Sign in or 
Location: POD (Philosophy Of Disciplines)
Discussion: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this|
skphuan |
Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 9 2008, 8:39 PM EDT
This thread is purely for posts based on articles. Reiterating the guidelines on LMS, pls ID yourself and keep to 4 posts; this means you need to think about what you are writing before you click "Post".
0
out of
19 found this valuable.
Do you?
Keyword tags:
None
|
weiyang3j |
1. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 11 2008, 9:15 AM EDT
Caffeine has been defined as a drug by numerous sources as it is a substance which stimulates the central nervous system to increase cognitive and physical performance. I personally agree with the definition of caffeine as a drug because i believe that anything manufactured or processed outside the body to be consumed to boost performance of any sort is a drug.Cognitive abilities have be proven to be improved through the use of caffeine. (http://www.kidshealth.org/teen/drug_alcohol/drugs/caffeine.html) I agree with Jie Jun's point that caffeine should be taken in moderation as excess abuse of caffeine can cause: * Restlessness * Anxiety * Irritability * Muscle tremors * Sleeplessness * Headaches * Nausea, diarrhea or other gastrointestinal problems * Abnormal heart rhythms (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/caffeine/NU00600). The main ethical issue regarding caffeine use now is the use of caffeine by sportsmen to boost and enhance their performance during sports. It is proven that caffeine boosts athletic performance (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7550260). Since caffeine is considered a drug, i believe that the use of caffeine before competitions should be banned so as to maintain fair competition 1 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
leonheng |
2. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 11 2008, 9:48 AM EDT
Consider an implication arising from results of studies which show caffeine enhances cognitive performance (task switching, intuition, etc ... read article on LMS). Do you think caffeine should be used to enhance cognitive performance (are you for or against it)? Jusitfy your position in light of an ethical or social issue.This is the actual question that we are suppose to discuss for those who are unsure. Also, this thread is the one and only thread that should be used for discussion on this topic and post should only be part of the four that you are allowed. -Leon- 5 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
skphuan |
3. Should caffeine be used to enhance cognitive performance? Justify.
Mar 11 2008, 11:01 PM EDT
Thanks to Leon for helping to post the focus of our discussion. Consider an implication arising from results of studies which show caffeine enhances cognitive performance (unfair advantage in competitions due to advantage in enhanced task switching, intuition, etc ... read article on LMS). Do you think caffeine should be used to enhance cognitive performance (are you for or against it)? Jusitfy your position in light of an ethical or social issue (fairness, unequal access, etc). 0 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
leonheng |
4. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 12 2008, 3:31 AM EDT
Results of recent studies show that caffeine enhances cognitive performance. The primary effect of caffeine on cognitive performance is that it “improves tasks switching performance by enhancing anticipatory processing such as task set updating”(http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/505580/description#description) This basically means that caffeine improves our ability to anticipate probable situations and thereby allows us to switch from task to task more effectively An implication that arises from this finding is whether caffeine should be considered a drug since it enhances our performance just like any other performance enhancing drug, and if so should it be banned in competitions involving tasks switching and other similar skills. First, let me clarify the term “performance enhancing drug”. Drugs have been a controversial topic for many years due to their ability to improve performance, be it physically or mentally. Recently, Olympic gold medalist Marion Jones had her achievements revoked when she was found to be consuming performance enhancing substances before meets, giving her a significant advantage over her opponents. This incident epitomizes the whole controversy surrounding the use of performance enhancing drugs. Taking a performance enhancing drug is a way of giving you an added advantage over another competitor, and increasing your chances of winning. In the spirit of competition, competitors who have each poured out blood and sweat to have a chance of winning are desperate to reach the light at the end of the tunnel. This strong desire to reach that goal leads to them using drugs. However, for these drugs to be rightly banned in competitions there has to be a valid reason. Due to the lack of space, I will continue this discussion in my next post.
