Healthcare workers should get a flu shot or lose their jobs, two health groups say

reply to post by iamsupermanv2


Of course the amount of people in your age group that get measles mumps etc... is going to be low, the vaccines for them have been out for years. On the other hand look at the number of autistic children, those numbers have went up while the number of kids who get the diseases have went down. No OFFICIAL $tudie$ $how a correlation ? Hmmm, wonder why ?

reply to post by Mirthful Me


I used to work in healthcare with the elderly and i always got my flu shot altho many did not and i found that to be careless on their part.As for those who are sick and still going to work when in the medical feild i know for a fact that most employers rather see you come to work sick and get sent home by them rather than u calling out.When i was in my early twentys i was working at a food plant and got chicken pox from a fellow worker whose child had them and they were a carrier and because i called out and had a doctors note taking me out of work for 2 weeks they fired me on the day i returned to work.
So i say if your in the healthcare feild it should be mandatory to get the flu shot.

This is so ridiculas.

I think any human being has the right to decide if they want junk pumped into their blood that has never been proven to be bennificial and may actually be more harmful.

Studies have proven that vaccinations damage the human genome.
Source

One more thing to note, imo people who get sick when they go the hospital or doctors get sick from the other sick patients already there. Thats what doctors offices and hospitals are, places for the sick so how does one sick nurse make things any worse?

As I said, ridiculas!



[edit on 2-9-2010 by FreeSpeaker]

Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn
Your first link www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... is a German article but I am not going to completely discount everything just because it is based on data outside of the United States.

You know the flu and flu vaccine aren't exclusively American things, right? What difference would it make if the data was from Germany, France, Madagascar, or India?

I do take issue with their:
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Many studies demonstrate that influenza vaccination for health-care workers lowers morbidity and mortality in their patients. Official immunization recommendations and free, voluntary immunization programs for health-care workers have been in existence for many years. “Nevertheless, influenza vaccination rates are unacceptably low.”

If for years influenza vaccinations remain low than the morbidity and mortality numbers should be through the roof.

Re-read the paragraph. It very clearly states that healt-care worker vaccination has been shown to reduce M&M, but that adherence to the programs is unacceptably low, meaning the M&M rate could be much lower, if there was better adherence.

That's not a hard concept to grasp.

I found this response to the article very interesting.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Blah blah, an emotional appeal and a vague reference to Nazism. What tripe.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
This article does not speak of vaccination. It clearly states: “Except for the microorganisms listed above, the prevention of nosocomial pneumonia is not pathogen-specific. Rather, prevention of nosocomial pneumonia requires the use of infection control procedures, including patient and staff education; isolation of patients with highly contagious respiratory pathogens; vigorous hand washing; cleaning and sterilizaton of respiratory equipment; and use of sterile water in nebulizers and humidifiers. It also requires procedures to limit pooling and aspiration of secretions, such as positioning and rotation of the bed-bound patient; frequent suctioning of respiratory secretions using gloves and sterile suction catheters; and limiting enteral alimentation. Finally, selective decontamination of the digestive tract may be considered for intubated patients.”

Again, please re-read the paragraph. You left out a very important sentence, which I will reproduce here for you:

"Prophylaxis for community-acquired pneumonia is pathogen-specific and is directed toward the most common microorganisms that cause it. The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine; the trivalent influenza vaccine; the Haemophilus b conjugate vaccine; and either trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, dapsone, or aerosolized pentamidine are recommended to prevent Streptococcus pneumoniae, influenza viruses, H. influenzae type b, and Pneumocystis carinii respectively."

Read that about three times to let it sink in, and then pick up where your quote begins. The abstract is very clearly stating that OTHER THAN THESE MICROORGANISMS AND VACCINES LISTED, penumonia can't be prophylactically treated on a pathogen-specific basis.

The biggest problem I have with the whole Magilla is that everyone that reports with a runny nose, cough or sneeze is lumped into the influenza category regardless to whether it is allergy related or a rhinovirus.

I've never seen anyone diagnosed with flu over a runny nose and cough. Certainly, having an upper respiratory infection makes you PRONE to flu infection, but no one is diagnosed with flu without specific symptoms being present.

Since I didn't say that you called "all nurses ignorant, disease-ridden, or useless" I guess you don't require that apology or edit. If I misjudged you I guess it had a lot to do with the way you described how you interact with your co-workers and your demanding demeanor. It does provoke one to respond accordingly.

So, you think it's bad that I "demand" universal precautions be followed, and remove anyone from the room that could pass a fatal infection to my immunocompromised patient?

