sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456 
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 17, 2021 1:56:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 5:51:01 GMT
«Nothing to be concerned about»? First of all: the «recipe» is the same no matter where it is produced. And people dying is nothing to you? What I meant was the countries that have suspended the vaccine have said "it cannot be concluded whether there is a link between the vaccine and the blood clots." The EMA says there is "no indication that vaccination has caused these conditions." AstraZeneca Plc on Sunday said it had conducted a review of people vaccinated with its COVID-19 vaccine, and no evidence has been found of an increased risk of blood clots. The review covered more than 17 million people vaccinated in the European Union and United Kingdom. The World Health Organization (WHO) and EMA have joined AstraZeneca in saying there is no proven link. I certainly never meant I am not concerned about people dying. Well, one of the countries (mine) now says it is more likely that the vaccine caused this than that it didn’t! |
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 5:52:07 GMT
And I think it is interesting that the Norwegian National Hospital now says that it is more likely that the vaccine is the cause than that it isn’t. You know, the people who actually have access to all the data. |
|
Enna
Full Member
Posts: 296
Location: The land of the midnight sun
Jan 26, 2016 14:55:35 GMT
|
Post by Enna on Mar 17, 2021 9:24:38 GMT
In my country they looked at the data and said there has actually been less bloot clots than there usually is - so I guess it means the vaccination actually prevents them.
Just kidding of course. 🙂
But we have to accept that there are risks in everything. We can't make a vaccine that would is 100% safe to everyone. It is risk against benefit.
If we look at the numbers, taking birth control pills has much higher risk for a bloot clot than this vaccine. And people still take them.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 11:30:28 GMT
And I think it is interesting that the Norwegian National Hospital now says that it is more likely that the vaccine is the cause than that it isn’t. You know, the people who actually have access to all the data. How did they come to that conclusion ? is there data and scientific evidence to back up their " more likely" decision? How many have received it in Norway? In Britain, where over 11 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine had been administered when these countries started to suspend its use but is far more now— more than any other country even added together— there have been reports of about 11 people developing blood clots after getting a shot. None were proven to have been caused by the vaccine. |
|
sueg
Prolific Pea
Posts: 7,981
Location: Munich
Member is Online
Apr 12, 2016 12:51:01 GMT
|
Post by sueg on Mar 17, 2021 11:37:16 GMT
In my country they looked at the data and said there has actually been less bloot clots than there usually is - so I guess it means the vaccination actually prevents them. Just kidding of course. 🙂 But we have to accept that there are risks in everything. We can't make a vaccine that would is 100% safe to everyone. It is risk against benefit. If we look at the numbers, taking birth control pills has much higher risk for a bloot clot than this vaccine. And people still take them. I agree with you. I think it is good that we look at side effects, but we need to keep it in perspective and consider whether the risks outweigh the benefits. Perhaps a recommendation that people with a history of blood clots shouldn’t receive this vaccine, if there is an alternative, but not stop it for everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 12:25:27 GMT
And I think it is interesting that the Norwegian National Hospital now says that it is more likely that the vaccine is the cause than that it isn’t. You know, the people who actually have access to all the data. How did they come to that conclusion ? is there data and scientific evidence to back up their " more likely" decision? How many have received it in Norway? In Britain, where over 11 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine had been administered when these countries started to suspend its use but is far more now— more than any other country even added together— there have been reports of about 11 people developing blood clots after getting a shot. None were proven to have been caused by the vaccine. 140.000 have been vaccinated, and 2 people have died so far (and approx 1400 have reported side effects, like low platelet count). As to how and why, I’m not a doctor, so I choose to trust those who are. Contrary to what you seem to believe, we actually have doctors, epidemiologists etc etc in Norway too. As long as they can’t say that they are 100% sure it can’t cause strokes, I’m staying far, far away from it. |
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 12:26:48 GMT
In my country they looked at the data and said there has actually been less bloot clots than there usually is - so I guess it means the vaccination actually prevents them. Just kidding of course. 🙂 But we have to accept that there are risks in everything. We can't make a vaccine that would is 100% safe to everyone. It is risk against benefit. If we look at the numbers, taking birth control pills has much higher risk for a bloot clot than this vaccine. And people still take them. I agree with you. I think it is good that we look at side effects, but we need to keep it in perspective and consider whether the risks outweigh the benefits. Perhaps a recommendation that people with a history of blood clots shouldn’t receive this vaccine, if there is an alternative, but not stop it for everyone. None of those who have suffered serious side effects in Norway, had a history of blood clots. They were all healthy and young. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 12:27:19 GMT
