California 1st in nation to require vaccines for health care workers

Horseshoe, BSN, RN · Aug 13, 2021

I try to err on the low key side of things, and try not to be argumentative. The point that Baloney is making is something I've thought about and at the end of the day, agree with. This is a web site for nurses. However, there is no professional vetting done, so anyone can come and post. People can represent themselves as nurses even if they have never set foot in any medical facility ever in a professional role. People who are not nurses can come here to get information, familiarize themselves with the nursing point of view, and for many other reasons.

When people who either are nurses (or people who represent themselves as such but are not nurses) post misinformation, these posts are viewed by people who come here from all over the world. Nurses are a trusted profession and our words can influence. I'm actually surprised the mods allow posts which contain not only misinformation by confused people, but outright lies that are surely posted by antivaxxers who have made it their mission to create fear and mistrust of not just the covid vaccines, but all vaccines. We are supposed to be an evidence based profession, so I understand that Baloney is not calling out what she sees as flimsy evidence of covid vaccine safety issues to convince the naysayers-she is trying to prevent information-seeking laypeople who come here from being scared off vaccines for invalid reasons. Her posts are not necessarily written the way I would always write them, but I certainly get where she is coming from.

If you understand that she is posting not for the benefit of the people making the arguments, but for people who might see and assimilate these views, her passion makes much more sense. JMHO

jive turkey · Aug 13, 2021

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

This isn't a clinic. No one can catch their patient's diabetes or emphysema or high blood pressure. The members in these threads are not our patients, they are supposed to be our health professional peers. Your analogy is not relevant.

The antivaxxers aren't here looking for information to inform themselves. They are here to spread their excuses and flawed reasons to not vaccinate. Why can't you discern that?

I'm not trying to change their minds. I'm not interested in their misinformation and poorly informed opinions about or interpretations of the data. They are wrong and should vaccinate asap. I will continue to tell them that they are behaving in antisocial and unpatriotic ways in a national public health crisis.

Their ignorance makes them feel argumentative. The cognitive dissonance of their antivaxx stance leads to their defensiveness.

The example is relevant to education given to those who didn't request it. Perhaps you misunderstood.

What I've discerned is you have an opinion about the intentions and thoughts of those who disagree with you. Just because you think it, doesn't make it true.

You're engaging with people who have a contrary opinion that you say you don't care about. That is interesting.

Do you genuinely believe telling people they are antisocial and unpatriotic is the most intelligent and efficient way to achieve your goal of having people vaccinate?

You would have better success responding to "anti vaxxers" with facts and data in your posts. Even if you don't convince the "anti vaxxer", you may persuade the others you are concerned read these posts for information. Name calling and venting may not sway the doubtful.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong about vaccination to be clear. So.....

I challenge you to just put the facts in your next post rather than use generic language. Let everyone see it and be satisfied.

toomuchbaloney · Aug 13, 2021

7 minutes ago, jive turkey said:

The example is relevant to education given to those who didn't request it. Perhaps you misunderstood.

What I've discerned is you have an opinion about the intentions and thoughts of those who disagree with you. Just because you think it, doesn't make it true.

You're engaging with people who have a contrary opinion that you say you don't care about. That is interesting.

Do you genuinely believe telling people they are antisocial and unpatriotic is the most intelligent and efficient way to achieve your goal of having people vaccinate?

You would have better success responding to "anti vaxxers" with facts and data in your posts. Even if you don't convince the "anti vaxxer", you may persuade the others you are concerned read these posts for information. Name calling and venting may not sway the doubtful.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong about vaccination to be clear. So.....

I challenge you to just put the facts in your next post rather than use generic language. Let everyone see it and be satisfied.

Perhaps you didn't understand me the first time.

I'm not trying to change the opinions or feelings of the people visiting these threads who confide that they have not and do not plan to vaccinate in the near future. I do not care what their poorly informed and dangerous opinions include because they are all based in misinformation and propaganda.

I believe in speaking clearly, honestly and as accurately as possible in these forums. The belligerently unvaccinated members in these threads have earned the labels of antisocial, unpatriotic, foolish, selfish, and likely other descriptors.

