(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?
Sorry to deflate your bubble but it is true. Just read below. I would think the corner would know.
GRAND COUNTY, Colo. (CBS4) – The Grand County coroner is calling attention to the way the state health department is classifying some deaths. The coroner, Brenda Bock, says two of their five deaths related to COVID-19 were people who died of gunshot wounds.
The coroner specifically pointed out that these were not counted as deaths due to Covid, but as deaths among Covid cases. The coroners concern was that some people might confuse this as deaths due to Covid.
Every state appears to track both sets of numbers, but so far there doesn't appear to be any proof that anyone who clearly did not die of Covid was counted as a death resulting from Covid rather than a non-covid death within the Covid positive group. Despite that, people here persist on making that claim to bolster the argument that Covid-19 isn't that big of a deal.
Either we have the lowest influenza activity in the last 100years or thousands of cases of influenza and their deaths are being counted as Covid https://www.CDC.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm . Also on the two occasions that I had confirmed Covid 19 I asked the provider/MD if I happened to die from an MI, stroke, or pneumonia if I would be counted as a Covid death (I was minimally symptomatic). I was told "absolutely" since it would be impossible to ascertain that Covid did not play "some role" in my morbidity or mortality. I have talked to former ICU coworkers and they advise that even clients with DNR's who are withdrawal (from vents) for other conditions (such as stroke/MI) are being counted as Covid deaths if they are positive (and everyone in the ICU are tested). This is Florida so it that is happening here I cannot imagine what states like California are doing.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
9 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
Either we have the lowest influenza activity in the last 100years or thousands of cases of influenza and their deaths are being counted as Covid https://www.CDC.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm . Also on the two occasions that I had confirmed Covid 19 I asked the provider/MD if I happened to die from an MI, stroke, or pneumonia if I would be counted as a Covid death (I was minimally symptomatic). I was told "absolutely" since it would be impossible to ascertain that Covid did not play "some role" in my morbidity or mortality. I have talked to former ICU coworkers and they advise that even clients with DNR's who are withdrawal (from vents) for other conditions (such as stroke/MI) are being counted as Covid deaths if they are positive (and everyone in the ICU are tested). This is Florida so it that is happening here I cannot imagine what states like California are doing.
Gosh, it's almost like if a significant portion of the population DOES mask, distance and sanitize (because of a very contagious covid) the less contagious influenza virus will also be mitigated.
Your anecdotal personal history would suggest that following 2 acute experiences with covid, your sudden death or disability from a stroke, MI or pneumonia would most certainly be unexpected unless associated with covid. Do you have some other underlying risk for those causes of death?
Did California terminate the person responsible for the state's covid data and politicize the data? No that was Florida. Why are you projecting one governor's actions onto another?
Also on the two occasions that I had confirmed Covid 19 I asked the provider/MD if I happened to die from an MI, stroke, or pneumonia if I would be counted as a Covid death (I was minimally symptomatic). I was told "absolutely" since it would be impossible to ascertain that Covid did not play "some role" in my morbidity or mortality. I have talked to former ICU coworkers and they advise that even clients with DNR's who are withdrawal (from vents) for other conditions (such as stroke/MI) are being counted as Covid deaths if they are positive (and everyone in the ICU are tested).
Hearsay is ALWAYS the best foundation for spreading misinformation. I would definately say what you stated here is substantial evidence that Covid is being attributed to deaths unrelated to the virus.
Specializes in Critical care, tele, Medical-Surgical.
5 hours ago, myoglobin said:
If masks and social distancing are the answer then why has almost every European country suffered a similar fate (repeated closings and lockdowns) despite more restrictive lockdowns and mask laws? The peer reviewed Danish study proved that masks have little (if any) protective effect on catching the Covid 19 virus https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/danish-study-doesnt-prove-masks-don't-work-against-the-coronavirus/ . However, it did not prove that masks don't help prevent it's spread (they probably do). However, the approach that I advise of lower risk people (under 65 without comorbidities) going back to work where necessary (working from home where possible) and providing better masks (N-95) and goggles/faceshields for more at risk individuals who desire to go out has never been attempted.
