specifically, the focus has been on:

Data Security and Patient Privacy

The administration is prioritizing the protection of sensitive patient data. Concerns center around the potential for data breaches and the misuse of protected health details (PHI) by AI systems. Increased enforcement of HIPAA regulations and the exploration of new data security standards are anticipated.

Algorithmic Bias and Health Disparities

A key area of concern is the potential for algorithmic bias to exacerbate existing health disparities. Machine learning models trained on biased datasets can perpetuate and even amplify inequalities in healthcare access and outcomes. The administration is exploring mechanisms to audit and mitigate bias in AI-powered diagnostic tools and treatment recommendations.

National Security Implications

The use of AI in healthcare also raises national security concerns, particularly regarding the potential for foreign adversaries to exploit vulnerabilities in healthcare systems. The administration is highly likely to increase scrutiny of AI supply chains and promote the development of secure, domestically-sourced AI technologies.

Potential Regulatory Actions & Impact on Health Tech

Several regulatory actions are being considered, which could significantly impact the health technology sector:

  1. Increased FDA Oversight: The Food and drug Administration (FDA) is expected to expand its oversight of AI-driven medical devices and software as a medical device (SaMD). This could involve stricter pre-market approval requirements and ongoing monitoring of AI performance.
  2. New Data Privacy Regulations: The administration may propose new regulations governing the collection, use, and sharing of patient data by AI systems. These regulations could build upon existing frameworks like HIPAA and perhaps incorporate elements of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
  3. Funding for AI Ethics Research: Increased funding for research into AI ethics,fairness,and accountability is anticipated. This could support the development of tools and techniques for mitigating bias and ensuring responsible AI development.
  4. Executive Orders & Guidance: Expect executive orders and agency guidance clarifying the administration’s position on AI regulation and outlining expectations for industry stakeholders.

Real-World Examples & Case Studies

* IBM Watson Health: The struggles of IBM Watson Health to deliver on its promises in cancer diagnosis serve as a cautionary tale about the challenges of deploying AI in healthcare. Issues with data quality, algorithmic bias, and lack of clinical validation contributed to the project’s difficulties.

* Google’s AI-Powered Dermatology Tool: Google’s development of an AI tool for diagnosing skin conditions highlights the potential benefits of AI in healthcare, but also underscores the need for rigorous testing and validation to ensure accuracy and fairness.

* PathAI’s Diagnostic Solutions: PathAI, a company utilizing AI for pathology, demonstrates successful implementation of AI in healthcare by improving diagnostic accuracy and efficiency.

Benefits of Responsible AI Implementation

Despite the regulatory challenges, responsible AI implementation in healthcare offers significant benefits:

* Improved Diagnostic Accuracy: AI algorithms can analyze medical images and data with greater speed and accuracy than humans, leading to earlier and more accurate diagnoses.

* Personalized Treatment Plans: AI can definitely help tailor treatment plans to individual patients based on their genetic makeup, lifestyle, and medical history.

* Reduced Healthcare Costs: AI can automate administrative tasks, optimize resource allocation, and prevent costly medical errors.

* Enhanced Drug Revelation: AI can accelerate the drug discovery process by identifying potential drug candidates and predicting their efficacy.

Practical Tips for

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Health

Johnson & Immigrant Care: D.C. Emergency Aid Backed

by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health
written by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health

The Fragile State of Public Health Data: Shutdowns, Surveillance, and a Looming Crisis

Nearly one in five Americans lives in a county where critical disease surveillance data went dark during the recent government shutdown, forcing epidemiologists like Caitlin Rivers of Johns Hopkins to manually piece together information from 50 individual state health department websites. This isn’t a one-off event; it’s a stark warning about the vulnerability of our public health infrastructure and a potential harbinger of future crises. The incident underscores a critical need for resilient, decentralized data systems – and a re-evaluation of how we protect access to essential healthcare, including emergency care guaranteed by laws like EMTALA.

The Shutdown Spotlight on Data Gaps

The recent shutdown highlighted a glaring weakness: the CDC’s reliance on consistent funding for its core data collection and dissemination functions. While House Speaker Mike Johnson has affirmed Republicans’ current stance against altering the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which mandates emergency care regardless of immigration status, the broader issue of public health preparedness remains deeply concerning. The fact that a dedicated epidemiologist had to undertake a weekend-long data rescue mission speaks volumes about the fragility of the system.

This isn’t simply about inconvenience; it’s about delayed detection of outbreaks, hampered response efforts, and ultimately, increased risk to public health. The CDC’s National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) is the backbone of our ability to track and respond to infectious diseases. When that system falters, the entire network is compromised. The reliance on state-level data, while valuable, introduces inconsistencies in reporting standards and delays in aggregation, making a national picture difficult to assemble quickly.