I challenge you to block my content if you don't like my style. Apparently you haven't noticed that the unvaxxed aren't satisfied with facts and evidence. Why not use YOUR posts to address the visitors who might be swayed by facts rather than focus upon how ineffective you believe I am at achieving goals that are more yours than mine?

jive turkey · Aug 13, 2021

57 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Perhaps you didn't understand me the first time.

I'm not trying to change the opinions or feelings of the people visiting these threads who confide that they have not and do not plan to vaccinate in the near future. I do not care what their poorly informed and dangerous opinions include because they are all based in misinformation and propaganda.

I believe in speaking clearly, honestly and as accurately as possible in these forums. The belligerently unvaccinated members in these threads have earned the labels of antisocial, unpatriotic, foolish, selfish, and likely other descriptors.

I challenge you to block my content if you don't like my style. Apparently you haven't noticed that the unvaxxed aren't satisfied with facts and evidence. Why not use YOUR posts to address the visitors who might be swayed by facts rather than focus upon how ineffective you believe I am at achieving goals that are more yours than mine?

That's what I thought....

You may truly want to promote vaccination however the nature of your posts leaves the impression of someone more interested in arguing and shaming. That's contributing to the problem not helping. My posts were intended to encourage balanced discussion between people with opposing views. Those who are pro and contra vaccine would benefit from respectfully sharing information, perspectives, and learning from each other leading to an informed decision.

If you believe the anti vaxxer is a problem, don't assimilate their behavior by engaging in baseless presumptions about their feelings and intentions.

Have a good night, stay safe!

toomuchbaloney · Aug 13, 2021

27 minutes ago, jive turkey said:

That's what I thought....

You may truly want to promote vaccination however the nature of your posts leaves the impression of someone more interested in arguing and shaming. That's contributing to the problem not helping. My posts were intended to encourage balanced discussion between people with opposing views. Those who are pro and contra vaccine would benefit from respectfully sharing information, perspectives, and learning from each other leading to an informed decision.

If you believe the anti vaxxer is a problem, don't assimilate their behavior by engaging in baseless presumptions about their feelings and intentions.

Have a good night, stay safe!

Your opinion is noted. You don't like that I'm not nice to antivaxxers and I don't care.

We're all good now, you do you and I'll do me.

Soloist, LPN · Aug 13, 2021

5 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Your personal beliefs about the development of the vaccines and ethical consideration is an example of religious extremism. It's foolish to refuse a safe and effective vaccine, in the middle of a pandemic, because of some decades old fetal cell line that is maintained for these purposes. Apparently, those beliefs and feelings about fetal cells are more important to you than participating in the public efforts to end the pandemic.

While you have the right to your position, I would point out you would never convince anyone that they are wrong with this approach.

New cell lines have been made in a fairly consistent pattern with it being said its never going to happen again. First in the 60s then in the 80s then again in 2010. Thats just the vaccine cell lines. We have well over 100 cell lines in regular research from fetal cells in the USA alone. My primary objection is that this research supports further use of new cells from abortion. That is challenged repeatedly but history shows this is a booming expanding industry and its not just cells being used. Fetal tissue/cells are being grafted/injected into mice to create humanized mice for research and production of monoclonal antibodies (link provided as proof) https://www.nuventra.com/resources/blog/monoclonal-antibodies-past-present-and-future/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22723099/

https://www.jax.org/news-and-insights/2014/September/humanized-mice-for-tumor-antibody-production

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20973278/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71548-z

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3755109/

Take it for what you will, but the secular world knows its inconsistent to use the fetal cell produced research and deny funding or support https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/health/trump-covid-fetal-tissue.html

I object to this and feel that unless one takes a stand, it will eventually be what medicine is across the board. More and more advanced medication is being based on this technology or produced from this. Should I just accept that abortion derived medication is the future? I can't and that is why I'm looking for other fields to work in. The future of medicine does not involve me. Unless you've had this stance pre-covid, I doubt you'd convince anyone of conviction...

toomuchbaloney · Aug 13, 2021

8 minutes ago, Soloist said:

While you have the right to your position, I would point out you would never convince anyone that they are wrong with this approach.

