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?
WAIT! Didn't you just argue that you can't trust the government, or government funded studies??? But you can trust them for this, just not the "tainted" studies? Which one's are tainted again?
An informed decision is right. Or would it just be about how great vaccines are. How about letting her know that her child could die (but they say it's rare) or could become ill after the vaccine. Instead we tread lightly on those parts of education. We don't want to scare someone into not taking it but convince them that the risk is so low. But what if their child is the one.
Do you tell a patient when you give them Tylenol that this drug has the highest chance of killing them than any other drug in the U.S.? The risks are specifically stated for vaccines, and in almost all vaccines the risk or death or permanent disability is
There is inherent risk in everything. The risk that a child will die from an OTC medication is 10,000's x greater than from a vaccine. There is a greater risk of child dying learning to swim or ride their bicycle than from a vaccine. No one is denying their is a risk to vaccines or any medication. It is just that most of us don't use the "I believe" system to base our nursing practices on.
No, it's what is happening. You just can't see it or don't want to. If you take a look at history, you might better understand how governments tend to become corrupt. I wouldn't doubt it if we see another Hitler-like situation someday. Edward Snowden? Remember him? Yeah he busted out the gov for their surveillance program. I'm sure there is much more going on that we aren't even aware of. Conspiracy? Nope. It's just the truth. It's what is happening in the world. So why would I feel confident in gov funded studies?
I have to confess that I've not read this thread all that closely, but if this is the first comparison to Hitler, then congrats! It took 85 pages for her to get around to it.
So would you take Tums or recommend it during pregnancy? Tums has less of a safety rating than these recommended vaccines and has less studies showing it is safe in pregnancy.
I have figured it out! It isn't the vaccines increasing autism. It is those dang antacids. The calcium crosses the placenta binds to the Ca++ ion channels in the brain through the non-intact blood brain barrier causing intermittent antagonization of developing neurons thus making incomplete neuronal synapses...
I have to confess that I've not read this thread all that closely, but if this is the first comparison to Hitler, then congrats! It took 85 pages for her to get around to it.
Nope, she had a Nazi reference before that one. Not sure what page, though.
pregnancy places otherwise healthy women at increased risk for serious complications from influenza. 1, 2, 3, 4 Vaccination continues to be the most effective method for preventing severe influenza illness and its sequelae. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 .....Pregnant women were >4 times more likely to be hospitalized for novel influenza A (H1N1)-related complications than those infected in the general population, and accounted for 13% of all deaths from pandemic influenza A (H1N1) during this time period. Most of the pregnant women who died as a consequence of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) were healthy prior to their influenza illness. 4
Many pregnant women struggle with the concept of vaccination during pregnancy because of theoretical concerns regarding harm to the fetus. In the longitudinal, population-based Collaborative Perinatal Project that was conducted between 1959-1965, >2000 pregnant women received influenza vaccination, almost a third during the first trimester. The children of these women were followed up for the first 7 years of life, and maternal influenza immunization did not increase the number of stillbirths, congenital malformations, malignancies, or neurocognitive disabilities. 39, 40
In another longitudinal, prospective study, Deinard and Ogburn 36 detected no association between maternal influenza immunization and maternal, perinatal, or infant complications. No teratogenicity was documented, and the infants of vaccinated mothers did not differ from nonvaccinated offspring in physical or neurological assessments at birth and 8 weeks of life.
Similarly, a large retrospective, matched cohort study, which included 3160 infants born to influenza-vaccinated mothers and 37,969 infants born to nonvaccinated mothers, revealed no differences with regard to birthweight, gestational age, or length of stay for birth hospitalization. 31 The safety of the inactivated influenza vaccine was assessed in 7 other trials in which >4500 pregnant women were vaccinated and no significant adverse effects to the fetus were identified 30, 32, 33, 35,37, 41 (Table).
Inactivated influenza vaccine can be safely and effectively administered during any trimester of pregnancy. No study to date has demonstrated an increased risk of either maternal complications or untoward fetal outcomes associated with inactivated influenza vaccination.
(Tamma et all, 2009)
So if in fact you are telling women that there is more likelihood of harm if they have a flu vaccine than if they do not, you are leading more to have harm occur to them and their fetuses than you are helping.
It scares you? It scares me that some nurses are so close minded and don't understand different ways of doing things or not critically thinking about things. I never knew thinking critically meant doing things just because. I am a great nurse, and I advocate for my patients. I care about their health, and I will make darn sure they know the risks before they do anything.
As for the mandated flu vaccine, I have the option to wear a mask the entire flu season, which I will gladly accept. If it comes to me losing my job, so be it. It's a shame that companies and the government are trying to force people into medical issues that they do not agree with. It's my body, not theirs. Patient's have the right to refuse vaccines but nurses don't in the workplace? That is not right. It's slippery slope we are journeying down, and I truly fear the future. When we have no choice. Our country is turning into a communist country where we will eventually have no choice. It's truly a shame.
Forgive me - that was the first Hitler reference. I got mixed up by a communist reference. This was the post I was thinking of.
Safety probably wasn't tested. It says it wasn't "established."
The only way to "establish" and get an A pregnancy safety rating for a drug is to have clinical trials done on pregnant humans. The only drugs that are going to get IRB approval for that kind of thing drugs specifically meant to be used for pregnancy related conditions i.e. oxytocin, methergine etc.
Vaccines like most other medications rely on retrospective studies and pregnant animal studies to determine safety during pregnancy.
I have to confess that I've not read this thread all that closely, but if this is the first comparison to Hitler, then congrats! It took 85 pages for her to get around to it.
I have to confess that I've not read this thread all that closely, but if this is the first comparison to Hitler, then congrats! It took 85 pages for her to get around to it.
Not the first, but we got Stalin/communism much sooner.
Red Kryptonite
2,212 Posts
Oopsie