(So glad I stumbled across this website again after almost 6 years! I need to change my username because I am not an aspiring nurse anymore, I have been a nurse for almost 3 years! ?)
Anyway, I really do not want to take this new covid vaccine. I know I can’t be the only one who feels this way. Typically I am not an anti-vaxxer but something about this illness is making me think otherwise. For personal reasons I really do not want to take it when available at my hospital, but I’m afraid it will be mandatory. I am almost considering finding a new job if my hospital forces us all to take it. What a shame because I do like my job and wouldn’t know what else to turn to that isn’t nursing, because chances are most healthcare related places of employment will likely require all employees take it.
I want to use the excuse of it being against my religion but I already took the flu vaccine this year. I have nothing against the flu vaccine but didn’t necessarily want it, but my hospital practically FORCED everyone to take it unless they grant you an exemption. I’m afraid they’ll question me why I took the flu shot but cannot take the covid vaccine.
What do you guys think about this? Will you be taking the vaccine? I just want us to be able to make our own decisions about this. If patients can refuse medications, procedures, and treatments, why can’t healthcare workers do the same? I read in multiple articles it will not be required by the federal government but each state and employer can decide whether or not it will be mandatory.
And forget the $1500 “stimulus check” that may be offered if you take it. All the money in the world would not change my mind about taking the vaccine. I feel as though if you have to bribe people to take it, something is peculiar.
I don’t know why this is bothering me so much. It should be a choice in my opinion. But by telling a few friends about not wanting it I feel judged. I have worked with covid patients multiple times since I am one of the younger nurses who does not have any kids/am pregnant. I feel like week after week I was always chosen to go to the covid section. At first I was mad but now it doesn’t bother me. I am not afraid to be near covid patients. Luckily through all this time I haven’t caught it. I always tell people I’d rather catch it than get this vaccine. That’s how strongly I feel against taking the vaccine. All of my non-nursing who have had covid are covered and thriving. To me catching it isn’t the biggest deal but others have called me selfish because I could be spreading it to others. Why is it looked at as selfish for not wanting to inject something into MY body. #mybodymychoice
Am I thinking about this too much? What would you do?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
44 minutes ago, Jeckrn1 said:
A perfect example of a previous post of what happens when you don't follow the company line.
This post shows the posters bias for the vaccine. By pushing to get a vaccine that has not had long term proper testing being a advocate for your patients?
There's that "company line" rhetoric again. Maybe you can articulate how sharing data, evidence and facts while others express their cultivated vaccine fears is some sort of company line. I highly doubt it, but you have an opportunity. Do you believe that advocating for public health recommendations is the same as parroting some "company line"?
The science is actually biased in favor of vaccination but that is lost on the folks who elevate fear above knowledge. The evidence is pretty lopsided this point. Mostly because the people wanting to forego vaccination can't seem to find any credible evidence to support their fears. If they could it's easy to imagine that they would include those citations and details in their arguments.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
10 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
11 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
Which aspect of the data presented is misinformation? It would be preferable to present better information which demonstrates that the aforementioned information is not correct than simply to assert that the data presented is "misinformation". One approach stops discussion while the other may facilitate greater learning and understanding.
I'm not interested in furthering discussion on nonsense and propaganda about the covid death rate. No health processional should be entertaining that crap this late in the game.
How is it that you can't recognize obvious covid baloney so many months into this experience?
Which aspect of the data presented is misinformation? It would be preferable to present better information which demonstrates that the aforementioned information is not correct than simply to assert that the data presented is "misinformation". One approach stops discussion while the other may facilitate greater learning and understanding.
I, for one, was verging on giving up because you seem to be filibustering this thread, and were refusing to back down from wholly unsubstantiated claims like where you said the vaccine was riskier to people under 50 than the virus itself, despite a pretty clear-cut refutation. Discussion is only a good thing when it's held in good faith. I was starting to get the impression that I was humoring bad faith propaganda rather than furthering thoughtful inquiry.
13 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
I think that as long as we can all agree that the vaccines should be voluntary then we are at least mostly on the same page.
I can definitely live with this, if you mean it. Does this also mean we can agree that while more data on the vaccinations would be useful and that caution is not unreasonable, the data we have so far is promising? That you'll stop making factually incorrect statements about either what we know about the vaccinations so far and about the virus itself? At least agree to acknowledge reliable data when it's presented rather than treating this like some debate club?
There's that "company line" rhetoric again. Maybe you can articulate how sharing data, evidence and facts while others express their cultivated vaccine fears is some sort of company line. I highly doubt it, but you have an opportunity. Do you believe that advocating for public health recommendations is the same as parroting some "company line"?
The science is actually biased in favor of vaccination but that is lost on the folks who elevate fear above knowledge. The evidence is pretty lopsided this point. Mostly because the people wanting to forego vaccination can't seem to find any credible evidence to support their fears. If they could it's easy to imagine that they would include those citations and details in their arguments.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
19 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
Also, perhaps a better example of natural herd immunity before vaccination was Chicken Pox. Most people got it by age 12 or so and most survived (some however became very sick and perished). However, it also had/has late life ramifications like Shingles making the vaccine worthwhile. Still, even before the vaccine (for Chicken Pox) there was a high rate of "herd" immunity. Conversely, with diseases like Polio and measles herd immunity was achieved mostly through vaccination. It is usually a combination of both people getting the disease and vaccination that ultimately achieves this result.
Holy cow.
Most people suffer through varicella once in their lives. Most people develop long term immunity after experiencing infection. Are those things true for covid?
