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?
Dr. Peter Venkman: Ray, pretend for a moment that I don't know anything about metallurgy, engineering, or physics, and just tell me what the hell is going on.
Again, data can be twisted. Again, sometimes personal observation is evidence enough.
Actually, personal observation is not enough.
Limited sample size, too much variability, biased interpretation. You talk about hard data being twisted, what do you think about personal observation being twisted?
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...
Not calcium ion harvested at night under direct light from a new moon, which is the only type I recommend. I sell it at the front deck for $28 per tablet.
I post some good points, yet you focus on trivial stuff like how I said I stay 3 feet away from sick people.
What were your best points?
I feel we are on the verge of something new.
We are, a pandemic.
I am great nurse regardless. I take great care of my patients.
Andi, honestly you aren't. You tell yourself you are. You convince yourself you are. But when you are actively working against evidenced-based practice you are putting patients at risk. You are not doing it maliciously and you may even think and believe you are doing the "right thing" and can envision yourself saving lvies from the horrible fate of an autoimmune issue, but the truth is you are putting patients at greater risk by doing it.
I have a few "frequent flyers" I tried this with today but my stethoscope isn't long enough. If you don't at least listen to them they won't buy your supplements.
Limited sample size, too much variability, biased interpretation. You talk about hard data being twisted, what do you think about personal observation being twisted?
I personally observe that no one I have ever talked to about this stuff has gotten any of the vaccine-preventable illnesses, except for the flu. I personally observed my vaccinated-against-the-flu-self was the one to break that record this year. I personally observed that I got a heck of a lot less sick than my not-yet-vaccinated-against-the-flu daughter when she got it right before me. I personally observed a co-worker's less than a year old daughter contract a vaccine-preventable illness that caused this poor baby to be on pressors and a vent, complete with a few RBC and platelet transfusions, for weeks. WEEKS. I personally observed a professor break down in tears telling the story of his wife losing her baby due to chicken pox.
Hold on, I'll post a link to other personal observations. Maybe Andi will appreciate those.
Specializes in Med nurse in med-surg., float, HH, and PDN.
This thread is going almost faster than I can keep up with !
andi78--Just wondering what you think of Consumer Reports? Are they part of the Gov't/Pharma scam? They have multiple articles on-line about vaccines.
For instance there was one that was about vaccine safety in childhood, which said that the possibility of brain inflammation occurring after a person having been vaccinated for measles is 1 in 1 million. What if that is your child, right?
Well they also say that a person who has had the measles 'naturally' and has NOT been vaccinated ? Their chance of brain inflammation after the event is 1 in 1,000. What if that is YOUR child?
Please wait... I will repost this video since it gives a great example of what "proven" means in science and what it means to the general public.
Ah, my hero again. Listening now at work. Thanks! Y'all have moved quickly since I was here this morning. Again, great links with true research!
Actually, personal observation is not enough.
Limited sample size, too much variability, biased interpretation. You talk about hard data being twisted, what do you think about personal observation being twisted?
Very true - eyewitness accounts in legal circles are not very reliable due to the same issues.
When a car accident occurs, you are shocked and what you personally perceive will almost certainly be a bit different than another eyewitness. The person in the car, the person behind the car, the person two lanes over, the person on the sidewalk . . . all different perspectives.
(edited to add - I personally experienced this back in 1978 when I was hit broadside by a vehicle that ran a red light. Of course I was shook up but not hurt. I thought the vehicle was a purple pickup. The eyewitnesses on the street said a white sedan. It was a white sedan. )
In courtrooms, eyewitness accounts aren't superior to actual physical evidence. Lots of scientific research on that but I won't post links since that isn't the subject of this post.
I'm just a bit appalled that someone would rely on "personal observation" rather than science. Especially a person who works in the medical field.
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.
Horseshoe, BSN, RN
5,879 Posts
Lol, "Who you gonna call?"