Forced Vaccines Refused By Nurses In New York - vid

[keep_it_real]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7wBwOEsw2I&feature=player_embedded

[panader0]

1. I wish I could watch videos

Good luck with this post. I got called every name from moron to idiot to anti-science for suggesting in my post yesterday that there may be some risks associated with vaccines. For me, it just boils down to the fact that I don't trust the medical industry.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. Oh, your post was certainly anti-science.

And it was a lot more than "some risks associated with vaccines."

Why would you misrepresent your own thread?

[panader0]

4. Peace to you and Odin

When I did a google search of vaccine risks yesterday, there were hundreds of scientific articles about associated risks. Perhaps you guys know much more than myself or the folks who wrote them. At any rate, people are different, and as far as I know, are entitled to different opinions. As for myself, I haven't been to a hospital in nearly thirty years, and don't take medicines or pills or believe in restless leg syndrome. I do believe in being nice though.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. None of the crap you posted was scientific.

There's a difference between having big words, and being scientific.

Science isn't a matter of opinion, and neither is restless leg syndrome.

[panader0]

18. I'm an old hippie

I used to live in a tent in the woods in Oregon, late sixties, early seventies. I liked the life. Organic vegies, etc, and very little "science". I believe science has brought us many good things, and to a degree, vaccines may be one of them. Science has also brought us genetically modified food, the atomic bomb, pollution, big pharma and many more bad things. I'd like to see a returning to more natural ways. I'm not "anti-science"--I like my electric guitar, I'm just against some of the bs that science has inflicted on our world.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. You slur hippies.

Hippies were literate. Hippies detest bullshit.

"I'm not "anti-science"--"

Then stop posting anti-science bullshit.

[panader0]

25. As i said, if science means genetically modified foods

weird drugs, a future of people living in little pods on the moon because we polluted our planet, then I'm agin it. But if science means findings ways to counteract what "science" has already done to our planet, then I'm for it. Not all science is good for you.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. Well then stop claiming you're not anti-science.

Quit trying to have it both ways.

[Odin2005]

47. LOL, I'm a biotech major, I find the hysteria against GMOs pathetic.

The insulin diabetics take comes from genetically engineered E. coli.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Hmm there was a time about 200 years ago

when people who were part of the elites made similar statements against Jenner's vaccine.

Back then they had a different mindset. Yours is not that different.

I am sorry to tell you this, but your fears are not that different from those of the Archbishop of Guadalajara. The difference, the Good Bishop lived in a pre enlightenment world. The Enlightenment and secular ideas were truly of the devil.

Some things have not changed.

And you are not stupid... nor even willfully ignorant. Just live in a whole different intellectual milieu...

by the way I got the vaccine. The risk of any of the side effects are minuscule compared to me dying from Asthma (runs in the family, that genetics, sciency stuff) if I get the flu.

[Odin2005]

15. The risks are far less worse than dying of infection viral diseases.

You are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to call it fact.

[liberalhistorian]

105. No kidding. And they're also not entitled to put the rest of us

at risk for a serious illness, even a potentially fatal one in the case of someone with weakened immunity or other underlying conditions, by their ignorant, willful, selfish refusal to learn said facts. Then again, science has never been Americans' strong suit, far from it, whereas willful ignorant fear-mongering certainly has been. And, as a Christian, I think God finds it both funny and frustrating that the very science he created and put in motion is demonized, ridiculed and misrepresented by some of those who claim to be speaking in his name.

[PatSeg]

94. People ARE different

and one size doesn't fit all. Some people probably need vaccines, whether it is because of a weak immune system or even the belief that they need them, but personally I've refused every vaccine that has been offered. I'm not prone to viral infections and don't choose to inject any more foreign substances in my body than necessary.

I do have a problem with "forced" vaccinations and understand people's reluctance to submit to them. Being these are health care personnel, I would assume that their's is an informed decision.

The last time this subject came up, I also did a search for articles about vaccine risks and for me, I feel safer without them. People who tend to be vulnerable to certain diseases might be better off going with the vaccine, voluntarily of course.

[liberalhistorian]

106. Don't ever just assume that just because someone's a health

care professional that they're always making an "informed" decision. Far from it. These are some of the same people who, even though they KNOW the many benefits of washing hands between patients or after using the bathroom and prior to seeing patients, etc., etc. still often refuse to take such a simple step to prevent infections, illness, etc., in their patients. It's been found that more than thirty percent of health care professionals do NOT wash their hands between patients, after the bathroom, etc. Just 'cause you're a health care professional doesn't mean you're not gonna put your own convenience and selfishness ahead of the welfare of your patients.