2
out of
5 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
leonheng |
5. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 12 2008, 3:32 AM EDT
Continuing from my previous post, I personally feel that if giving yourself an added advantage in competitions is disallowed, then competitors should be made to wear the same shoes, clothes and even consume the same foods before the race as all of these products are made to provide athletes with the best equipment so that they can be a cut above the rest. Shouldn’t better shoes and healthier foods be considered performance enhancing products too? Since sportsmen are given the freedom to choose their running shoes, why shouldn’t they be given the same freedom to use performance enhancing drugs? Therefore I feel that drugs should not be banned solely based on its ability to improve one’s performance. Every athlete should have his or her own right in choosing how he or she wants to improve themselves, be it using drugs or buying better shoes. In this light, coffee should be considered a drug as according to the online dictionary, a drug is “a chemical substance that affects the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and often addiction”. However it should be allowed in competitions involving task switching or similar activities. Contestants would then have a choice to take or not to take coffee if they think that coffee helps them perform better or otherwise. This not only creates a fair platform for competition, it also increases the standard of the competition as the questions can be made harder. Therefore, my stand is that coffee is a performance enhancing drug and does have its side effects like any other of its kind. However, relating to the ethical issue of fair competition, I feel that coffee, should be allowed in competitions as it is a form of enhancing your ability to learn, just like taking vitamins to improve your state of mental health. This would allow every contestant to have more freedom in how they want to enhance their performance.
1
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
evilavatar |
6. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 12 2008, 8:11 AM EDT
Caffeine is a psychoactive stimulant that has the effect of temporarily warding off drowsiness and restoring alertness. As brought up by Leon, caffeine enhances cognitive performance by improving task switching. As such, can we classify caffeine as a drug? A drug is a substance that affects the structure or function of our body. A drug, in this case, is used to optimize and enhance our performance in competitions, giving us a direct edge over our opponents. However, I feel that caffeine should not be constituted as a drug; rather, it should be classified under nutrition as caffeine does not have a negative effect on its user as opposed to drugs.Now, let me get onto the ethics of using caffeine. It is a known fact that everyone is unique and response to stimulation varies from individual to individual. Caffeine is just like food. We cannot control how one’s body reacts to a particular kind of food. With the same amount of protein intake, Person A may have bigger muscles than Person B. We cannot ensure that the effect of nutrition is the same for everyone. Hence, should we ban those who have the most optimum response from competition? The obvious answer is no. The same goes for caffeine; certain people may benefit from the stimulation provided by caffeine and utilize it, giving them the full edge in the competition. Although it may seem unfair, it is impractical to ban caffeine from competitions, as the paranoia of keeping every variable similar for the competition is next to impossible.The same goes for banning Kenyan runners from cross country competitions. Kenyan runners have slim, long legs which require less energy to swing and they also have a higher concentration of an enzyme in skeletal muscle that spurs high lactate turnover and low lactate production. Can we ban Kenyan runners due to their body structure? Since it is way beyond human means to control the varied response of each individual, caffeine should not be banned from competitions. David 0 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
SamOng |
7. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 12 2008, 11:35 AM EDT
Caffeine is a bitter white alkaloid commonly found in tea, coffee, and some other beverages that makes you feel more active and used predominantly as a mild stimulant. Cognition refers to the process of establishing and processing information in humans. A drug is defined as an illegal substance, which people take to feel happy, relaxed or excited. Caffeine is found in daily beverages such as coffee, tea and even Coca-Cola. Almost everyone consumes these beverages on a daily basis. How can caffeine be considered as an illegal drug? Hence, caffeine is definitely not a drug because it is legal. However, some people inject excessive amounts of caffeine into their body with the intention of boosting their cognitive performance before a competition, thus giving them an unfair advantage over the other competitors. This can be viewed as consuming drugs. On the other hand, caffeine also has its