We were discussing the Disneryland measles outbreak at work, and I was appalled to find some of my co-workers refuse to vaccinate their kids. They (grudgingly) receive the vaccines they need to remain employed, but doubt their safety/necessity for their kids.
I must say, I am absolutley stunned. How can one be a nurse and deny science?
As a nurse, you should darn well know what the scientific method entails and what phrases such as "evidence based" and "peer reviewed" mean.
I have to say, I have lost most of my respect for the nurses and mistrust their judgement; after all, if they deny science, on what premise are they basing their practices?
She already said in a reply to one of my posts that she believes it is her job to "educate" her patients against vaccines. Hopefully, someone at her facility has picked up on this and is taking these public comments to the administration at her facility because someone needs to advocate for those patients.
That's actually what I'm concerned about, thank you for responding. I'm curious as to what "additional" education is being provided, beyond the CDC's VIS pages for each vaccine.
It's definitely become a strange world when the far-right and far-left agree on something.....although the crux of this article is PRO, I'm surprised at the number of ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals who are on the same side of the anti-vax brigade.
That's weird to me too. I guess it just proves that what my poli sci prof said was true: extremists on both sides end up meeting each other. Strange bedfellows indeed.
She already said in a reply to one of my posts that she believes it is her job to "educate" her patients against vaccines. Hopefully, someone at her facility has picked up on this and is taking these public comments to the administration at her facility because someone needs to advocate for those patients.
Yeah I advocate for my patient's. I do that by not withholding information from them.
Yeah I advocate for my patient's. I do that by not withholding information from them.
Then what, exactly, do you "not withhold" from your patients (English error removed)? What are you providing to them beyond what you consider too minimalistic?
formaldehyde (yes, also in many beauty products, including topical creams, lotions and makeup found at your local Sephora) is a carcinogen, etc, etc, etc.
Once again with the bogus formaldehyde argument. It has already been documented numerous times on this very thread that the amount of formaldehyde in vaccines is minuscule, far far less than the human body produces naturally in a single day and which is a vital part of human metabolism. It has been shown that fruits and vegetables contain greater quantities of formaldehyde than all vaccines combined. It has been shown that the formaldehyde found in vaccines does not build up in the body over time.
Our bodies NEED the formaldehyde we produce naturally, and it's patently false that the miniscule amounts which are contained in many but not all vaccines are carcinogenic.
It's exposure to incredibly high amounts of formaldehyde in an industrial setting which could be dangerous. They are not the same thing and it is incredibly dishonest to suggest that these are the same things.
Then what, exactly, do you "not withhold" from your patients (English error removed)? What are you providing to them beyond what you consider too minimalistic?
This is how Andi answered that back on post #642:
"I do advocate for my patient's. If I am to give a vaccine, I make sure they understand fully the risks. I don't want the person to become ill for life or die because I gave it to them."
I took that as she believes she should be telling them about these discredited theories that she is trying to spread here as well. Highly dangerous to have that coming from a healthcare provider if you ask me.
If this is what is happening, then I would hope that someone who is the recipient of such "education" reports a nurse who is presenting unsubstantiated (and potentially harmful) opinions as medical facts.
"I do advocate for my patient's. If I am to give a vaccine, I make sure they understand fully the risks. I don't want the person to become ill for life or die because I gave it to them."
I took that as she believes she should be telling them about these discredited theories that she is trying to spread here as well. Highly dangerous to have that coming from a healthcare provider if you ask me.
That's how I interpreted her reply as well. It's deeply frightening. Even a single nurse who doesn't know how to interpret research can cause a significant amount of damage by spreading fallacious information to her/his patients. Sadly there seems to be more than one nurse that fits that description in this thread.
I have to ask, are individual nurses or physicians allowed to give any information to their patients regarding medical matters, such as there own personal misguided subjective opinions, in the US? I'm not sure what the legal standpoint is on this issue.
I'm Swedish. I have a legal obligation to only inform about and practice according to EBM. Alternative methods without an effect proven by solid research isn't allowed. If I stray from that path I'm risking my license. In my opinion, this is as it should be.
I just noticed this part of one of andi78's posts.
I feel it's a problem when a young mother takes her baby for a checkup and is given a single page of information on the vaccines her child is to receive. This bit of information is most likely the only information this mother knows about the vaccine, assuming she hasn't done any research and reading on her own. She has no idea about the ingredients, the chance of adverse reaction, the possible risks, and all the things that some of us know goes on behind the scenes. She is basically handed a paper to read at her convenience and the baby gets the shots. I don't feel that is properly informing the mother.
I provided an article that answers your question as to why parents choose not to vaccinate. I think it sums it up pretty well. I don't tend to focus on the autism side. I'm more on the side of ingredients, questionable data, bigPharm, and possible health issues it causes down the road.
Andi, what exactly do you say to your patients/parents of patients about ingredients, questionable data, bigPharm and possible long-term health effests in connection with immunization vaccines?