[kestrel91316]

16. You are absolutely correct that there are "some" risks with vaccines. Hell,

there are risk with getting out of bed in the morning and flipping on a light switch. Or certainly driving a car, or crossing the street.

But you see, there is absolutely no denying that the risk of harm from NOT vaccinating for various diseases far outways the miniscule risk of receiving the vaccine. So it doesn't make sense to get one's panties in a wad over it.

Like I tell my clients: VACCINATE YOUR CATS, DAMMIT. We have enough trouble with the diseases we cannot prevent. There is no earthly reason to be getting into trouble with the diseases we CAN prevent.

God, I hate stupid people.

[LeftishBrit]

88. There are risks with everything

Nurses and doctors are at far more risk from their constant exposure to ill patients and their germs than from a vaccine. Yet they cannot say, "I want to have this job but I won't go to work because I might catch something from the patients".

If you take a job that involves caring for patients, then you have to accept the risks associated with that, including vaccines when necessary.

[rd_kent]

100. What "risks" are there that outweigh the proven benefits?

[liberalhistorian]

103. Oh, bullshit. Any "risks" associated with vaccines

are tiny and miniscule compared to the REAL risk of infecting others, who will then infect others and so on and so forth, which is FAR worse. Unless you're allergic to the components of a vaccine, as some people are, it's truly selfish and irreponsible not to be vaccinated or to allow your children to be vaccinated. Not to mention ignorant fear-mongering. I wouldn't want to be treated by any health care professional who refused a vaccine for non-allergic reasons; they would obviously consider their bullshit reasons to be more important than my and my family's health, or their own family's health.

My teenage son is an aspie and I can't count the number of times some moran has tried to get me on board the "vaccines cause autism" horseshit; I enjoy telling them where to put it each and every time.

[Odin2005]

3. Oh fuck, here's more insane, paranoid, anti-science BS.

[defendandprotect]

7. Yeah -- let's all support chemical science -- untried, untested and frequently proven wrong!!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. Uh, by definition...

"chemical science" is tried, tested, and proven right.

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. So we should scrap the Germ Theory of disease?

A simple yes or no will work, to know whether to think of you are pre enlightenment or part of the modern world.

[defendandprotect]

84. Germ theory? Men would still be wallowing in germs in operation rooms . . .

if it wasn't for women --

Becoming immune to cow pox was a natural theory - - you milked a cow, you were immune.

Chemicals that are making our troops ill -- remember Gulf War I? -- isn't something we

should also be doing to the general population. What was the nurse saying . . .

4,000 from the last insufficiently tested vaccine?

Now . . . here's how it works. . . you ask a question --

BUT I SUPPLY THE ANSWER --

Thanks, anyway --

Enlightenment would cause us to respect nature -- not the chemical industry.

Wake up!

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. Ok scratch one more to the pre enlightenment

and lets scratch the germ theory of disease... including things like washing hands in-between patients.

[defendandprotect]

99. Of course, that's what's what YOU said. . . not what I said . . .

Wake up --

attempted bullying doesn't make you look enlightened --

it makes you look even dumber than your posts.

[Lagomorph]

90. People tell me there's germs everywhere...

I just looked under my keyboard and desk and didn't see any. :shrug:

[rd_kent]

102. What is untested, untried and frequently proven wrong?

[Chemisse]

8. Holy crap - are people not allowed to question the medical establishment?

It is hardly anti-science to recognize there are risks with any vaccines, and any intelligent person is going to want to balance those risks to decide what to do.

Why is there such an hysteria around here about this topic?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. People are allowed to question the medical establishment.

But if they just make up a load of bullshit, they'll get called on it. Vaccines causing autism is a perfect example.

"Why is there such an hysteria around here about this topic?"

Hysteria? There are just a few loony woo woos, and the people calling them out.

[Chemisse]

26. So you have scientific evidence that says the swine flu vaccine

Is safer than the risk of the disease?

I don't think anybody knows that for sure. And certainly the last one was not safe. So what is wrong with criticizing the source someone may choose to use, not the act of questioning itself?