benefits. In the medical field, a number of studies have shown that caffeine intake reduces the risk of developing Parkinson's disease. In addition, another study pointed out that caffeine, in the form of coffee, significantly reduces the risk of heart diseases. Caffeine improves short-term memory and speeds up reaction times for task switching. If one was to take coffee before an exam, it cannot be deemed as cheating or unfair. Hard work has to be put in before achieving success. The amount of effort put in is reflective on your results, not the amount of coffee one consumes. Studies show that caffeine increases activities in the brain and modulates a higher brain function through its effects on distinct areas of the brain. Overall, caffeine reduces the risk of diseases, improves ones’ memory and is not considered to be a drug. “Caffeine takes a special place, being a cognitive enhancer, stimulant, widely available, socially acceptable and relatively safe.” (www.enhanceproject.org/documents/Cognitive%20Enhancement%20Tech%20Review.pdf) 2 out of 15 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
DerrickLim |
8. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 13 2008, 10:37 PM EDT
As the others have pointed out, caffeine is considered a drug and i agree. Caffeine(present in coffee) is completely absorbed by the stomach and small intestine within 45 minutes of ingestion.In healthy adults, caffeine's half-life is approximately 3–4 hours.(the time required for the body to eliminate one-half of the total amount of caffeine consumed at a given time)The Food Standards Agency has recommended that pregnant women should limit their caffeine intake to less than 300 mg of caffeine a day – the equivalent of four cups of coffee a day. A higher intake may be associated with miscarriage.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine)Many people have experienced positive temporary effects from drinking coffee. However, from my personal experience, coffee does not have much of a positive effect on me. I started drinking coffee as a child and maybe that is a reason as to why i do not see the positive effects anymore, even if i take a mild dosage(not overdose). When i drink coffee, i do not seem to be more active. In fact, i feel sleepy instead of awake. However, i still drink coffee ocasionally as it is rather hard to beat the addiction. Caffeine is said to have different effects to different people and i think that this is true, taking in mind my case. 0 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
DerrickLim |
9. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 13 2008, 10:44 PM EDT
continuition from my last post: Some people are more sensitive to caffeine than others. Many individuals can drink several cups of coffee with no effects, while others feel the effects of just one cup. (http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/HGIC4152.htm). Therefore caffeine is counted as a drug as it affects bodily functions, be it positive or negative. In the case of an atheletic event, i agree with leon. Every athelete has the right to improve themselves. They get to choose their foods, clothes, shoes, etc. So why not choose their own drugs? Afterall, if they were to test the atheletes based on their true strength, they would need to be put into the same conditions and fed the same food, wear the same clothes, shoes, etc. This would be a big hassle to the atheletes as well as the programme planners.
1
out of
8 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
NeoTheChosen |
10. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 4:21 AM EDT
Similar to what has already been said, I personally believe that caffeine is a drug because it is a substance alien to the body that alters normal bodily functions. Caffeine basically improves our cognitive operations, causing us to have faster reactions, enhanced alertness and wakefulness, and sometimes even less errors. Therefore, the question is whether it is ethical to use caffeine, which is a drug, to purposefully improve "anticipatory process in task switching".My answer is undoubtedly a 'YES'. If caffeine can help to improve one's well being and allow one to perform better in society, why not? As far as I know, unlike harmful drugs such as heroine, caffeine is not harmful at all to the human body. That is of course if not taken in excess. Though constant consumption of products containing caffeine may lead to a sort of addiction, where the consumer feels that he must constantly take the product to feel good, this addiction is weak in most cases and can be easily overcome. Take me for example. When I was in Primary 6 I had to constantly drink coffee every night in order to stay awake to study for the upcoming PSLE. I temporarily got "addicted" to coffee as I could not study or do anything that requires concentration without drinking coffee. However, when the PSLE was over I started to cut down on coffee because I realised that I did not need it as much anymore. In about a month's time I completely dropped the "addiction" of coffee and only drank occasionally (once in 1-2 week). This is never the case in harmful drugs, whereby the consumer will feel terribly sick if he does not take the drug. Furthermore, unlike harmful drugs which are illegal, there are no laws surrounding that of caffeine. Therefore, if caffeine is a drug which is legal, not harmful and available to the public, that can help enhance physical and mental well being, why shouln't it be used to enhance performance? Gareth Neo (5) 7 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