That's great you do! Really, I don't care what piece of paper you received from a college. You use that to make others think they should believe you over anyone else. That doesn't mean you are an expert. It just means that you spent a lot of money to get a piece of paper. People can learn without school. People can study and dissect information for themselves. There are many who have doctorates and believe the exact opposite of what you claim in this thread too.
"That piece of paper" represents years of in depth study. Only a person with minimal education would suggest otherwise, because they truly don't know what they don't know. The posters here who have made this field their primary area of expertise have exposed your bogus data time and time again. They have kicked.your.butt. at every single turn. Each time you link a source, it turns out to be either an opinion piece, a biased web site full of more opinion pieces, or links to studies which upon further scrutiny reveal that they have been deliberately misinterpreted, or worse, twisted into an outright lie. These sites count on the fact that the reader is uneducated as to the subject matter, or won't take the time to actually look at the linked studies and evaluate them.
As for people being rude: pot, meet kettle. You aren't fooling anyone with your nonsense.
There is not one valid research study which has "proved" that vaccines cause autism, aluminum poisoning which causes silver drainage from skin tissues (GMAFB) or Alzheimers, or any of the other lies you have attempted to promote here. For that matter, no ONE study can "prove" anything. One has to look at the preponderance of the evidence to begin drawing conclusions, and there are REAMS of properly conducted studies which reveal that vaccines are by far more safe and effective than allowing these deadly diseases to take hold again in our world. There are NOT reams of properly conducted studies to suggest the opposite.
You and your other holistic minded sidekick are not convincing anyone who understands science and how to evaluate research studies of your baloney because it is so clear how dishonest the sources used to justify them are. Unfortunately, people like you may fool the vulnerable people in the population who look at YOUR "piece of paper" and assume that you know what the hell you are talking about, swallow your conspiracy theories and go on to cause harm to their own children or someone else's. Here your ignorance is essentially harmless, but out in the community, you are going to hurt innocent people. It's a shame.
The tide is going to turn eventually, and the anti-vaxxers are going to find themselves shut out of public schools and universities, social gatherings, etc. as people finally begin to put the community foot down and enforce consequences for people who would erode the herd immunity that protects the most vulnerable among us.
In my honest opinion, the anti vaxers should be made to march past the graves of the thousands of children who died during the Polio epidemic.
I have a son on the autism spectrum, and having thoroughly researched both sides, I'm staunchly in favor of vaccinations. There is absolutely no credible evidence that can prove that there is a link between autism and vaccines.
Sent from my iPhone using allnurses
Late on this, am going back to the origins of this thread and wanted to comment.
I, too, have an autistic child, and when telling this to an acquaintance when my son was quite young, she informed me that it must have been the MMR vaccination that caused it, because after all there's PROOF. Hmmm.
I told her that I was quite certain that the MMR vax did NOT cause my child's autism, as he exhibited characteristics of that disorder LONG before he ever received the vaccination. Still, she persisted, the MMR most probably "enhanced" the traits. Ummm.....NO, the kid was autistic, I KNEW he was autistic, he was a walking BILLBOARD for autism, and he hadn't come anywhere NEAR the danged vaccination at that point! I just happened to be a mom of an older child so I had a pretty good idea of developmental milestones, etc, as well as running a monthly mother/baby group so I got to see first-hand LOTS of babies/toddlers/preschoolers in the early stages of development. Nope...my son was definitely autistic and definitely before receiving the vaccinations. I have no doubt there are many parents who don't recognize it that early, and therefore think it "appeared" immediately after vaccination. Placing blame where it isn't due.
As for the acquaintance, she still didn't believe it wasn't the MMR. She was programmed to say "that's what did it" and that's all she could continue to do.
That's great you do! Really, I don't care what piece of paper you received from a college. You use that to make others think they should believe you over anyone else. That doesn't mean you are an expert. It just means that you spent a lot of money to get a piece of paper. People can learn without school. People can study and dissect information for themselves. There are many who have doctorates and believe the exact opposite of what you claim in this thread too.
I missed the people with Doctorates on this thread that are arguing against vaccination. Do you care to point them out?
Actually, having a DNP or DNAP does imply that you are an expert at evaluating medical/nursing literature. There will always be something we don't know, but we are trained to critically evaluate medical studies. We have proven our expertise among other academics that hold a doctorate on many occasions and we submit our final research through an academic committee to prove that we know how to expertly critically evaluate literature. I think our hundreds of hours, if not thousands of hours, of guided analysis of the literature outweighs anything that you have self taught yourself about critically evaluating scientific literature.
You consider a reproductive psychiatrist that makes her living offering alternate medicine consults as an expert, but not a nurse because they don't share your own point of view..?
Okay, then if you understand how to dissect literature why haven't been able to identify the differences in systematic literature reviews, meta-analysis, RCTs, reviews, commentary, perspective, and opinion pieces? You have lumped them all together and consider all these type of articles to carry the same scientific weight.
She was programmed to say "that's what did it" and that's all she could continue to do.
RNsRWe, ASN, RN
3 Articles; 10,428 Posts
That's actually what I'm concerned about, thank you for responding. I'm curious as to what "additional" education is being provided, beyond the CDC's VIS pages for each vaccine.