I am not ready to swallow what somebody feeds me, hook, line and sinker, without questioning it. And it appears these nurses are not either. Why does that push such a button?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. Projected U.S. deaths by swine flu in U.S. for 2009-10

30,000-90,000

Projected swine flu deaths of people who have had the vaccine: 0

Projected deaths because of the vaccine: 0

"I am not ready to swallow what somebody feeds me, hook, line and sinker, without questioning it. And it appears these nurses are not either. Why does that push such a button?"

Push a button? You misunderstand. I fully recommend that all woo woos not get the vaccine. Or any life saving medicine for that matter.

[Chemisse]

37. That's what I mean

You are rabid on this subject. I have noticed this in the past. It seems odd to me because you seem fairly reasonable on other topics.

I am not anti-vaccine. I am not pro-vaccine. I am in the middle and very curious about what evidence comes out. I like discussing it, but see that here people are either flaunting shoddy science and making crazy claims, or are screeching at anybody who dares to question anything about ANY vaccination.

I am very grateful that my children could be protected from polio and smallpox and tetanus, horrible and frightening diseases. But I am also pretty skeptical about what people try to sell. The more the flu vaccine gets pushed (suddenly last year, just about every age group was said to need the vaccination), the more I am leery of motives (even YOU must recognize that the annual flu shot is a no-risk money maker).

I do not trust big business and will not take any flu vaccine unless I feel the risks make it worth it. In your response, you wished me death, again showing what a fanatic you are on the subject. Hopefully neither of us will die this flu season.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I'm an astronaut.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Confusious]

75. How much money is made because of vaccines

Very little for almost all vaccines. Vaccines are inexpensive to produce and many were never patented at all. Only a couple new ones are patented today.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_money_is_made_because_of_vaccine

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. Actually the flu vax is not a good money maker

one of the myths.

The reason why the wide spread vaccination is recommended is due to herd immunity and try to reduce the 30-50k annual deaths...

Me, I get it... not something I have to think too much about it. It is very safe these days, and the consequences of NOT getting me could kill me. That said, there are folks who should, under no circumstances, get it. For that talk to your doctor. Be sure to mention any previus effects to vaccines, or allergies to eggs. And if you fear thiromisal you can pay for the nose administered version.

[Maru Kitteh]

114. I think it needs to be said also that the flu can kill ANYONE. Influenza is a bitch and it doesn't

care if you are "usually" don't get the flu or you say you "never" get sick. It only takes once and you don't need to have a preexisting condition or belong to any certain demographic for it to take your ass out.

People forget that 36,000 people die of this disease every year.

Additionally, it seems to be a trend recently to call every damn thing a "flu." People get the sniffles or a headache and call it the flu, and say "oh, I had the flu for about a day and a half last week." NO - you didn't. That ain't the flu dumbass, that's a cold.


You're so patient Nadin. :-P Thanks for the information you lend. Just remember for every thick-headed moron who won't listen to logic and reason, there's somebody, somewhere, reading silently and benefiting from your perseverance.

[nadinbrzezinski]

119. I know and what has been bad about this flu

is that it has run the gamut from a very mild disease, I think I got it during the summer, and it was MILD

To it can kill you...

Most folks are getting the mid of the road that sucks... major way.

As to the patience... I am reaching the bottom of that barrel. You'd think in a country that supposedly has universal education I should not have to 'splain these things the same way I had to with people who had primary school. Oh and who accepted the vaccines once we explained it to them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. They are called CLINICAL TRIALS

we have five in the US... and many more around the world. You think they are deploying this without testing?

Jeesus age... they HAVE done the same testing they do on the ANNUAL vax...

[liberalhistorian]

109. Horsehshit again. The CDC and the NIH

have all said that it's benefits outweigh any risks, and I think they'd have a better idea than the paranoid fear-mongers. I'm sure the 18-year-old college freshman in Ohio who died of swine flu this past Saturday would have preferred the "risks" of the vaccine over such a sudden, untimely death. As would have his family and those around him.

The problem with swine flu is that anyone born after 1967 has never been exposed to any flu virus similar to this one, which is why it hits children, teens and young adults so hard and not so much older people.

[Odin2005]

14. The hysteria is coming from idiots that think I was poisoned by MMR vaccines.

[Chemisse]

28. I saw nothing on this thread about the MMR

You are talking about a different argument.

[liberalhistorian]

111. No, actually he's really not. It may be a different vaccine, but

it's the same kind of ignorant, paranoid, fear-mongering bullshit that absolutely refuses to listen to any real reason or argument that doesn't exactly fit what they want.