EMTALA and the Political Landscape of Emergency Care

Speaker Johnson’s statement regarding EMTALA is a temporary reprieve, but the law has faced increasing scrutiny from some conservative lawmakers who argue it incentivizes illegal immigration. While the current political climate may shield EMTALA from immediate changes, future legislative battles are almost certain. The debate isn’t just about immigration policy; it’s about the fundamental right to emergency medical care and the financial burden placed on hospitals.

Hospitals, particularly those in border states, already operate under significant financial strain. Uncompensated care costs, coupled with rising operational expenses, create a challenging environment. Any attempt to restrict EMTALA’s protections would likely lead to increased rates of preventable deaths and exacerbate existing health disparities. It would also likely trigger legal challenges, further complicating the situation.

The Rise of Decentralized Surveillance

The Rivers’ data rescue effort, while commendable, isn’t a sustainable solution. However, it points towards a potential path forward: a more decentralized and resilient public health surveillance system. Investing in state and local health departments, empowering them with the resources and technology to collect and analyze data independently, and establishing standardized reporting protocols are crucial steps. This doesn’t mean abandoning the CDC, but rather shifting towards a collaborative model where the CDC serves as a central coordinating body, rather than the sole data repository.

Furthermore, exploring innovative technologies like wastewater surveillance – which has proven effective in tracking COVID-19 and polio – can provide early warning signals of outbreaks, supplementing traditional surveillance methods. The CDC itself is investing in wastewater surveillance, recognizing its potential, but broader implementation requires significant infrastructure investment.

Future Implications and the Need for Proactive Investment

The events of the past few weeks are a microcosm of a larger trend: the increasing politicization of public health and the chronic underfunding of essential infrastructure. Future government shutdowns, natural disasters, or emerging infectious diseases will inevitably expose these vulnerabilities again. The cost of inaction far outweighs the cost of proactive investment.

We can anticipate increased pressure on hospitals, particularly in states with limited resources, to provide uncompensated care. This will likely lead to calls for federal assistance and renewed debate over EMTALA. Simultaneously, the demand for robust, real-time public health data will only grow as we face increasingly complex health challenges. The key will be to build a system that is not only technologically advanced but also politically resilient and equitably funded.

What steps can be taken *now* to strengthen public health data infrastructure and ensure access to emergency care for all? The answer lies in prioritizing long-term investment, fostering collaboration between federal, state, and local agencies, and recognizing that public health is not a partisan issue – it’s a matter of national security.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

JLR Resumes Production in UK After Brief Cyberattack Shutdown; Factories Restart Operations on 8th

by James Carter Senior News Editor
written by James Carter Senior News Editor




Jaguar Land Rover Resumes Production Following Cyberattack

Table of Contents

Solihull, UK – Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) has announced the resumption of manufacturing at select facilities, effectively ending a roughly six-week suspension triggered by a important cyber incident.The news, confirmed on October 7th, brings relief to the British automotive sector and signals a step towards recovery for the luxury car manufacturer.

Production Restart Details

Operations began restarting on October 8th, initially focusing on engine and battery production. Critical areas within the vehicle assembly plants, including body and paint shops, have also been brought back online. The company’s primary manufacturing hub in Solihull, Birmingham, is set to resume production of the Range Rover and Range Rover Sport models later this week.

Recognizing the financial strain placed on its supply chain during the shutdown, JLR is proactively implementing a support program. This includes prepayments to select parts suppliers, aiming to alleviate liquidity concerns and ensure a smooth ramp-up of production.

economic Impact and Government Support

The prolonged production halt significantly impacted JLR’s output, with the company operating three UK factories collectively producing approximately 1,000 vehicles daily. Economists had warned of potential repercussions for the broader UK manufacturing landscape. Analysts estimated weekly losses for JLR exceeding £50 million.

in late September, the British government responded by guaranteeing a £1.5 billion loan facility to provide financial backing for affected suppliers. This intervention underscores the strategic importance of JLR and its supporting ecosystem to the UK economy.

Sales Performance and Ongoing Challenges

JLR recently reported a 24.2% decrease in wholesale vehicle sales and a 17.1% decline in retail sales for the July-September quarter. This downturn was attributed not only to the production disruptions caused by the cyberattack but also to the planned discontinuation of older Jaguar models and the impact of tariffs imposed by the United States.

Metric Percentage Change (July-September)
Wholesale Vehicle Sales -24.2%
Retail Vehicle Sales -17.1%

Did You Know? Cyberattacks are increasingly targeting the automotive industry,disrupting supply chains and impacting production. According to a 2024 report by Cybersecurity Ventures, the global cost of cybercrime is projected to reach $10.5 trillion annually by 2025.

