Flu Vaccine. Necessary or Harmful?

Nurses COVID

Published

Just curious as to what you guys think about the flu vaccine. Don't sit here and feed me the CDC's "recommendations", as I am well aware of them and also their "statistics". From my own personal research, I've found that the number of cases of flu related deaths seem to be blown out of proportion. Also that the vaccine contains questionable ingredients, such as formaldehyde and mercury, which are known to be quite toxic to the body...particularly the brain. And it also disturbs me about the strange phenomenon of guillian-barre syndrome that occurs in some people as well as other neurological types of side effects. There are documented vaccine-related deaths from extreme allergic reactions, to unknown reasons, but there is suspicion that these are underreported. I have also ALWAYS been puzzled as to the process of creating the vaccine itself. We basically just make an educated guess as to which strains of flu will be most prevalent during the upcoming flu season and place those strains in the vaccine. So in otherwords, it might work or it might be totally useless.

This leaves me to question as to why are we injecting our patients and ourselves with this every year? Do the risks of getting or spreading the flu truly outweigh the risks associated with the vaccine? And is it ethical to force all healthcare workers to get an annual flu vaccine or be terminated? In my area, there are hospitals who have fired hundreds of employees who refused to take the vaccine. That's pretty extreme in my opinion. I mean...I've had the flu. Other than feeling like a truck ran over me for a week....I survived. And it really wasn't THAT bad.

Why are we so paranoid of the flu? Yes it can be a deadly disease....usually only in the sickest, most immunocompromised of patients, like the elderly or those with many comorbidities, so I get that. But...the average healthy person just gets knocked on their keester for a week or so, then they are just fine. And in the process formed new immunities against whatever strain of virus they had. To some extent, it is good for the body to be exposed to pathogens because of the immunities that are developed.

There are some studies suggesting that annual flu vaccines lead to Alzheimer's later in life. I would personally rather take my chances with the flu every year. And have the right to make that decision for myself without having my job/livelyhood dangling over my head. I just feel like trying to prevent a (in most cases) non-fatal illness is a waste of resources. This really makes me question the true motives of this "flu paranoia" and the use of scare-tactics and bullying to get people to take the vaccine. Yes, threatening your job over a vaccine is bullying in my opinion and it's not right. If there was an outbreak of (insert deadly disease) going on, cities were being quarantined and health care workers were refusing the vaccine....that's a whole different scenario.

No, I am not a conspiracy theorist that thinks the government is deliberately trying to inject us with "something".

And for you people with the "it's the right thing to do to proctect your patients" mantra...save it. I wash my hands, I stay home if I have a fever. Period. Your 50/50 flu shot doesn't make you any less likely to spread flu virus if you don't wash your hands. Your hands are a vector whether you are immune or not.

I welcome all your comments....pro vaccine or against. ;)

Personally, I've gotten a flu vaccine nearly every year I could. I'm type 1 diabetic and while my immune system is pretty strong apparently, the flu doesn't seem like something I want to have. Also, it could be the many years I spent in retail where you're exposed to a lot of people that cough all over you, your counter, etc. I didn't want to be sick and I certainly didn't want to get my coworkers or customers sick. But, it's up to the person.

Specializes in Cardiac step-down, PICC/Midline insertion.
OP you mentioned you don't have time to write snide and condescending replies but discussing culling the herd is in itself condescending. .[/quote']

"Culling the herd" was not my comment. But thanks for that anyway.

culling the herd was my term, and I did not write anything about snide remarks. culling the herd is not condescending, it is a simple term used to describe an evolutionary action.

culling the herd was my term, and I did not write anything about snide remarks. culling the herd is not condescending, it is a simple term used to describe an evolutionary action.
While I think we know what you're trying to say with the of the term "culling the herd", you should be aware that it is not really related to the process of evolution. Further, it is incorrect to refer to it an an "evolutionary action" as evolution is a passive process. In addition, the process of evolution is very broad with only the element of natural selection bearing any relevance to culling. The term "culling the herd" is more correctly associated with livestock management and in contrast to the evolutionary process, requires some form of active management.