New cell lines have been made in a fairly consistent pattern with it being said its never going to happen again. First in the 60s then in the 80s then again in 2010. Thats just the vaccine cell lines. We have well over 100 cell lines in regular research from fetal cells in the USA alone. My primary objection is that this research supports further use of new cells from abortion. That is challenged repeatedly but history shows this is a booming expanding industry and its not just cells being used. Fetal tissue/cells are being grafted/injected into mice to create humanized mice for research and production of monoclonal antibodies (link provided as proof) https://www.nuventra.com/resources/blog/monoclonal-antibodies-past-present-and-future/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22723099/

https://www.jax.org/news-and-insights/2014/September/humanized-mice-for-tumor-antibody-production

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20973278/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71548-z

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3755109/

Take it for what you will, but the secular world knows its inconsistent to use the fetal cell produced research and deny funding or support https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/health/trump-covid-fetal-tissue.html

I object to this and feel that unless one takes a stand, it will eventually be what medicine is across the board. More and more advanced medication is being based on this technology or produced from this. Should I just accept that abortion derived medication is the future? I can't and that is why I'm looking for other fields to work in. The future of medicine does not involve me. Unless you've had this stance pre-covid, I doubt you'd convince anyone of conviction...

You're trying to justify not vaccinating during a deadly pandemic because of your emotions and some belief about fetal cells that lands you in the realm of zealots. Perhaps you didn't understand when I've stated that I'm not trying to change the minds of those who choose to gamble with a deadly VPD because of flawed reasoning. I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm telling you that it's selfish and dangerous to refuse to vaccinate when you otherwise could, especially if you are a health professional working with patients.

I'm glad that you are leaving the profession, we need health professionals who believe in science and elevate that above feelings about old fetal cells. Thanks for at least figuring that out.

jive turkey · Aug 13, 2021

1 hour ago, Soloist said:

While you have the right to your position, I would point out you would never convince anyone that they are wrong with this approach.

Thank you for echoing what I've been trying to say. They made it clear they're not trying to convince anyone to take a vaccine. What's left is them just talking ****.

Let's show them what it looks like to respectfully learn about differing views:

As someone with a more centrist perspective about the controversy surrounding vaccines and mandates I see your primary objection is the use of fetal cells from abortions. In addition to your overall position on abortion are you concerned this practice will compel pharmaceutical companies to discreetly promote elective abortions for testing purposes?

macawake, MSN · Aug 13, 2021

36 minutes ago, jive turkey said:

Thank you for echoing what I've been trying to say. They made it clear they're not trying to convince anyone to take a vaccine. What's left is them just talking ****.

Let's show them what it looks like to respectfully learn about differing views:

You’ve made half a dozen posts complaining about how some posters address posts that attempt to disseminate vaccine disinformation, but as someone who has posted a lot in the Covid subforum, I don’t recall seeing you taking the time to do research and post factual, scientific information, refuting the disinformation. I have done it often enough that I’m considering changing my user name to Nurse Sisyphus. Can you say the same? It’s easy to lecture about how others ought to conduct themselves, but isn’t it time for you to put your money where your mouth is?

36 minutes ago, jive turkey said:

As someone with a more centrist perspective about the controversy surrounding vaccines and mandates I see your primary objection is the use of fetal cells from abortions. In addition to your overall position on abortion are you concerned this practice will compel pharmaceutical companies to discreetly promote elective abortions for testing purposes?

The question you pose is in my opinion rather contrived. It is estimated that some 56 million abortions are performed each year worldwide. Due to misogynistic laws in place in many countries, almost half of them are carried out in conditions that put the woman’s health and life at risk.

Given the large numbers of abortions performed, why would anyone feel the need to ”discreetly promote” abortions? It’s not a logical question to ask.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion

Soloist, LPN · Aug 13, 2021

2 minutes ago, macawake said:

The question you pose is in my opinion rather contrived. It is estimated that some 56 million abortions are performed each year worldwide. Due to misogynistic laws in place in many countries, almost half of them are carried out in conditions that put the woman’s health and life at risk.

Given the large numbers of abortions performed, why would anyone feel the need to ”discretely promote” abortions?