[liberalhistorian]

110. I know just what you mean, Odin. As the mother of an aspie, I

can't get away from the paranoid ignorant idjits morans who keep wanting me to jump on that "vaccines cause autism" wagon that is so full of horseshit I'm surprised it can move. It's like a wack-a-mole game, as soon as I manage to get rid of one, up pops another. It drives my son batty as well.

[kestrel91316]

17. Some of us in the scientific and medical communities are sick and fucking tired

of the ANTI-SCIENCE BS that takes over any discussion of medical issues on DU.

Here's your balance: risk of serious harm from vaccines = miniscule
risk of serious harm from infectious disease = high

Deal with it.

[Chemisse]

23. So you have scientific evidence that says the swine flu vaccine

Is safer than the risk of the disease?

I don't think anybody knows that for sure. And certainly the last one was not safe. So what is wrong with criticizing the source someone may choose to use, not the act of questioning itself?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

50. The clinical trials are certainly strong evidence of that fact.

Given the fact that the swine flu is particularly deadly for young healthy people the vaccine seems prudent at this point.

[Chemisse]

59. Thanks Fire Medic Dave - you are a voice of sanity

I have been uncertain what to advise my daughter regarding my little grandson. I am hoping we can get just a bit more reassurance from the trials before that decision has to be made. I keep thinking about the last swine flu vaccination that turned into a disaster.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

60. The adjuvant was the problem in the 1976 vaccine, the US has refused vaccine with adjuvant.

How old is your grandson?

[Chemisse]

62. He is four years old.

I read that the younger school-aged children are the most vulnerable. So he is nearly in that category.

I did not know that we were not getting the vaccine with the adjuvant. I remember a lot of discussion about it here a month or so ago, that the adjuvant was needed to make a small amount of vaccine be spread thinner to help more people, but don't recall how it all turned out.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

67. Here is some of the info I shared with city council last week.

The initial swine flu vaccination that will be received in the US will be in the flu mist form. I will contain no adjuvants and is approved for healthy adults and children ages 2-49. (Children may need 2 doses, I didn't research that I was specifically talking about employees.) Obviously the disease is very prevalent in youngsters like your grandson, they aren't very good at hand washing and like to touch everything then put their hands in their mouths. The deaths in children have largely been in children with pre-existing conditions. Children are much more likely to be hospitalized than any other age group, adults ages 25-49 stand the greatest chance of dying from the disease. There was apparently a swine origin H1N1 component to the seasonal flu from 1947-1957, that seems to have conferred some immunity to many adults over the age of 52. This accounts for the low infection rates and low numbers of fatalities in the adults over 50 age group. The flu mist vaccine is a live virus unlike the injection. In this form it is designed so the virus can't live in the body outside the cooler temperatures in the nose. Flu like side effects are more common with flu mist be it is extremely effective in respiratory transmitted diseases. There is some good info here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FluMist and here http://www.cdc.gov/H1N1FLU/ . I hope all this helps you and your daughter make an informed decision.

David

[Chemisse]

89. Thank you! I am sharing that with her right away. - nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Two words: CLINICAL TRIALs

they have been done, and in the Clinical trials it is as SAFE as the annual vaccine

[defendandprotect]

101. That's a rather authoritarian approach to "science" and debate which is ...

dumb --

4,000 people, at least were harmed by one of the vaccines the nurses are talking about.

Our own soldiers have been harmed in many ways by vaccines given to them.

There is quite a difference between the natural immunities provided by nature and the

artificial chemicals produced by industry for profit --

Mandating that everyone take because someone may get a flu is inane to the level of fascist.

[defendandprotect]

85. DU has a pro-vaccine gang which kind of defies all reason . . .

and they work hard at it --

A lot of $$$$ in vaccines -- Rummy could tell you that!!!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

93. Aren't you also constantly accusing the pharma industry...

of never curing anything because it doesn't make money?

How do you reconcile these two contradictory conspiracy theories?

[rd_kent]

108. What reason is being defied? Other than your lack of it?

[alarimer]

24. And by nurses, no less, who need to be vaccinated more than anyone else.

For one thing, they are in contact with sick people all the time. People whose immune systems cannot handle more infections. Unvaccinated nurses or doctors are like Typhoid Mary, carriers. And the flu is especially bad for people with compromised immune systems. I am sick of the ignorant BULLSHIT about vaccines on this websites. You anti-science people are fucking stupid.