Well, if preventing patient infection and death makes me "demanding", I'll proudly wear that scarlet letter, no problem.

Originally posted by DAVID64
reply to post by iamsupermanv2

 

Of course the amount of people in your age group that get measles mumps etc... is going to be low, the vaccines for them have been out for years. On the other hand look at the number of autistic children, those numbers have went up while the number of kids who get the diseases have went down. No OFFICIAL $tudie$ $how a correlation ? Hmmm, wonder why ?

Oddly, the spike in autism cases directly correlates with the change from diagnosing "autism" to including it in the umbrella term "autism spectrum disorder".

Don't you think that just might be an explanation?

reply to post by FreeSpeaker

So, you think it's bad that I "demand" universal precautions be followed, and remove anyone from the room that could pass a fatal infection to my immunocompromised patient? Well, if preventing patient infection and death makes me "demanding", I'll proudly wear that scarlet letter, no problem.

Good twist but I never said that the reinforcing of universal precautions was bad.

I commented on what sounded like rude, condescending, arrogant behavior towards your co-workers. There is no harm in requests; in fact they often work better than demands.

I am a student nurse, I have to get vaccinated against certain stuff such as HBV and flu as well as being up to date with the other stuff like Tetanus. I would much rather have those shots than pass on infections to patients or receive them from patients and have to take time off. I have no problem with a policy of sacking health care professionals for not taking these vaccines as a matter both patient safety and for their own protection.

Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

 

So, you think it's bad that I "demand" universal precautions be followed, and remove anyone from the room that could pass a fatal infection to my immunocompromised patient? Well, if preventing patient infection and death makes me "demanding", I'll proudly wear that scarlet letter, no problem.

Good twist but I never said that the reinforcing of universal precautions was bad.

I commented on what sounded like rude, condescending, arrogant behavior towards your co-workers. There is no harm in requests; in fact they often work better than demands.

Please post these "rude, condescending, arrogant" remarks I've said I made toward co-workers. The worst thing I believed I mentioned was kicking a nurse out of a patients room for refusing to wear a mask, which is entirely within bounds when guarding the health of a patient.

So, as I said before, please provide evidence, or apologize. It's the adult thing to do.

The increase in autism cases does NOT directly correlate to the change in diagnosis. It was already going up very fast even before these changes, indeed, the changes were done in, i think, 1994, and the cases since then have CONTINUED to drastically increase. Now lets contrast this with the amish community, where they take no vaccines, and have almost no autism at all.

Further, lets stop dramatizing people. I have been in healthcare for over a decade, and have NEVER had a problem calling in sick. They never even asked for a doctors note, NOT ONCE, not at ANY job i have been at in a hospital! Furthermore, the main cause for nosocomial infection is handwashing, not lack of vaccines. As I posted earlier, the flu vaccine, which is what we are all talking about here, only gives between 8-16% protection anyhow. Hospitals are VERY strict on universal precautions. And....I have NEVER had a patient DIE of the FLU. I have had heart attacks, GSW, Trauma, cancer, liver failure, AIDS, and old age (who often die of pneumonia, and its probably CLASSIFIED as flu death).

Originally posted by pexx421
The increase in autism cases does NOT directly correlate to the change in diagnosis. It was already going up very fast even before these changes, indeed, the changes were done in, i think, 1994, and the cases since then have CONTINUED to drastically increase.

Source, please.

Now lets contrast this with the amish community, where they take no vaccines, and have almost no autism at all.

Autism rate similar in Amish community and general population

Autism risk the same in vaccinated versus unvaccinated children (large population-based study)

Furthermore, the main cause for nosocomial infection is handwashing, not lack of vaccines.

No one has suggested being unvaccinated is the main cause of nosocomial infections. Does something have to be the MAIN cause in order for you to try to stop it? If being unvaccinated even accounts for 1% of nosocomial infections, isn't it worth trying to stop that 1%, considering flu can lead to peri/pancarditis in immunocompromised patients?

As I posted earlier, the flu vaccine, which is what we are all talking about here, only gives between 8-16% protection anyhow.

Source please.

Hospitals are VERY strict on universal precautions. And....I have NEVER had a patient DIE of the FLU.

I have. Several. Try working around high-risk groups (elderly, immuncomps, and indigents). Stop being disingenuous by trying to compare primary infection with sequelae.

Flu deaths

I have had heart attacks, GSW, Trauma, cancer, liver failure, AIDS, and old age (who often die of pneumonia, and its probably CLASSIFIED as flu death).

No, the only thing reported as "flu-associated death" by the CDC are those sequelae that are direct results of the flu, such as pneumonia and other forms of pulmonary congestion, as well as disseminated infection/septicemia.