tanjyr |
11. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 4:54 AM EDT
Should caffeine be banned before any competition? Well in my opinion, it should not. Caffeine has been shown in many scientific studies to improve cognition as well as lowering perception of effort, warding off drowsiness and increasing alertness by stimulating the central nervous system. “Well-controlled laboratory studies involving running or cycling after taking placebo or 3-13 mg caffeine/kg body weight 1 hour before exercise have shown that caffeine improves endurance by prolonging time to exhaustion” [http://www.extension.iastate.edu/nutrition/supplements/caffeine.php]. This shows that caffeine not only aids in mental activities but also aids in physical activities. It can be seen that caffeine obviously aids in physical performance in athletic events. However, caffeine is probably as much a “drug” as chicken essence which, according to studies, also enhances cognitive ability [http://nutriweb.org.my/publications/mjn009_1/mj n9n1_art3.pdf]. Does that mean that chicken essence should be banned before activities such as examinations as well as competitions? In addition, as tuition also gives the student an unfair advantage over those who do not go for tuition, should tuition also be banned then? These are among the other objects and activities in daily life which gives people a so called unfair advantage over others. Many activities as well as food products affect one's ability to perform in various activities and it might be said that these give each person an unfair advantage. If caffeine should be banned then all these products and activities should also be banned. Even schools give unfair advantages, like some students going to IP rather than the Express streams which teach differently and thus the students in the IP receive an unfair advantage over that of the Express. Doesn't this constitute as being performance enhancing? Thus if caffeine is banned for its aiding in performance in various areas then shouldn’t these programmes be banned as well?
4
out of
13 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
NeoTheChosen |
12. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 5:37 AM EDT
Of course, consuming caffeine for competition of physical and mental ability brings about a whole new set of ethical arguments. Is it fair if one competitor takes caffeine to boost his mental and physical state whilst another competitor does not? Theoretically, an ideal competition is one whereby all factors involved are constant variables. The only independent variable are the competitors themselves. In such a competition, the competitors will be subject to exacty the same treatment, including same clothing, same food consumption, same footwear, same orientation etc. This ensures that the competition is purely fair. However, we know that such an ideal competition does not exist in the real world. Competitors are allowed to choose their own racquets, running shoes, clothing as well as food and drinks. Therefore, is it fair if one competitor decides to drink coffee before a competition whilst another competitor does not? Well, yes of course! In fact, it is the competitors fault if he decides to be at a disadvantage by not drinking coffee. Furthermore, just like what Derrick said, some people have adverse reactions to coffee and feel that they will do better without coffee. Therefore, even if it is ideal that all competitors do not take coffee, it is not ethically wrong for a competitor to take coffee. I only feel that a competition is unfair when illegal drugs not readily available to the public have been taken by one competitor and not another. Though these drugs will provide a temporary boost in physical and mental abilities, in the long run they are usually harmful to the body and that's why its illegal. Taking illegal drugs in a competition is not ethical because: 1) You're breaking the law. 2) You're not adhering to the rules and regulations of the competition. 3) You're doing harm unto yourself by taking these harmful drugs. 4) You have a really big advantage over other competitors who cannot legally match this advantage. 4 out of 6 found this valuable. Do you? |
Jonathanlow |
13. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 8:26 AM EDT