[defendandprotect]

98. They're willing to forgo their jobs to NOT BE VACCINATED . . . think about it -- !!!

[Maru Kitteh]

113. Yeah, it means they have the freedom to be conspiracy theorist whack-job idiots too!

[liberalhistorian]

107. Hey, this is America!

We lead the way with that! Woooo-hooooo!!!!!! :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[RidinMyDonkey]

5. It's their right to refuse the vaccine

I'm not sorry that they are losing their jobs though.

My mom works in a doctor's office up here in MN. Every single person on staff (voluntarily) gets vaccinated to reduce the risk of infecting more patients. I wouldn't want to be treated by someone who has been around swine flu, or even seasonal flu, all day and didn't take steps to reduce the possibility of spreading it. And I certainly would not trust them to treat ANY at risk patients what so ever. Nope, I'll take my grandma and kids to the doctors and nurses that protect themselves and their patients.

[LeftishBrit]

87. Agreed.

I got the 1968-pandemic flu as a small child, when I was in hospital for another reason, and was exposed to a doctor who came to work when coming down with the flu. Obviously I recovered, but it's not something I'd recommend especially for people who are already ill.

I think that for most people, it should be up to them whether they want it; but for a doctor or nurse who comes into contact with lots of sick people, it's irresponsible not to get it.

[defendandprotect]

6. This kind of mandate has to be stopped now --

YOU decide what goes into your body or your child's body --

We are all at risk every day from all kinds of perils --

And vaccines are certainly one of them -- !!!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Oh, I disagree.

If these nuts don't want the vaccines, they forfeit their jobs.

[midnight]

29. Just wow. How absoulutely marshall law of you. There is

a medical and civil rights issue at the center here. The nurses are pointing out both. But do let us know how you and yours fair with that innoculation.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. Marshall law? Didn't watch the video, did you?

The nurses could either get the vaccine, or lose their job. They're choosing the later.

It's got nothing to do with marshall law or civil rights.

[msanthrope]

58. Who the frak is Marshall? n/t

[timtom]

96. (snicker) they must mean "martial"

Sorta like "later" for "latter". I guess language isn't scientific enough.

[Chemisse]

30. Let's all be glad you are not the dictator it sounds like you would like to be - nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

34. Let's be glad these nurses are being fired.

I'm glad there won't be any more patients under their care.

[liberalhistorian]

112. Amen to that. You have the right to decide things like that

IF IT DOESN'T AFFECT OTHERS. If you're going to be treating people all day and refuse to be vaccinated, then you shouldn't be anywhere near patients, period. And if you refuse and someone gets sick because of it, if they die, you should be sued up the wazoo. Period. You have the right to make such personal decisions, but you do NOT have the right to put your own selfish irresponsibility ahead of your patients and to put others at risk. IOW, your right to swing your fist ends when it hits someone's face.

[Odin2005]

13. You think vaccines are a "peril"?

You are nuts.

[kestrel91316]

20. Frickin' psychos, these people are. Spreading DANGEROUS myths.

[kestrel91316]

19. Fine. Decide not to be vaccinated. But don't then expect to be allowed to

have contact with patients who can A) catch infectious disease from you and die and B) give you infectious disease for you to spread to others.

No one has a constitutional right to be a Typhoid Mary.

[Chemisse]

33. If this actually WAS typhoid disease, I would probably agree with you

But this is the swine flu, no more dangerous than any other flu, and hardly worthy of some marshal law action forcing vaccinations.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. The National Healht Emergency has NOT been lifted

so the legal authority is there.

As to less dangerous... pray it does not mutate.

Lets just say cytokine storms are NOT FUN and ARE deadly

[Chemisse]

97. If it mutates significantly

The vaccine could be rendered useless.

[nadinbrzezinski]

116. Could is the operative word

[LeftishBrit]

92. Any sort of flu is dangerous to immunocompromised or very sick people

I agree that there should not be compulsory vaccinations for the vast majority of the population. But if someone's job requires them to care for very sick people, then I think they should get vaccinated.

[Maru Kitteh]

121. Hospital patients are by definition vulnerable so YES IT IS more dangerous to them.

The same obviously holds true for most people visiting a clinic as well.

1) You belittle the meaning of terms like "martial law" when you fling them around like so much slop in a trough. Nobody was pointing a gun at these ignorant hysterics. A nurse knows going in that their job requires them to be vaccinated in order to protect their vulnerable patients.

2) Influenza kills 36,000+ people annually in the United States EVERY YEAR. I'd call that dangerous.