In my country they looked at the data and said there has actually been less bloot clots than there usually is - so I guess it means the vaccination actually prevents them. Just kidding of course. 🙂 But we have to accept that there are risks in everything. We can't make a vaccine that would is 100% safe to everyone. It is risk against benefit.If we look at the numbers, taking birth control pills has much higher risk for a bloot clot than this vaccine. And people still take them. Exactly. With 17 million recipients having had this vaccine is like having a clinical trial for that amount of people - totally unheard of for any vaccine ever. Emer Cooke head of the EMA said the EMA was receiving and assessing similar reports related to other coronavirus vaccines in use across Europe. "We are looking at adverse effects associated with all vaccines,” she said during Tuesday’s press conference. Data from the MHRA ( the UK regulator) meanwhile shows that they have received more reports of blood clotting among recipients of the Pfizer vaccine than the AstraZeneca one – the former of which has not been suspended. Up to 28 February, there were 38 reported thromboembolic events from approximately 11.5 million administered doses of the Pfizer vaccine, compared to 30 from more than 11 million AstraZeneca jabs. The equivalent of around one blood clot for every 367,000 vaccines, both figures do not represent cause for concern and are not higher than the risk expected in the general population. The sceptic in me is wondering why the publicity about the AZ and not both? |
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 12:28:26 GMT
In my country they looked at the data and said there has actually been less bloot clots than there usually is - so I guess it means the vaccination actually prevents them. Just kidding of course. 🙂 But we have to accept that there are risks in everything. We can't make a vaccine that would is 100% safe to everyone. It is risk against benefit. If we look at the numbers, taking birth control pills has much higher risk for a bloot clot than this vaccine. And people still take them. I don’t, and never did. My dad almost died from a stroke, and my mom died from it a few months ago. There is no way I’m going near that vaccine. Have at it, the rest of you, but I won’t! |
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Mar 17, 2021 12:29:44 GMT
I have no idea why you guys are so aggressive towards someone who won’t take the risk of this particular vaccine. I’m done with this message board.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 12:32:14 GMT
How did they come to that conclusion ? is there data and scientific evidence to back up their " more likely" decision? How many have received it in Norway? In Britain, where over 11 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine had been administered when these countries started to suspend its use but is far more now— more than any other country even added together— there have been reports of about 11 people developing blood clots after getting a shot. None were proven to have been caused by the vaccine. 140.000 have been vaccinated, and 2 people have died so far (and approx 1400 have reported side effects, like low platelet count). As to how and why, I’m not a doctor, so I choose to trust those who are. Contrary to what you seem to believe, we actually have doctors, epidemiologists etc etc in Norway too. As long as they can’t say that they are 100% sure it can’t cause strokes, I’m staying far, far away from it. I didn't suggest anything of the sort so please don't put words in my mouth or assume what I believe. |
|
|
|
Post by gar on Mar 17, 2021 12:33:49 GMT
I have no idea why you guys are so aggressive towards someone who won’t take the risk of this particular vaccine. I’m done with this message board. Please don't leave. I like your input as another non-American. I don't think anyone intended aggression towards you personally for refusing the vaccine (you have added why you have personal reason to particularly fear strokes) rather were questioning why there are such reports in Norway but nowhere else and what that might mean. |
|
peppermintpatty
Pearl Clutcher
Refupea #1345
Posts: 3,835
|
Post by peppermintpatty on Mar 17, 2021 12:35:04 GMT
I agree with you. I think it is good that we look at side effects, but we need to keep it in perspective and consider whether the risks outweigh the benefits. Perhaps a recommendation that people with a history of blood clots shouldn’t receive this vaccine, if there is an alternative, but not stop it for everyone. None of those who have suffered serious side effects in Norway, had a history of blood clots. They were all healthy and young. Here's the thing, you don't know if you have a condition that makes you prone to blood clots until you actually get one. I had genetic testing years ago for fertility treatments and I have the clotting factor thingy (can't remember what it is called) that makes me more likely to develop one. Completely forgot about it until 2 years after I had knee surgery where I developed DVT 4 weeks post op. It was easily treated but I now have to take baby aspirin and when I have surgeries now, I have to take blood thinners for at least a month after. I did know about the clotting issue but forgot about it until a DVT clot showed up.
