brandy1017 25,713 Views
Joined Jun 30, '02.
Posts: 1,956 (67% Liked)
Yes, some people who had had the flu shot have developed GBS. So have people who haven't gotten the flu shot. The fact that people who develop GBS after receiving the flu shot do so at about the same rate as people who haven't had the flu shot suggests strongly that the flu shot does not increase your risk (let alone, God help us all, "cause" GBS, as you state). People claim all kinds of reactions to vaccinations to the US vaccine compensations board -- just as people claim all kinds of side effects to other kinds of medications. The fact that someone experienced a health problem after receiving a vaccination or taking other kinds of medication does not, by itself, in the absence of some kind of pattern among lots of people over time, mean that there is a causal relationship between the vaccine or medication and the negative outcome. It really hard to imagine that you are an actual nurse and can't understand this stuff. Did you manage to get through school without any study of infectious disease or statistics??
And the rate is no higher among those who have received the flu vaccine than it is among those who haven't had the vaccine. There was one year, 1976, that there actually was a problem with the flu shot and GBS (which was admittedly tragic), and, although there has never been a connection with the flu shot any other year, some people are still maintaining the myth that there is an ongoing risk.
The plural of anecdote is not evidence.
I really dislike the use of the word forced. Nobody is going to run up and jam a needle into you or tie a mask on your face. It is simply a condition of employment, which the employer has the right to both set upon hire and change as change is deemed necessary. If you choose not to meet the conditions of employment by either not getting the vaccine or not wearing the mask, then you no longer meet the criteria for continued employment. You can still make the choice to refuse the vaccine and refuse the mask. The employer has the right to provide consequences for it.
Count yourself lucky, where I work you don't have a choice. You have to get the shot or be fired. The only exception is if you can prove you had guillain barre or an anaphylactic reaction. A committee then decides whether to accept your Dr's excuse or you lose your job. And if you are accepted you have to wear a mask at all times for the entire flu season!
Of course many people will tell you a flu shot is like taking vitamins, safe for everyone; and downplay the risks of paralysis and tell you it's your moral duty to get the flu shot. Funny how so many fellow health care workers are concerned about the various sundry duties a person must due to be a proper upstanding nurse! Don't you know you have to give up the right over your own body and what you put in it for this noble job!
I've taken care of several people with guillain barre from a flu shot, if it's so rare why have I seen it so often? FYI if you are older than 50 your risks are higher! Also Bells Palsy is linked to the flu shot as well, not as serious, but certainly physically upsetting!
That said many on here will post that you are ignorant and not a good nurse if you are against the flu shot or simply want to have the choice of what you put into your body. You will not find a sympathetic audience here on this issue, sad to say!
Sorry, I did not see this before I posted. There is a difference between someone who has failed in the past and is now successful and someone who has never done well and only has excuses. How can you really trust their advice?
I agree no one should be shamed for their weight, however, as healthcare professionals, we should try to incorporate healthy habits into our lives. I remember reading before about how even running 10 minutes several days a week can be beneficial cardiovascular wise. Saying u don't have 10 minutes to spare is pure bull. And you don't get to be 5 feet, 250 lbs because u have a thyroid issue. That is bull too. Most people have food addictions. Google some of the blogs or pages of triathletes and runners who work full time and have a family. They still get it done.
To KCMnurse do you know who complained against you a patient/family or your previous employer? Was your employer mad at you for leaving?
How much did it cost for all the legal fees? If you don't mind letting us know, just to have a ball park of what getting a lawyer costs if we're ever in such a situation?
I know the BON is not our friend, thankfully through the grace of God I've never had to deal with them.
I'm a shy person so don't volunteer, but do give to charities on a regular basis that support causes I believe in. I give a percentage of my income, ideally I'd tithe but have too many bills at this time. There are so many worthy charities and needs that it is hard for me to say no. I wish I could do more. But I don't give to every charity and I check to make sure they are trustworthy first by checking out Charity Navigator.
I imagine when I'm retired I will probably do actual volunteer work. While I work full time now, the 12 hour shifts don't leave a lot of time to volunteer. I love all animals and wish I had a pet, love dogs especially, but feel it would be unfair to have one with my current work situation, plus my sleep is messed up working nights. I hope to have a pet when I retire and can get back to a normal life and sleep pattern. In the meantime, I enjoy the pets of my family, friends and neighbors.
This can best be done by the hospital lobby in each state. QUOTE]
The hospital lobby is the last one that would lobby for safe staffing ratios, that would interfere with their need to maximize profit sad to say!
Would knowingly, purposefully, and chronically under staffing units such that the nurse to patient ratios are at all time highs (and thus increasing the chances of med errors or other problems) be considered to be "bad process"? Because I'm thinking that is one of the major contributing factors to the mistakes that are made in hospitals. And while not "intentional" on the part of the nurses and ancillary staff, it most certainly seems "intentional" on the part of the powers that be. Increasing caregiver to patient ratios is done to boost the bottom line, with no thought whatsoever of the consequences on the caregivers themselves, and ultimately, on patient safety.
It's a shame what the media has done to him. if you listened to his speech, which you probably don't, you'll recognize that that is far from the truth.
Hopefully Hillary has changed her views on nurses. Counting on a President to support nurses is foolhardy, the govt pays for medicare and medicaid and want to cut costs and we are viewed as part of the costs. It will take unionization like the National Nurse United to support nurses and legislators at the state level seem to be more sympathetic to safe staffing ratios etc.
I view the political process with a very jaundiced eye, and look at the upcoming Presidential race as the lesser of the two evils. I cannot stomach Trump, he is a national disgrace and a very dangerous character should he have his hands on the nuclear codes! While I'm not pro Hillary, I feel there is no contest that she is the most highly qualified candidate to be President who would have her husband' input who is on good terms with Republicans like the Bush's in their philanthropic pursuits. There is no contest Trump a joker who has no experience, no skills just a reality star egomaniac or Hillary Clinton who has a lifetime of political service both domestic and international! I fear for our country if Trump becomes President!
Er Um, actually we DO diagnose. We don't make medical diagnoses, we make nursing diagnoses. That's actually the core of nursing practice and clinical reasoning.
Advertise With Us