When you think about it, it's pretty fraking stupid that influenza kills anywhere near that number in the US at all, when we have perfectly good vaccines against it. I blame a lack of access to healthcare but I also blame anti-vaxers, air-headed celebrities with big mouths but no brains, internet hysterics and anti-science woo-woos for large numbers of the deaths as well.

[Lyric]

22. To me, this is no different from pharmacists who refuse to fill BC scripts.

Whatever your moral/ethical objections, getting vaccinated is part of the job. You cannot be a nurse if your "ethics" could put your patients (and the general public) at risk. Because medical professionals have a higher chance of being exposed to infectious disease, being vaccinated against it IS a necessary and vital part of the job. In such a profession, you are directly compromising the health of the most vulnerable people of all--the elderly, sick, and disabled--if you remain unvaccinated.

If you can't handle what goes along with the job, then by all means, find another profession. Like kestrel said--nobody has a Constitutional right to be a Typhoid Mary.

[seabeyond]

35. no. it is comparable to phrmacists who refuse to take the pill. yet still sell. nt

[Lyric]

39. You're missing my comparison.

I meant that both cases involve medical professionals putting other people at risk to satisfy themselves. Both involve medical professionals who refuse to do EVERY part of the job required of them, and still expect to retain said jobs. And both have people defending their right to forsake a vital part of the job they were hired to do and put vulnerable patients at serious risk, all for the sake of indulging their own personal suspicions and superstitions.

Was that more clear?

[Ms. Toad]

66. There is a difference between requiring someone to

perform the duties of their job, such as filling prescriptions, and requiring people to submit to medical procedures to retain their jobs - especially when that requirement was not part of what they agreed to when accepting the job.

I was a teacher, and had to submit to the TB test as part of my job. I knew that up front. If I didn't want to, I didn't accept the job. That is far different from forcing me to make the decision between submitting to a medical procedure or forfeiting my job AFTER I have already agreed to the terms and conditions of employment - and after given up other opportunities that (in all likelihood) are no longer there.

[Dorian Gray]

91. I don't know that that comparison is apt....

as the non-taking of the immunization can present a clear and present danger to their patients. As refusing to fill a prescription would do. Not taking the Birth Control Pill has no bearing on a patient.

[laughingliberal]

36. Not sure how to feel about this

Worked for years as an RN. Never took a flu shot, never got the flu. Took the hepatitis B vaccine in the days when it was still made from human serum. After the year I took it they changed it due to the fear of AIDS. We then had to be tested for HIV. Not sure if anyone converted from that vaccine but the possibility was certainly there. I am always a little anxious about unknown consequences of a new vaccine.

edited for grammar

[SidDithers]

38. Hope they lose their jobs...nt

Sid

[laughingliberal]

55. Me too! Furthering the nursing shortage can only be good for everyone

When it gets critical enough, shortage wise, the for profit industry may actually have to cough up some reasonable wages and benefits to get us back. Once a nurse leaves the field it is very difficult to ever persuade her/him to return.

[SidDithers]

56. Not sure if you're being facetious or not...

but, fwiw, I agree that nurses are horribly underpaid and overworked.

I also believe that all medical staff have a duty to protect themselves and their patients against the spread of disease.

Sid

[laughingliberal]

57. I'm not being facetious

Nothing will change for us until we stand up and refuse to be treated badly. I, for one, became weary with the emotional manipulation by the industry. No one would still be working if we did not care about our patients. But that is what allowed the industry to overwork us for substandard wages and benefits.

I am aghast at forced vaccination of any group of people. We did not cease to be human beings when we passed our boards. The nurse in the video makes a good point about 4000 people who became disabled or died over the last vaccine to a swine flu. I am not anti-science or anti-vaccine but I do think it should be a personal choice as it is not risk free nor is any medication or medical procedure. I also refer you to my earlier post about being a recipient of the Hepatitis B vaccine in 1983 when it was made from human serum. We were all put at risk of HIV infection in the same way hemophiliacs were. I was also part of the original study on health care workers which showed we were excreting Methotrexate in our urine. This led to the implementation of personal protective garb, perhaps a little late for some of us. In my first 2 years as an RN I was already put at serious risk by my profession.