I'm not saying that the vaccine didn't cause the clots, it is very likely that it did but the percentage is SO LOW and is below what they deemed as an acceptable risk. But you can't say that they didn't have some sort of underlying condition that made them more susceptible. You don't know you are until you have clots. That's the way it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by hookturnian on Mar 17, 2021 12:39:24 GMT
As far as I'm aware we are expecting some results of the investigation by the EMA on Thursday.
I think that countries did the right thing by halting vaccinations while they worked out whether the incidence of blood clots was coincidence, correlation or causation. At this stage it looks like it is coincidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by compeateropeator on Mar 17, 2021 13:13:21 GMT
I don’t know anyone who has gotten a leaflet, but I’ll not complain. Just happy we were able to get the vaccine so early. while I did plenty of my own research on the vaccine - there was zero info about it at my vaccination appt. wasn’t even handed a pamphlet. It was just too quick, not enough time, for anyone to go over the information with each person as has always been done with my children’s vaccines & even my vaccines in the past. I received my card, a sticker & was told don’t take aspirin or advil for any side affects and that was it. Like I said I’ve been reading up on it since at least December so I knew what I was getting into, but that was my own effort & my own research. There is no ‘informed’ here that I know of. I did talk with my Dr about it at my telehealth appt in January and she said take whichever one I can get so I did It is amazing how different everyone’s vaccination experiences were. When I signed up my parents for their shots on our state website they had both the Pfizer and Moderna information sheets. I printed off both because you did not know what vaccine you would get. When I got my vaccination through my work they had both informational sheets on our intraweb for people to read. When I signed in for my vaccine they asked if I had read/seen the information and had copies there if you wanted them. I had already read them when I printed them for my parents. Our state commissioner of health has said that preliminary reviews of the data released doesn’t necessarily show that the risk for blood clots is any higher with the AstraZeneca vaccine at this time. Our hospital is doing AstraZeneca trials (small, around 300 participants) and they have not had any reactions. Everything has risks and everyone that I know that has received a Covid vaccine has felt that the benefits far out way the risks presented. 40 cases in the millions of doses administered doesn’t seem overly concerning in my non medical opinion and would not sway my decision to receive it, but everyone’s choices and opinions vary. |
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Mar 17, 2021 13:50:54 GMT
while I did plenty of my own research on the vaccine - there was zero info about it at my vaccination appt. wasn’t even handed a pamphlet. It was just too quick, not enough time, for anyone to go over the information with each person as has always been done with my children’s vaccines & even my vaccines in the past. I received my card, a sticker & was told don’t take aspirin or advil for any side affects and that was it. Like I said I’ve been reading up on it since at least December so I knew what I was getting into, but that was my own effort & my own research. There is no ‘informed’ here that I know of. I did talk with my Dr about it at my telehealth appt in January and she said take whichever one I can get so I did It is amazing how different everyone’s vaccination experiences were. When I signed up my parents for their shots on our state website they had both the Pfizer and Moderna information sheets. I printed off both because you did not know what vaccine you would get. When I got my vaccination through my work they had both informational sheets on our intraweb for people to read. When I signed in for my vaccine they asked if I had read/seen the information and had copies there if you wanted them. I had already read them when I printed them for my parents. Our state commissioner of health has said that preliminary reviews of the data released doesn’t necessarily show that the risk for blood clots is any higher with the AstraZeneca vaccine at this time. Our hospital is doing AstraZeneca trials (small, around 300 participants) and they have not had any reactions. Everything has risks and everyone that I know that has received a Covid vaccine has felt that the benefits far out way the risks presented. 