In pharmacology, Dictionary.com defines a drug as "a chemical substance used in the treatment, cure, prevention, or diagnosis of disease or used to otherwise enhance physical or mental well-being." According to such a definition, coffee which increases the capacity for mental or physical labor therefore is considered a drug.Drugs have a purpose, for example morphine is used medically to relieve pain, however there are people who abuse and misuse it which lead to addiction. Caffeine also can be dangerous when overused; a person would suffer from a wide range of unpleasant physical and mental conditions including nervousness, muscle twitching and headaches. Caffeine like heroin has its share of abusers who use it like any other stimulant but I don’t think it should be banned because unlike drugs such as morphine, caffeine is not addictive and thus lives won’t get ruined because of it. Regarding the ethic issue of using “drugs” in a competition, I believe that athletes should be given free rein to try and optimize what they are trying to do by for example using certain shoes. Therefore caffeine should be legal in competitions as it is up to the athlete whether he wants to use it to try and improve himself, also unlike other performance improving drugs it does not give some imbalance edge over others nor does it produce harmful side effects. 0 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
coldwindz |
14. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 8:31 AM EDT
Caffeine is a central nervous system stimulant, having the effect of temporarily warding off drowsiness and restoring alertness. It is definitely classified as a drug as it is a psychoactive substance, but unlike most other psychoactive substances, it is legal and unregulated in nearly all jurisdictions. In North America, 90% of adults consume caffeine daily. By Central Narcotics Bureau's standards, a drug is any substance that alters normal bodily functions and can result in an addiction. Caffeine is guilty of both as it alters normal brain functions after being metabolised in the liver and reports have shown that caffeine can indeed result in an addiction after repeated and frequent consumption (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6354232).If caffeine can help to improve one's performance in the exams and society, why not? An array of studies found that caffeine could have nootropic effects, inducing certain changes in memory and learning. In one study, caffeine was added to rat neurons in vitro. The dendritic spines (a part of the brain cell used in forming connections between neurons) taken from the hippocampus (a part of the brain associated with memory), grew by 33% and new spines formed. After an hour or two, however, these cells returned to their original shape (http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12355000/pdf/caffeine.PDF). Another study showed that human subjects—after receiving 100 milligrams of caffeine—had increased activity in brain regions located in the frontal lobe, where a part of the working memory network is located, and the anterior cingulum, a part of the brain that controls attention. In essence, focused thought coupled with caffeine consumption increases mental performance. The enhanced mental performance might just aid the development of an invention or research that will ultimately benefit mankind. I will address the ethical issues involved in my next post. Ng Qin Xiang (18) 12 out of 15 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
coldwindz |
15. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 9:07 AM EDT
Does caffeine really pose an ethical issue? Coffee is a common beverage consumed in the world and is easily available to people from all walks of life. Whilst it's true that caffeine raises cognitive performance (eg. task switching), consuming it will not disproportionately improve your mental performance as unlike other stimulants such as Modafinil (Provigil) it is a non-controlled substance that is readily available to the public and not only the rich and privileged. Like what Gareth has pointed out, it is in fact the competitor's fault if he decides to be at a disadvantage by not drinking coffee. And with every stimulant, there are Pros and Cons to it - an acute overdose of caffeine, usually in excess of 250 milligrams, can result in a state of central nervous system over-stimulation called caffeine intoxication and along with added efficacy in mental and cognitive processes, caffeine has vasoconstricting effects attached.Taking caffeine before the exam might help you focus better - this is not unfair to the other candidates sitting for the paper as everyone has access to caffeine (readily present in tea and coffee) and it does not give a disproportionate advantage to the candidate as caffeine has mild cognitive enhancement effects that are short and temporary lasting only a while after being metabolised; after an hour or two, the effects are said to disappear (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/472473.stm). It must be recognised that science is not "fool-proof" - use of such agents to improve normal cognitive performance may, for at least some people, prove to be a Faustian bargain in which the consumer will pay with the emergence of malign neurobehavioural effects (http://www.minddisorders.com/Br-Del/Caffeine-related-disorders.html) - it is ultimately your own choice and decision at the end of the day. It should also be noted that caffeine exists in impure and minute amounts in the coffee powder we buy. Ng Qin Xiang (18) 13 out of 14 found this valuable. Do you? |
samuelanonymous |
16. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 9:19 AM EDT