[edit on 9/2/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]

reply to post by Mirthful Me


There are many diseases that are contagious for days long before the symptoms show up, like chicken pox for example.

While I applaud that sick people should stay home, it is not a complete saftey net.

I had a job that required a vaccination. Hey, I have had my rabies shots.

I am on the fence about this. I don't believe in forced vaccinations. But I also think that a healthcare worker who is in contact with hundreds of compromised people every day, I think it is a good idea.

I have trouble posting sources, but all you need do is google "autism diagnosis has not changed since 1994" and you will see many articles showing that the increase in diagnosis is not attributable to the new diagnostics.

As to the amish, according to your own article they only found 7 amish children who fully fit the criteria of autism, which is 1 in 257, while general society has been found to be closer to 1 in 64.

As to how effective. Several years ago i read on the CDC's own website that they estimated it provided between 8-16% protection. It was taken down shortly after i saw it, and now it is very difficult to find any source stating a definitive protection level. Curious.

Here is an exerpt from the british medical journal : "A closer examination of the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) figures shows that in 2001, there were only 257 deaths directly attributable to flu, and in only eighteen cases was the flu virus positively identified. Between 1979 and 2002, NCHS data show an average of 1,348 actual flu deaths per year—a mere 5.7% of the “new and improved” estimate."

"Moreover, by arbitrarily linking flu with pneumonia and other lung diseases, current data are statistically biased. Until corrected and until unbiased statistics are developed, the chances for sound discussion and public health policy are limited.”

We were told in recent years that there would be so many cases of bird flu that it would stun the world. Those concerns were totally unfounded. Then there was the swine flu panic last year, with the government overbuying the H1N1 vaccine—71 million doses—to the tune of $260 million and promoting it without proper tests. Where is all that valuable medicine now? In the garbage. But the CDC goes on releasing bogus data to amp up the hysteria—an act that would have any private company or individual hauled in for fraud.

The real problem here is that our government has become a full partner with drug companies in the vaccine business. This has led to a crony capitalist environment in which the government can no longer be trusted to tell the truth.

Meanwhile, not a word from the media discussing the real influenza preventative: vitamin D."

Originally posted by pexx421
I have trouble posting sources, but all you need do is google "autism diagnosis has not changed since 1994" and you will see many articles showing that the increase in diagnosis is not attributable to the new diagnostics.

So, if I search for the exact thing you're trying to support, you're saying I'll find articles that just happen to support that statement?

What a shocker! Why don't you try removing selection bias and just look a the the numbers, instead?

Evidence that broader diagnostic criteria is accountable for rise in ASD cases

Majority, if not all, of increased prevalence due to broader diagnostic criteria

As to the amish, according to your own article they only found 7 amish children who fully fit the criteria of autism, which is 1 in 257, while general society has been found to be closer to 1 in 64.

False.

Current estimates are 1-2/1000 for autism, and 6/1000 for ASD.

As to how effective. Several years ago i read on the CDC's own website that they estimated it provided between 8-16% protection. It was taken down shortly after i saw it, and now it is very difficult to find any source stating a definitive protection level. Curious.

Of course you did

That seems to be a growing trend on ATS. When you can't provide a source to back-up statistics or claims, suddenly the evidence "was there one time", but now it has been "taken down".

Here is an exerpt from the british medical journal : "A closer examination of the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) figures shows that in 2001, there were only 257 deaths directly attributable to flu, and in only eighteen cases was the flu virus positively identified. Between 1979 and 2002, NCHS data show an average of 1,348 actual flu deaths per year—a mere 5.7% of the “new and improved” estimate."

"Moreover, by arbitrarily linking flu with pneumonia and other lung diseases, current data are statistically biased. Until corrected and until unbiased statistics are developed, the chances for sound discussion and public health policy are limited.”

Again, stop being disingenuous. If you truly work in health care, surely you know the difference between primary infection and sequelae? There are certain conditions that are attributable to flu infection, but which aren't caused directly by the flu virus, or occur only after detectable infections have waned. Pulmonary fibrosis, congestive pulmonary issues, meningitis, and pancarditis are good examples. Those would be flu-linked illnesses, especially if a patient dies and had a recent history of flu infection. They are not considered direct flu deaths, but are included in flu-linked death statistics when history dictates.

We were told in recent years that there would be so many cases of bird flu that it would stun the world. Those concerns were totally unfounded. Then there was the swine flu panic last year, with the government overbuying the H1N1 vaccine—71 million doses—to the tune of $260 million and promoting it without proper tests. Where is all that valuable medicine now? In the garbage. But the CDC goes on releasing bogus data to amp up the hysteria—an act that would have any private company or individual hauled in for fraud.