40 cases in the millions of doses administered doesn’t seem overly concerning in my non medical opinion and would not sway my decision to receive it, but everyone’s choices and opinions vary. I’m sure to cover themselves there may have been an infirmation sheet on the website I signed up thru, but appointments dissapear so fast it’s a race to get they & schedule one I wasn’t going to stop to find something I’d already researched. But unlike every single other vaccine, including others at that same location, no one spoke to me about risks or gave me the info sheet. I’m not upset by it, I knew what I was getting into. But it did stick out to me as an anomaly as I’d just gotten a different vaccine there 16 days earlier and it was discussed and I was given an info sheet. So it was weird. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 14:41:18 GMT
miominmio, I am so sorry to hear about your parents, sending hugs. I appreciate hearing the perspective from you country . my husband has to be very careful regarding blood clots and is on warfarin, he also has to be vigilent about his blood not becoming too thin either. This is a subject that is so important, so thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 16:50:20 GMT
miominmio , I am so sorry to hear about your parents, sending hugs. I appreciate hearing the perspective from you country . my husband has to be very careful regarding blood clots and is on warfarin, he also has to be vigilent about his blood not becoming too thin either. This is a subject that is so important, so thank you. I would get him to speak to his GP or his regular warfarin nurse if he needs more information @ktc They know his situation far better than any newspaper or any other info out there. |
|
wellway
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,759
Jun 25, 2014 20:50:09 GMT
|
Post by wellway on Mar 17, 2021 16:56:44 GMT
miominmio , I am so sorry to hear about your parents, sending hugs. I appreciate hearing the perspective from you country . my husband has to be very careful regarding blood clots and is on warfarin, he also has to be vigilent about his blood not becoming too thin either. This is a subject that is so important, so thank you. You are asked a few questions by the nurse before you are given the jab and one question is "are you on blood thinners". I don't know what they would do if the answer is yes but they definitely ask. I would talk to his doctor, he may advise it is not prudent to have it. Eta, I'm in the UK, not sure if you are too. |
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Mar 17, 2021 17:04:45 GMT
My MIL should sue. She is 75 and received the AZ vaccine yesterday, before it was approved for use in Canada for people over 64. I know someone else who also received it before it was officially approved. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that anything is wrong with the vaccine, and neither does my MIL. She was happy to take it yesterday, even while knowing that 7 countries had temporarily stopped its use. She is so eager to get out and about and play golf with her friends that she probably would have signed permission to possibly be getting a placebo (joke). She is getting much enjoyment from being able to tell everyone she knows all the details. I’m not sure if you read the link by Dotty, but it looks like it was approved for use for people in Canada over the age of 18 on February 26, 2020, so your MIL’s shot wasn’t problematic since she is definitely in the category it was approved for at the time of her shot. Which is good news! 😀 |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 17, 2021 17:06:46 GMT
And I think it is interesting that the Norwegian National Hospital now says that it is more likely that the vaccine is the cause than that it isn’t. You know, the people who actually have access to all the data. Is there a particular reason behind your snarky, condescending response? I didn’t make a claim one way or the other. Just that I found the take demanding absolute vaccine perfection from anti vaxxers to be something I personally have noticed. |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 17, 2021 17:09:45 GMT
I have no idea why you guys are so aggressive towards someone who won’t take the risk of this particular vaccine. I’m done with this message board. Aggressive? I didn’t even address you, and you were completely snarky and condescending to me. Perhaps a break is for the best. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2021 18:04:01 GMT