Pro Tip: Businesses should regularly update their cybersecurity protocols and invest in robust threat detection systems to mitigate the risk of cyberattacks.

The Rising Threat of Cyberattacks in the Automotive Industry

The automotive sector is facing an escalating number of sophisticated cyber threats. Modern vehicles are increasingly connected, relying on complex software systems for everything from engine control to infotainment. This interconnectedness creates multiple potential entry points for malicious actors. Cyberattacks can range from ransomware attacks that disrupt production to data breaches that compromise sensitive customer information. The financial and reputational damage resulting from such incidents can be substantial.

Supply chain vulnerabilities represent another significant challenge. Automotive manufacturers rely on a vast network of suppliers, each with its own level of cybersecurity preparedness. A breach at a smaller supplier can have cascading effects, disrupting production across the entire value chain. Companies are now prioritizing supply chain security as a critical component of their overall cybersecurity strategy.

Frequently Asked Questions About the JLR Cyberattack

What caused the cyberattack at Jaguar Land Rover?

The specific details of the cyberattack have not been publicly disclosed, but it was understood to be a sophisticated incident that disrupted the company’s IT systems and manufacturing operations.

How long was JLR’s production suspended due to the cyberattack?

Production was suspended for approximately six weeks, beginning in mid-September and resuming on October 8th.

What is JLR doing to support its suppliers affected by the shutdown?

JLR is providing prepayments to selected parts suppliers to help alleviate financial hardship caused by the production halt.

What impact did the production halt have on JLR’s sales figures?

JLR reported significant declines in both wholesale and retail vehicle sales for the July-September period, partially attributed to the production suspension.

How are automotive companies strengthening their cybersecurity defenses?

Automotive firms are investing heavily in threat detection systems, software updates, and enhanced security protocols across their networks and supply chains to mitigate risks.

What are your thoughts on the increasing cyber threats faced by the automotive industry? Share your comments below.


What specific actions did JLR take to contain the cyber incident, and how quickly were they implemented?

JLR Resumes Production in UK after Brief Cyberattack Shutdown; Factories Restart Operations on 8th

Timeline of the JLR Cyberattack & Recovery

On October 7th, 2025, Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) experienced a notable cybersecurity incident that forced a temporary shutdown of production across several of its UK manufacturing facilities. Operations were swiftly halted as a precautionary measure to contain the threat and assess the extent of the data breach. Thankfully, production resumed on October 8th, demonstrating a rapid response and recovery effort.

Here’s a breakdown of the key events:

* october 7th, 2025 (Morning): Initial detection of suspicious activity on JLR’s network.

* October 7th, 2025 (Afternoon): Production suspended at Solihull, halewood, and Castle Bromwich plants. IT systems isolated.

* October 7th – 8th, 2025 (Overnight): Cybersecurity teams worked to identify the source of the attack, mitigate the threat, and restore critical systems.

* October 8th, 2025 (Morning): Production restarts at all affected UK facilities. Ongoing monitoring for further threats.

Impact of the Cyberattack on JLR Production

The JLR cyberattack primarily impacted IT systems, leading to the proactive shutdown of manufacturing lines. While the exact nature of the attack remains under investigation, initial reports suggest a ransomware attack was a strong possibility. The immediate outcome was a disruption to vehicle production,possibly affecting delivery schedules for popular models like the range Rover,Defender,and Jaguar F-Pace.

Specifically, the shutdown affected:

* Solihull Plant: Production of Range Rover, Range Rover Sport, and Defender models.

* Halewood plant: Manufacturing of the Land Rover Finding Sport and Range Rover Evoque.

* Castle Bromwich Plant: Primarily focused on Jaguar vehicles, including the F-Pace.

The financial implications of even a brief production halt can be substantial,encompassing lost output,potential supply chain disruptions,and the cost of remediation. JLR has not yet released a detailed assessment of the financial impact.

JLR’s Response and Cybersecurity Measures

JLR acted swiftly to contain the cyber incident, prioritizing the security of its systems and data. Key steps taken included:

  1. System isolation: Immediately isolating affected IT systems to prevent further spread of the malware.
  2. Incident Response Team Activation: Deploying a dedicated team of cybersecurity experts to investigate and resolve the issue.
  3. Collaboration with Authorities: Working closely with UK law enforcement and cybersecurity agencies, including the National Cyber Security Center (NCSC).
  4. System Restoration: Implementing recovery procedures to restore critical systems and data from backups.
  5. Enhanced Monitoring: Increasing network monitoring and security protocols to detect and prevent future attacks.

JLR has a history of investing in cybersecurity infrastructure, but this incident highlights the evolving threat landscape and the need for continuous vigilance. The company is likely to review and enhance its security measures in the wake of this attack.