I, for one, was verging on giving up because you seem to be filibustering this thread, and were refusing to back down from wholly unsubstantiated claims like where you said the vaccine was riskier to people under 50 than the virus itself, despite a pretty clear-cut refutation. Discussion is only a good thing when it's held in good faith. I was starting to get the impression that I was humoring bad faith propaganda rather than furthering thoughtful inquiry.
I can definitely live with this, if you mean it. Does this also mean we can agree that while more data on the vaccinations would be useful and that caution is not unreasonable, the data we have so far is promising? That you'll stop making factually incorrect statements about either what we know about the vaccinations so far and about the virus itself? At least agree to acknowledge reliable data when it's presented rather than treating this like some debate club?
These issues are very serious to me (being a health professional and having had the disease twice that I know of). Just because I might interpret the data differently or come to different (and yes sometimes incorrect conclusions) does not mean that the process isn't worthwhile. I assume that you and others have "good intentions and motives" even when I disagree with your positions or conclusions or believe them to be incorrect. All I ask for is the same. I question everything from all sources to the best of my ability and then make the best decisions that I can (and then question the validity of those).
4 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:
Holy cow.
Most people suffer through varicella once in their lives. Most people develop long term immunity after experiencing infection. Are those things true for covid?
I was trying to provide an example of one process of herd immunity. Every disease and individual is unique. I was also trying to examine the interaction between vaccination and getting the disease in the context of herd immunity. Bottom line is that herd immunity will play a role in how our civilization reacts to this disease.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
16 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
These issues are very serious to me (being a health professional and having had the disease twice that I know of). Just because I might interpret the data differently or come to different (and yes sometimes incorrect conclusions) does not mean that the process isn't worthwhile. I assume that you and others have "good intentions and motives" even when I disagree with your positions or conclusions or believe them to be incorrect. All I ask for is the same. I question everything from all sources to the best of my ability and then make the best decisions that I can (and then question the validity of those).
I was trying to provide an example of one process of herd immunity. Every disease and individual is unique. I was also trying to examine the interaction between vaccination and getting the disease in the context of herd immunity. Bottom line is that herd immunity will play a role in how our civilization reacts to this disease.
Do you believe that the varicella vaccine was developed with the goal of achieving herd immunity?
I think that as long as we can all agree that the vaccines should be voluntary then we are at least mostly on the same page. It would also be good to do a large cohort study (starting now) of hospital workers who receive and decline the vaccine over the next year or two looking at all outcomes including Covid infection rates as well as other morbidity and mortality. It should at least provide some additional data (albeit not as good as an RCT which probably isn't reasonable at this juncture) with which to develop a basis for informed consent. Hopefully, this is occurring as we speak.
Agreed. A year from now if the experimental vaccines being released right now prove themselves to be effective and safe we will all see for ourselves, and the majority of HCWs who are concerned at this time will be more than happy to take them.
The majority of people who are concerned are vaccinated for other things and are not anti vaccine. It’s just going to take time, a fast tracked research study is not the same as watching it play out for yourself. It would be unethical to mandate an experimental vaccine but once an appropriate amount of time and a (diverse) group of studies emerge including studies regarding the long term effects are available we won’t be having this conversation anymore.
In the meantime, respect your peers decisions over the next year regarding taking any of the experimental vaccines available now. And thank those who are willing to do so now, because it is them that will allow for the evidence needed for others to choose get vaccinated in the future.
Well stated. This is why myself and most other HCW’s feel who are not getting the vaccine at this time. If a person what’s or does not want the vaccine that is a personal decision.
No thank you. You can explain specifically why you directed that phrase at me or let it stand as nonsense.
There had been a discussion of herd immunity above and I was trying to explore a bit of the nuance between several different diseases and how it interacted with those specific conditions. In the case of Varicella there was significant (but not complete, as is also the case with Measles) of herd immunity and there is also significant sequelae associated with contracting Varicella thus making the vaccine very worthwhile for most people.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
58 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
When we live in a country where others define for us what is "normal for a health professional to display such biased view of vaccination and public health objectives." we have slipped into a dystopian society. Who are you or even the CDC or World Health Organization for that matter to decide what is bias and what is not? There is a wealth of information subject to a multitude of nuanced interpretation. Herd immunity is the only way this disease (or any infectious disease) will ultimately be controlled and hopefully vaccination will be a part of that process. However, it is vital that it remain voluntary in the context of informed consent with a balanced perspective between the risks and benefits of any vaccine. I experienced a decade where I had the "choice" of taking a flu vaccine (that I didn't want) or find another job. Indeed, even to go to school for both my undergrad and graduate degrees I was given the choice of "show proof of vaccination or you cannot go to school". I fear that I will be faced with a similar "choice" over the course of time with these forthcoming vaccines and I do not relish the idea.
OMG
Yes, it's a dystopian society when self described health professionals disregard and even discredit the expert opinions and analysis of chosen and elevated experts in the CDC or WHO.
Exactly how do you think that herd immunity is achieved, apart from use of a vaccine, with a covid that doesn't impart long term immunity?
No person in this thread is advocating mandatory vaccination.
toomuchbaloney
16,033 Posts
There's that "company line" rhetoric again. Maybe you can articulate how sharing data, evidence and facts while others express their cultivated vaccine fears is some sort of company line. I highly doubt it, but you have an opportunity. Do you believe that advocating for public health recommendations is the same as parroting some "company line"?
The science is actually biased in favor of vaccination but that is lost on the folks who elevate fear above knowledge. The evidence is pretty lopsided this point. Mostly because the people wanting to forego vaccination can't seem to find any credible evidence to support their fears. If they could it's easy to imagine that they would include those citations and details in their arguments.