miominmio , I am so sorry to hear about your parents, sending hugs. I appreciate hearing the perspective from you country . my husband has to be very careful regarding blood clots and is on warfarin, he also has to be vigilent about his blood not becoming too thin either. This is a subject that is so important, so thank you. You are asked a few questions by the nurse before you are given the jab and one question is "are you on blood thinners". I don't know what they would do if the answer is yes but they definitely ask. I would talk to his doctor, he may advise it is not prudent to have it. Eta, I'm in the UK, not sure if you are too. Anyone on Warfarin has regular INR blood test he could ask whoever does them before he goes. |
|
|
|
Post by sam9 on Mar 17, 2021 19:24:49 GMT
My MIL should sue. She is 75 and received the AZ vaccine yesterday, before it was approved for use in Canada for people over 64. I know someone else who also received it before it was officially approved. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that anything is wrong with the vaccine, and neither does my MIL. She was happy to take it yesterday, even while knowing that 7 countries had temporarily stopped its use. She is so eager to get out and about and play golf with her friends that she probably would have signed permission to possibly be getting a placebo (joke). She is getting much enjoyment from being able to tell everyone she knows all the details. I’m not sure if you read the link by Dotty, but it looks like it was approved for use for people in Canada over the age of 18 on February 26, 2020, so your MIL’s shot wasn’t problematic since she is definitely in the category it was approved for at the time of her shot. Which is good news! 😀 Yes, I had read the link. The fact is that after approving the vaccine formally on Feb 26, on March 1 they recommended that it not be used in anyone over 65 in Canada, pending further results. As I've said many times on this thread, my MIL is fine with the choice she made. When we get vaccinated here, they first look at the list of medications you are taking. My father is on a blood thinner because of atrial fibrillation. The nurse saw this, confirmed it verbally and he still received a vaccine, which happened to be Pfizer. Using a blood thinner is not contraindicative for receiving the vaccine. The risk of getting Covid is much more serious for patients with heart problems than the vaccine is. |
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Mar 17, 2021 22:51:36 GMT
I’m not sure if you read the link by Dotty, but it looks like it was approved for use for people in Canada over the age of 18 on February 26, 2020, so your MIL’s shot wasn’t problematic since she is definitely in the category it was approved for at the time of her shot. Which is good news! 😀 Yes, I had read the link. The fact is that after approving the vaccine formally on Feb 26, on March 1 they recommended that it not be used in anyone over 65 in Canada, pending further results. As I've said many times on this thread, my MIL is fine with the choice she made. When we get vaccinated here, they first look at the list of medications you are taking. My father is on a blood thinner because of atrial fibrillation. The nurse saw this, confirmed it verbally and he still received a vaccine, which happened to be Pfizer. Using a blood thinner is not contraindicative for receiving the vaccine. The risk of getting Covid is much more serious for patients with heart problems than the vaccine is. I think that there is some confusion about approval - made by one governing body - and recommendations made by another body. In a legal sense “approved” and “recommended” have different meanings - it seems that you may be using them interchangeably? In your first post about your MIL, you were fairly adamant that the AstraZeneca vaccine had not been APPROVED for use in her age group. You stated that clearly. It had, in fact, been approved by the body that approves vaccines in Canada - the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD). The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) is the body that stated on March 1st that they didn’t recommend the vaccine in those over 64, only because of a lack of data. They then changed that recommendation yesterday. They are not a board that approves the use of vaccines, they just make recommendations. Sort of like the FDA in the USA approves vaccines, while the CDC makes recommendations. The CDC cannot approve or prohibit a vaccine (or other medication), nor can your NACI. I am glad that your mother in law is happy with her ability to get a vaccine - even the AstraZeneca. It doesn’t appear that anyone screwed up in giving it to her. It was approved by the regulatory body that approves vaccines in Canada. Another body made another recommendation, which they have since rescinded, but that recommendation was just that - not legally binding in any sense. I hope that it is a relief! The more vaccinated people on the planet, the better. 👍🏻 |