I believe the standards of infection control should apply to this just as they do any other situation-proper hand washing and stay home if you have respiratory symptoms. I worked with an immune compromised population my entire career and nothing was ever shown to be as effective as hand washing and avoiding patient contact when experiencing respiratory symptoms. If they want to fire the nurses for not being vaccinated, so be it. It could be the catalyst that allows some to make their escape into a life where their needs matter sometimes.

[stray cat]

41. Its also their right to refuse to wash their hands - and that kills 10s of thousands

I thought health care professionals swore to first do no harm. Why not wash hands?

[Chemisse]

42. Washing hands does not have the potential to harm the nurses. nt

[depakid]

45. Oh really?

No allergies out there. eh?

[Chemisse]

48. I didn't know that was an issue

Are there alternative soaps for nurses with allergies?

[laughingliberal]

52. Yes and alternative gloves for those of us with latex allergies nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. Not only that, surgical soap "eats" through the protective layers

it gets bad in the winter, especially.

[uppityperson]

61. Then you haven't thought it through thoroughly

wash your hands enough your hands get dried out, skin cracks, letting bacteria into you and voila! Skin infections.

[laughingliberal]

63. Been there, done that

My first job as an RN was at a prominent children's cancer center where infection control was job 1. Staff compliance with hand washing was the highest in the nation. We washed our hands so much they did crack and bleed in the winter. Our solution was to apply A & D ointment at bedtime and sleep with gloves on. We had a very low nosocomial infection rate and the ointment/glove treatment usually got us through the winter with a minimum of bleeding.

[laughingliberal]

43. Correct. It is still the #1 defense against the spread of infection

Taking the vaccine does not mean a health care worker could not still spread the virus from one patient to another. Much more likely to spread it this way than directly.

[laughingliberal]

53. One question comes to mind

Will they fire the nurses with allergies to eggs?

[TexasObserver]

64. Each individual is right to decide whether to get a vaccine & the employer is right to insist on it.

There is no question that each person should be able to decide if they want the vaccine.

However, any employer who provides health care services to the public should be able to mandate vaccines for their employees, and if such employees choose not to have the vaccine, such refusal is a valid basis to discharge for cause the employee. Does this mean that nurses and doctors effectively give up their right to refuse vaccines as a condition of employment at most jobs? Yes.

Whether a person chooses to have the vaccine is a personal decision for adults and a public policy argument when regarding children. It's disingenuous for the pro vaccine advocates to claim they're pro science while claiming vaccine detractors are not. Both sides cite science, but the pro vaccine advocates rely on majoritarian data, while the vaccine detractors rely on side effects and contraindications. It is a fact that there are negative side effects, and that not all side effects can be known for years, maybe decades, after the vaccine is used.

There are legitimate reasons for fearing the vaccine, just as there are legitimate reasons to fear flying. That the percentages vastly favor one does not change either the reality of the very limited risk, or the potential severity of such negative consequences.

[laughingliberal]

68. I graduated from nursing school in 1982 and practiced as an RN until 2 years ago

I have never, in all these years, seen health care workers forced to take a vaccine until this past year. The first case I saw was a hospital an agency wanted to send me to. They required MMR & varicella vaccine of all the nurses. Despite the fact that I had measles, mumps, and chicken pox as a child and had a rubella vaccine after nursing school, they insisted unless I could get my pediatricians records and prove it. I'm 54 years old. I have no idea where those records would be now. I told the agency not to bother scheduling me at that hospital. Apparently this hospital calls every day needing nurses and the agency continued to pressure me about it. My attitude? Fuck 'em. When they feel enough pain from their staffing shortages perhaps they will feel a need to treat nurses like human beings.

[TexasObserver]

69. I'm fine with your approach.

You choose not to accept employment which has a vaccination requirement you don't want to accept.

However, I understand why employers in health care feel they must demand vaccines. It probably impacts their insurance coverages and costs.

[laughingliberal]

71. No, it does not

I would think it is part of the protection of the HIPAA laws whereby your employer is not allowed to have your health care information. The federal law does not exclude a group of employees who work in health care.

[TexasObserver]

72. No, requiring vaccines WOULD lower the hospital's insurance costs.

There is no doubt that requiring vaccines of all employees would LOWER the insurance premiums, since the risk of disease transmission by employees to patients is already a major exposure to liability of hospitals.