My first post was at http://39zephaniah.wetpaint.com/thread/1226307/POD+discussion?offset=29
0
out of
12 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
samuelanonymous |
17. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 10:05 AM EDT
Here I would like to respond to some of the posts above, especially those which define caffeine, and therefore coffee as a drug. Jonathan's definition from Dictionary.com is simply inadequate as many things can help to enhance physical and mental well-being. Many people take vitamins and other health supplements, to improve their physical well-being. I don't think these can be considered drugs. Qin Xiang's definition from the CNB is more specific, as it says that drugs have to be addictive, and alter normal bodily function. Again, many things can be addictive to different people. I think the most important part of the definition would be to state that drugs are can harm the body in both the short and long term. That definition would include heroin and other recreational drugs, but not caffeine. I fully agree with Gareth in terms of his view that caffeine is not as addictive as other drugs, which has resulted in its legality in most countries. However, I would like to extend this point to other performance-enhancing substances as mentioned in my previous post. Those are not addictive either, and should not be banned based on the same reasoning. I would like to point out that caffeine does NOT exist in minute amounts in coffee powder, as it would take just two cups of strong coffee to exceed the requirement that Qin Xiang has stated, 250 milligrams. In addition, other drinks such as Red Bull and Mountain Dew also contain high levels of caffeine. Finally, I would like to commend Qin Xiang's conclusion, that it is ultimately your own choice and decision at the end of the day. Everything we do in life has its own trade-offs. I feel that taking any substance including caffeine is ethical, the question is, would you do it if it harmed you? 0 out of 12 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
SamOng |
18. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 10:43 AM EDT
Responses to Other Posts:Caffeine does not pose any ethical issue. As mentioned by Qin Xiang, caffeine is non-controlled and readily available to the public. It can be found in the form of tea and coffee everywhere including schools. It is a common beverage that people of all races and religions consume. Most importantly, caffeine is legal by the government. I also agree with Ryan’s analogy of the IP and express stream. Nothing in this world is fair. It has appeared in the forum of newspaper many times by people requesting the government to scrap away the Gifted Educational Programme (GEP). It is said to be giving them an unfair advantage because the government is spending too much resources and attention grooming a small group of higher ability students. In conclusion, caffeine does not give one an unfair advantage over others. Ultimately, to take or not to take caffeine depends on your decision. Samuel Ong 0 out of 11 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
tanjyr |
19. RE: Implications on use of caffeine and ethical issues
Mar 14 2008, 10:48 AM EDT
I believe that although Qin Xiang does have a few valid points, it is not necessarily true that every student has "access to caffeine" or any other drug. It is not true that every single person has access to these performance enhancing drugs. Sometimes these drugs are not available due to the lack of funds. Although something is available to the public, it is not something which every single person is able to obtain. For example, richer people may be able to obtain more drugs as well as a larger variety of drugs which may further enhance their cognitive ability, among other abilities, which in turn may also cost more. Thus I would like to point out that there is nothing which is absolutely available to everyone. If everyone has access to a drug which may be BOUGHT, then richer people would most obviously have access to more drugs than poorer people and thus it is not fair. In this case of caffeine, some students might be so poor that even water is a luxury, let alone coffee and tea. Thus, following QX's philosophy, caffeine here would be unethical.However, it must be pointed out that it should not be banned. Those substances are banned because they cause they not only greatly improve performance but also harm the taker greatly. Thus banning it would be in the light of protecting the taker of the drugs. But it is indeed true that it is the athlete's own choice whether to take the drug or not and to suffer the grave side effects. Thus I believe that all the drugs should not be banned and is ethical to be taken at the risk of the athlete. Following up on Leon's example of the athletes choosing their own equipment, it is true that if athletes can choose their own equipment they might as well choose their own drugs, but the drugs should then be put up on a fair playing field where money is no problem, where every single person is able to acquire the drugs they want. Then only then where it is available to everyone is the use of caffeine ethical. 2 out of 13 found this valuable. Do you? |