Applying the philosophy of "culling the herd" in a human context is essentially the practice of eugenics, which is why so many are offended by it's use. Taken to it's logical ends, we would deny the use of eyeglasses and hearing aids to people in order to cull out the undesirable genetic traits that underlie poor eyesight and hearing. I suspect that is not what you had in mind.

Specializes in Medsurg, Homecare, Infusion, Psych/Detox.

I did a thread on this very topic a couple years back when my job was threatening to make the vaccine mandatory during the fake swine flu epidemic. They first tried enticing us with chances to win a kindle fire for getting the vaccine, but that didn't get many takers. Probably because the average nurse can afford to buy their own kindle fire. I am against the mandating of flu vaccines. It is obvious that this has become commercialized (even my local supermarket is selling the flu vaccine). It is really just a cash cow for big pharma. Hospital administrators and others are willingly complicit in the fear mongering, profiteering and offering up of their employees as lab rats and sacrificial lambs, all in the name of "protecting our patients." The truth is that it is really about money. If it was about protecting patients, then patients would be barred visitors when they are hospitalized.

Specializes in Medsurg, Homecare, Infusion, Psych/Detox.

BTW, I recently had the flu while pregnant and while it was not pleasant I still would not advocate for the flu vaccine for pregnant women. My daughter is a full term healthy and happy baby.

yup, tech. correct. but if you go back to my original post, it was used in the sense of the fittest surviving, not killing anyone off. I think that comes under evolution. it is nice to "hear" from someone who gets the passive aspect of evolution, every aspect of an organism's being doesn't need to be there for a reason, but if an aspect is neg then it will be evolved away. kinda fits my original though, eh? happy thanksgiving!

While I think we know what you're trying to say with the of the term "culling the herd", you should be aware that it is not really related to the process of evolution. Further, it is incorrect to refer to it an an "evolutionary action" as evolution is a passive process. In addition, the process of evolution is very broad with only the element of natural selection bearing any relevance to culling. The term "culling the herd" is more correctly associated with livestock management and in contrast to the evolutionary process, requires some form of active management.

Applying the philosophy of "culling the herd" in a human context is essentially the practice of eugenics, which is why so many are offended by it's use. Taken to it's logical ends, we would deny the use of eyeglasses and hearing aids to people in order to cull out the undesirable genetic traits that underlie poor eyesight and hearing. I suspect that is not what you had in mind.

I did a thread on this very topic a couple years back when my job was threatening to make the vaccine mandatory during the fake swine flu epidemic. They first tried enticing us with chances to win a kindle fire for getting the vaccine, but that didn't get many takers. Probably because the average nurse can afford to buy their own kindle fire. I am against the mandating of flu vaccines. It is obvious that this has become commercialized (even my local supermarket is selling the flu vaccine). It is really just a cash cow for big pharma. Hospital administrators and others are willingly complicit in the fear mongering, profiteering and offering up of their employees as lab rats and sacrificial lambs, all in the name of "protecting our patients." The truth is that it is really about money. If it was about protecting patients, then patients would be barred visitors when they are hospitalized.
yes! if we really cared! that what long term care does, to some extent.

ye

Once again, it is shocking, amazing, and disappointing to me that nurses are not aware of, or refuse to recognize and instill in their practice the overwhelming body of evidence that the flu vaccine is a safe and effective way to mitigate morbidity and mortality from the flu. If you don't want the flu vaccine, wear a mask for every single patient during flu vaccine. Don't be one of those people screaming that the world is flat. You will never win an argument when you deny science. Ever.

Why are we doing this again?

It's the same people with the same arguments, EVERY YEAR. Just go back and look at last year's posts. And the year before, etc, ad nauseam. If you haven't changed your mind d/t hard proof yet, I don't expect you will anytime soon.

Specializes in Oncology.

Why do people freak out so much over this flu shot conspiracy crap? I never hear anyone getting upset over an MMR or Tetorifice....well, not as much anyway

+ Add a Comment