Please provide the bogus data the CDC put out. I don't recall them ever giving specific numbers or projections for the number that would certainly be infected. I remember them providing the government with estimates of what it would require to vaccinate emergency personal and a given percentage of high-risk groups, which the government wanted to be able to vaccinate on the off-chance something DID happen.

Would you rather we not develop and purchase vaccines and then be caught with our pants down when mother nature decides to surprise us?

The real problem here is that our government has become a full partner with drug companies in the vaccine business. This has led to a crony capitalist environment in which the government can no longer be trusted to tell the truth.

What does the government have to do with public and private university studies showing efficacy and safety of these vaccines?

Do you think the government is lying about small pox being eradicated via a vaccine program? What about polio? Do you think those stats are made up? Or how about pertussis, dipthereia, mesales, mumps, rubella, and Hib? Are those stats all made up to sell a few quick vaccines in your mind?

Meanwhile, not a word from the media discussing the real influenza preventative: vitamin D."

Vitamin D deficiency is rare (to the point of being nearly unheard of) in the United States.

reply to post by pexx421


I agree there is a problem with government connections and pharmaceutical companies.
www.healing-arts.org...

Regarding the FDA and CDC approval of the controversial rotavirus vaccine in 1998 and 1999:

3 out of the 5 FDA advisory committee members who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in December 1997 had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.

4 out of the 8 CDC advisory committee members who voted to approve guidelines for the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998 had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.

The rotavirus vaccine was pulled from the market one year after approval, after it was found to cause severe bowel obstructions.
[Return to "Quick-Index" of Vaccines]

References
Subject: [paracelsus] Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Development; Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:40:45 -0700; From: Sara Klein Ridgley ([email protected]); To: paracelsus ([email protected]).
Written and overseen by Lewis Mehl-Madrona, M.D., Ph.D.
Program Director, Continuum Center for Health and Healing,
Beth Israel Hospital / Albert Einstein School of Medicine

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 9/3/2010 by semperfortis]

On my phone now so keeping it short. Our government has to do with university studies because close to 90 percent of all university studies are funded by government and corporations, which are really the same thing. As to vitamin d, it is becoming the largest chronic deficiency in the us, not according to rda levels but according to therapeutic levels which rda is not even close to.

And what I was telling you to look up, is that the criteria for autism in the dsm IV, has not changed since the early 90's.

Originally posted by pexx421
And what I was telling you to look up, is that the criteria for autism in the dsm IV, has not changed since the early 90's.

Yes, it has. There are broader interpretations of symptoms (which came about due to better understanding of symptoms). Autism isn't so much a discrete condition anymore, but rather part of a sliding-scale of symptoms common to several disorders. This is why ASD came about.

reply to post by kevinunknown


I will be more than happy to take the shots, right after the manufacturers stop exempting themselves from law suites due to shoddy manufacturing practices. You want to shot me up w/ something on pain of losing my career and home, then man up and take the responsibility for putting out a decent product and STAND BY IT.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
The easiest way to contain costs is prevention. I can here the cries of unconstitutional now.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
The easiest way to contain costs is prevention. I can here the cries of unconstitutional now.

Because it is Unconstitutional. If you, government, or anyone else believe that all medical workers should do x or lose their jobs is to imply they have no right to their own property or life. It is fine if a private business wishes to willingly mandate this to their workers because the worker could leave if they so choose (and find another employer). Mandated vaccines by government does not leave that option. There's also the conflict of a private business being opposed to this mandate, and then, through excessive regulation (such as the workers leaving), it may ruin their business and practice. Regardless of personal reservations, the individual has the right to govern their bodies, practices and life. It is not your business. It is not my business. It is not the government's business (unless fraud is going on).

This also asserts a slippery slope-- there are a million diseases and a million vaccinations. If you're going to tell medical workers they have to be vaccinated for disease x, then there should be no reason as to why medical workers should not be vaccinated for all diseases.

It is fine if this regulation is a mandate for public medicine, but not for private medicine. What the two healthcare groups say is Constitutionally irrelevant.

reply to post by imherejusttoread


It is not a matter of being unconstitutional or not. The vast majority of hosptials are private institutions and can make their own employment requirements, so long as they don't violate discrimination statutes (of which vaccination status is not a protected group).

Also, there are not "a million vaccinations". In fact, you would be shocked to see how small the actual number of viable vaccines there currently are. You probably already have most of them if you followed the vaccine schedule as a child.