[laughingliberal]

73. I would bet you they would not see one cent of lowered insurance premiums

for forcing the vaccine on the employees. And a vaccine that will not be available until weeks after the flu season has started will be just a little more effective than no vaccine for health care workers. Many people will be exposed and be incubating before the vaccine is even available. Hiring enough nurses might lower their liability costs, too, but they don't do it. Here's some real evidence for that:

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-32703220_ITM

[Horse with no Name]

125. Especially when she worked in a children's hospital as she stated upthread

Measles is deadly to kids.
Yeah, I can see why the employer insisted on it.

[Horse with no Name]

124. Or better yet

You could do what I did--have titers drawn.
Virtually painless and accepted throughout the country as "proof" of vaccination or disease.
I can't imagine that you weren't given that option.

[juno jones]

65. Today's word is Martial.

Of Mars, with all the associations of war and force and strife applying.

Martial.

Marshall has nothing to do with it. He's bonging out over at his friends's house.

I'm not sure if these happenings reflect martial law or not. It will be interesting to see how it unfolds, tho.

PS My husband has informed me that Marshall Faulk has left the NFL, so he has nothing to do with it either.

[laughingliberal]

70. Just another nurse oppressing policy by an industry that has tried to get rid of us for years

It never stops with these people. The industry tried back in the '90's to do away with the need for RN's by training 'unlicensed assistive personnel' in six week courses. They would be putting in catheters, ng tubes, etc... Then they could have them all work under the license of one RN on a floor of 30 or 40 patients. Of course, the nurse puts her license at risk with this but the hospital avoids liability as the RN's license requires her to validate the competence of all working under her. The nurses in the northeast got busy and unionized in droves. Many went on strike and stayed on strike for months until they got contracts that forbade the institutions to do this. The industry created the shortage purposely in order to argue for cheaper people to do our jobs. They forced overtime on nurses to avoid hiring more FTE's. There have always been enough nurses licensed in this country to meet patient needs. There just aren't enough willing to put up with the abuse. Health care workers are far more likely to be exposed to diseases by a patient than a patient is to be exposed by a worker. Forced vaccination is not the answer to institutional infection control. Proper hand washing and avoiding patient contact when experiencing respiratory symptoms are the answers. So, fire the nurses. Might do those administrators some good to kick off those heels and get out on that floor to care for a few sick people.

[defendandprotect]

86. It's your own fault for trying to care for patients and trying to wake us up -- !!!

And I think somewhere along the line you became a threat to the doctors' big bucks????

Personally, I think everyone knows they'd rather see a nurse than a doctor!!!

At least, that's true for me!!!

Keep telling the story -- we need to hear it --

and good luck to you all -- !!!

:)

[laughingliberal]

74. A nurse who had swine flu already is being forced to take the vaccine

It has been well established that those who already had H1N1 do not need the vaccine as they have built the antibodies. This is not about the public health. There is no reason on earth for anyone who has already had this virus to be vaccinated. This is another case of oppression of nurses. And what a surprise! The offending hospital owned by HCA.

http://thebirdflupandemic.com/archives/a-first-hand-account-from-a-nurse-being-required-to-take-the-swine-flu-vaccine-to-keep-her-job

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. This mandate is comming from the New York Department of Health

not HCA.

Just a point of order.

And I hate HCA for many reasons, but this is the New York Department of Health and I suspect it has to do with the Summer.

[laughingliberal]

115. Regardless, it is HCA who insists she have the vaccine despite having the virus already nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. Which is being mandated at the STATE LEVEL

[Kansas Wyatt]

104. My girlfriend is in North Carolina...

And the hospital she works at is making it mandatory too. She is pissed about it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

118. Balboa did like any other military facility

UCSD is making it mandatory.

You know what? I hate to take the side of health officials here, but it is selfish not to if you are a health care worker, not to mention stupid. This is AS SAFE as the annual shot.

[MissMarple]

120. People are really crabby around here. Is there a vaccine for that?

[quiller4]

122. I want to know that the nurses treating me have been vaccinated

and would refuse to be taken to a hospital that didn't take such steps to ensure patient safety.

The H1N1 vaccine has had more extensive trials with fewer problems than most seasonal vaccines. If the nurses in New York have such little faith in pharmacology what are they doing in the field?

[Horse with no Name]

123. Mandatory or not

THIS nurse will take it.
Yes I am aware of the risks...I am also aware of the risks to my patients if I do not protect myself.
The vaccine COULD kill me, however, the risk of the flu killing me is much higher.
I cannot WAIT until we have the vaccine available.
For people that do NOT get it...we have a flu EPIDEMIC in SEPTEMBER!
That is almost unheard of...and it frightens the hell out of me.