I actually agree, I don't think any pharmaceutical company is promoting abortion. There might be some impact in the way the abortions are performed to acquire specific tissue. I want nothing to do with this practice of benefiting from abortion, but I speak with my personal actions not at the voting box or with what I administer patients. aka, I won't use the medications tested or derived from abortion. I would believe my opinion is very rare. (I don't vote at all, this is a religious belief)

jive turkey · Aug 13, 2021

1 hour ago, macawake said:

You’ve made half a dozen posts complaining about how some posters address posts that attempt to disseminate vaccine disinformation, but as someone who has posted a lot in the Covid subforum, I don’t recall seeing you taking the time to do research and post factual, scientific information, refuting the disinformation. I have done it often enough that I’m considering changing my user name to Nurse Sisyphus. Can you say the same? It’s easy to lecture about how others ought to conduct themselves, but isn’t it time for you to put your money where your mouth is?

The question you pose is in my opinion rather contrived. It is estimated that some 56 million abortions are performed each year worldwide. Due to misogynistic laws in place in many countries, almost half of them are carried out in conditions that put the woman’s health and life at risk.

Given the large numbers of abortions performed, why would anyone feel the need to ”discreetly promote” abortions? It’s not a logical question to ask.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion

Suggesting people utilize a more effective listening and communication strategy to promote or argue against vaccination is not a complaint. My original and subsequent posts were based on that, not scientific data pro or contra vaccination. Reread my posts then come again.

The questions about fetal cells weren't directed towards you. Think what you may. Thank you for contributing.

It's quite interesting to see the feathers ruffled in response to encouraging people to communicate respectfully and learn.

macawake, MSN · Aug 13, 2021

2 hours ago, jive turkey said:

Suggesting people utilize a more effective listening and communication strategy to promote or argue against vaccination is not a complaint. My original and subsequent posts were based on that, not scientific data pro or contra vaccination. Reread my posts then come again.

I honestly think that you are just arguing semantics. You wrote a series of posts, sharing your opinion that you think some posters are belittling and shaming other posters with ”different perspectives”, that you thought that these posters have an attitude, are being argumentative and engage in name calling. You were quite obviously being critical of posters. You could have easily made your point without the criticism and instead just role modelled a positive ”vaccine public service” post. If you don’t want to label your words a complaint, fine. But please own your posts.

2 hours ago, jive turkey said:

The questions about fetal cells weren't directed towards you.

I realize that it wasn’t. However that fact, doesn’t make the question you asked any more logical. It doesn’t make sense to think that companies would try to ”promote” abortions. The first reason is that there simply is no need to due to the number being performed. The second reason is that women don’t have abortions because someone is ”promoting” them. They have them if they deem them necessary. Abortions are different from trying to promote one brand of soda over another, which is a scenario where promotion might work and be an effective tool. In my opinion, you were infantilizing women (no pun intended) when you suggested that abortions can be promoted to them.

If you only want a specific individual to reply to one of your questions, it’s probably better to just send a private message to that person. This is a forum and posters will comment and respond to posts.

2 hours ago, jive turkey said:

Think what you may.

I usually do ?

2 hours ago, jive turkey said:

Thank you for contributing.

There is really no need to thank me. Considering the tone in your reply to me, it just seems a bit off.

2 hours ago, jive turkey said:

It's quite interesting to see the feathers ruffled in response to encouraging people to communicate respectfully and learn.

My feathers aren’t particularly ruffled, and definitely not for the reason you just expressed here.

As I said, I’ve devoted many hours of my time locating evidence and sharing it with posters and answering questions when I can. I haven’t seen you contribute anything to help posters who are on the fence about vaccines, gain a more factual understanding of benefits and risks of Covid vaccines. So I guess I’m asking, who are you to try to lecture people about ”how it should be done”, when you don’t lead by example? It’s easy to criticize, but it actually takes a bit of time and energy to research the facts and share them. I would appreciate your contributions.

I think we need more nurses who actively try to spread accurate and evidence-based information about various pandemic-related topics, including vaccines. There is so much disinformation on the internet and the responsibility to counter that and promote public health falls on healthcare professionals.

Here’s a Youtube clip for anyone out there who still has some concerns regarding the Covid vaccines. I think it is good and easy to follow.