The Growing Threat of Cyberattacks in the Automotive Industry

the automotive industry is increasingly becoming a target for cybercriminals. Several factors contribute to this trend:

* Connected Vehicles: Modern vehicles are equipped with sophisticated software and connectivity features, creating potential entry points for hackers.

* Supply Chain Vulnerabilities: Automotive manufacturers rely on complex supply chains, which can be exploited by attackers.

* Data Sensitivity: Vehicles collect vast amounts of data about drivers and passengers, making them attractive targets for data breaches.

* Ransomware Attacks: Automotive companies are vulnerable to ransomware attacks,which can disrupt production and demand large ransom payments.

Recent examples of cyberattacks on automotive manufacturers include incidents affecting Toyota, Honda, and Renault.These attacks underscore the importance of robust cybersecurity

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Health

Speaker Backs Emergency Care for Immigrants

by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health
written by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health

The Looming Healthcare Battle: Why Emergency Care for All is Becoming a Political Flashpoint

Despite claims to the contrary, the debate over healthcare access for undocumented immigrants isn’t about “free health care,” it’s about upholding a decades-old federal law – and a growing financial pressure point for hospitals. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals that accept Medicare funding to provide stabilizing treatment to anyone experiencing a medical emergency, regardless of citizenship status. Now, as political rhetoric intensifies around government funding and border security, this foundational principle is facing unprecedented scrutiny, potentially setting the stage for legal challenges and a reshaping of emergency care access across the nation.

The EMTALA Mandate and the Rising Costs of Uncompensated Care

For years, EMTALA has functioned as a safety net, ensuring that individuals in crisis receive immediate medical attention. However, the financial burden of providing this care, particularly to those without insurance or the means to pay, has steadily increased. Hospitals argue that uncompensated care costs are straining their resources, especially in border states experiencing high volumes of migration. This has fueled calls – primarily from Republican lawmakers – to revisit the interpretation or even repeal EMTALA, framing it as a drain on taxpayer dollars. Vice President Vance’s recent statements, characterizing Democratic funding bills as providing “health care benefits to illegal aliens,” exemplify this narrative.

The core of the disagreement isn’t whether emergency care *should* be provided, but *who* should bear the cost. Currently, hospitals absorb a significant portion of these costs, which are then often passed on to insured patients through higher premiums. This creates a ripple effect throughout the healthcare system. A recent report by the American Hospital Association details the escalating financial pressures facing hospitals due to uncompensated care, highlighting a $76 billion gap in 2022.

Beyond the Shutdown: Potential Legal and Legislative Challenges

The immediate threat of a government shutdown has subsided, but the underlying tensions surrounding EMTALA remain. Several legal scholars suggest that a direct challenge to the law’s application to undocumented immigrants could be forthcoming, potentially arguing that it constitutes an overreach of federal power or an unfunded mandate. Such a case could reach the Supreme Court, with potentially far-reaching consequences.

Furthermore, even without a direct legal challenge, legislative efforts to restrict EMTALA’s scope are likely. Republicans could attempt to attach riders to future funding bills that limit the types of care covered under the law or shift the financial responsibility to states. This could lead to a patchwork of access across the country, with emergency care availability varying significantly depending on location and state policies.

The Impact on Public Health and Hospital Systems

Restricting access to emergency care, even for undocumented immigrants, carries significant public health risks. Untreated medical conditions can worsen, leading to more costly interventions down the line and potentially contributing to the spread of infectious diseases. Moreover, denying care based on immigration status could discourage individuals from seeking medical attention when they need it most, further exacerbating health disparities.

For hospitals, particularly those in border regions, any changes to EMTALA could create operational chaos. They would be forced to navigate complex legal and ethical dilemmas, potentially facing lawsuits and reputational damage. The resulting uncertainty could also deter healthcare professionals from practicing in these areas, further straining already limited resources.

The Future of Emergency Care: A Shift Towards Preventative Strategies?

The current debate highlights a critical need for a more comprehensive and sustainable approach to healthcare access. While the political focus remains on emergency care, a long-term solution requires investing in preventative care and expanding access to affordable health insurance for all. This includes exploring options for providing coverage to undocumented immigrants, either through state-level programs or federal initiatives.

Innovative models of care, such as mobile health clinics and community-based health centers, could also play a crucial role in reaching underserved populations and reducing the burden on emergency departments. Ultimately, addressing the root causes of health disparities and ensuring equitable access to care is not only a moral imperative but also a fiscally responsible strategy.

What steps can policymakers take to balance the financial realities facing hospitals with the ethical obligation to provide emergency care to all? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts
@2025 - All Right Reserved.

Hosted by ByoHosting - Most Recommendeed Webhhosting. For complains, abuse, advertising contact:
[email protected]

Adblock Detected

Please support us by disabling your AdBlocker extension from your browsers for our website.