|
|
|
Post by sam9 on Mar 17, 2021 23:11:18 GMT
Yes, I had read the link. The fact is that after approving the vaccine formally on Feb 26, on March 1 they recommended that it not be used in anyone over 65 in Canada, pending further results. As I've said many times on this thread, my MIL is fine with the choice she made. When we get vaccinated here, they first look at the list of medications you are taking. My father is on a blood thinner because of atrial fibrillation. The nurse saw this, confirmed it verbally and he still received a vaccine, which happened to be Pfizer. Using a blood thinner is not contraindicative for receiving the vaccine. The risk of getting Covid is much more serious for patients with heart problems than the vaccine is. I think that there is some confusion about approval - made by one governing body - and recommendations made by another body. In a legal sense “approved” and “recommended” have different meanings - it seems that you may be using them interchangeably? In your first post about your MIL, you were fairly adamant that the AstraZeneca vaccine had not been APPROVED for use in her age group. You stated that clearly. It had, in fact, been approved by the body that approves vaccines in Canada - the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD). The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) is the body that stated on March 1st that they didn’t recommend the vaccine in those over 64, only because of a lack of data. They then changed that recommendation yesterday. They are not a board that approves the use of vaccines, they just make recommendations. Sort of like the FDA in the USA approves vaccines, while the CDC makes recommendations. The CDC cannot approve or prohibit a vaccine (or other medication), nor can your NACI. I am glad that your mother in law is happy with her ability to get a vaccine - even the AstraZeneca. It doesn’t appear that anyone screwed up in giving it to her. It was approved by the regulatory body that approves vaccines in Canada. Another body made another recommendation, which they have since rescinded, but that recommendation was just that - not legally binding in any sense. I hope that it is a relief! The more vaccinated people on the planet, the better. 👍🏻 Clearly you and everyone else are correct. I am a stupid fucking idiot. Can you just let it go? |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 18, 2021 5:46:05 GMT
I think that there is some confusion about approval - made by one governing body - and recommendations made by another body. In a legal sense “approved” and “recommended” have different meanings - it seems that you may be using them interchangeably? In your first post about your MIL, you were fairly adamant that the AstraZeneca vaccine had not been APPROVED for use in her age group. You stated that clearly. It had, in fact, been approved by the body that approves vaccines in Canada - the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD). The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) is the body that stated on March 1st that they didn’t recommend the vaccine in those over 64, only because of a lack of data. They then changed that recommendation yesterday. They are not a board that approves the use of vaccines, they just make recommendations. Sort of like the FDA in the USA approves vaccines, while the CDC makes recommendations. The CDC cannot approve or prohibit a vaccine (or other medication), nor can your NACI. I am glad that your mother in law is happy with her ability to get a vaccine - even the AstraZeneca. It doesn’t appear that anyone screwed up in giving it to her. It was approved by the regulatory body that approves vaccines in Canada. Another body made another recommendation, which they have since rescinded, but that recommendation was just that - not legally binding in any sense. I hope that it is a relief! The more vaccinated people on the planet, the better. 👍🏻 Clearly you and everyone else are correct. I am a stupid fucking idiot. Can you just let it go? Yikes. I really think she was just trying to reassure you with confirmed factual info you could share, if needed. ☹️ You did sound very upset, you’re certainly not an idiot for being initially upset, under the circumstance. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 8:01:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 9:55:40 GMT
Many Thanks wellway , yes I am in the uk too. |
|
|
|
Post by gar on Mar 18, 2021 18:07:06 GMT
The A Z vaccine has been cleared after further investigation by the UK agency and the European Medical Agency. I hope it means those countries will resume the programme...numbers are rising in Italy (and maybe others?) and it’ll save lives without question.
|
|