From your linked Fact Check:
Danish Study Doesn’t Prove Masks Don’t Work Against the Coronavirus
Q: Did a recent study in Denmark show that face masks are useless for COVID-19?
A: No. The study found that face masks did not have a large protective effect for wearers — not that masks provide no protection at all or don’t offer benefits to others...
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers
Background: Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both.
Objective: To assess whether recommending surgical mask use outside the home reduces wearers' risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a setting where masks were uncommon and not among recommended public health measures.
Design: Randomized controlled trial (DANMASK-19 [Danish Study to Assess Face Masks for the Protection Against COVID-19 Infection]). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04337541)
Setting: Denmark, April and May 2020.
Participants: Adults spending more than 3 hours per day outside the home without occupational mask use.
Intervention: Encouragement to follow social distancing measures for coronavirus disease 2019, plus either no mask recommendation or a recommendation to wear a mask when outside the home among other persons together with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use.
Measurements: The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection in the mask wearer at 1 month by antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis. The secondary outcome was PCR positivity for other respiratory viruses.
Results: A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.
Limitation: Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.
Conclusion:
The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.
The Role of Masks in Mitigating the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Another Piece of the Puzzle
... We must first emphasize that this trial does not address the first question about transmission in communities where most people wear masks and does not disprove the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing. We explain how this trial adds to what we know about masks in the community and risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection...
... Two aspects are important to note. First, the study examined the effect of recommending mask use, not the effect of actually wearing them. Adherence to public health recommendations is always imperfect, as it was in this study, and can differ dramatically in communities with different attitudes toward such recommendations. Second, the effect of a mask recommendation also depends on many other factors, including the prevalence of the virus, social distancing behaviors, and the frequency and characteristics of gatherings. Mask wearing is just one of several interacting strategies to reduce viral transmission, with each reinforcing the others.
If the DANMASK-19 trial was not designed to answer a key public health question regarding widespread mask wearing as source control and did not provide a precise estimate of the personal protective effect of masks, why did Annals publish it?...
Also on the two occasions that I had confirmed Covid 19....
I’m curious about this. Confirmed reinfections are still as I understand it quite rare, yet you are the fourth or fifth poster I see on this forum saying that you’ve been infected by SARS-CoV-2 twice. One poster even shared that she’d been infected twice and at least two residents at the LTC she worked at had also been reinfected. This was probably back in October or early November.
Were both your bouts of Covid confirmed with whole viral genome sequencing and found to be two separate infections?
This article was published in the Lancet covering the data available from the start of the pandemic in December 2019 to about mid-September of 2020. It lists four confirmed cases of Covid-19 reinfections. Worldwide.
It seems reasonable to assume that number has increased somewhat since then and will increase further as time goes by, but I still think it’s a bit of a statistical outlier that so many people report anecdotal reinfections here considering the small number of confirmed reinfections after many millions of cases worldwide. And I make money playing poker ♣️?
It’s not that I necessarily think that people are lying, but rather that I suspect that people for various reasons might mistakenly believe that they’ve been infected twice. One possible reason is ongoing viral shedding from the original infection being mistaken for a new infection.
If the reinfections reported here are genuine there is likely a whole bunch of medical researchers who would love to write an article about y’all. It would be highly relevant data that is needed to better understand this virus.
Herring, I do agree with the rest of your post but I have to confess.. those pictures don’t really do it for me ? I only agree with the third one. Both pants and masks are decent source control, but as someone who has been peed on more than once I must say that I was even more disgusted by having my uniform urinated on and having it soak thorough to my skin and being forced to walk around with disgusting, soggy uniform pants until I could take them off.. and... burn ? them. I’d much rather wear shorts and just clean my bare shins which could be achieved quickly ? There is a reason that our surgical masks have a fluid-repellant outer layer. Pants suck as protection ? Source control for the urinator, yes. Protection for the urinatee... No.
This just proves that if you don’t wear the right protection it won’t work. Because if you get pee on and the pants are not water proof you will still get wet; just like mask that don’t stop airborne viruses you will still get exposed to the virus.
Danish Study Doesn’t Prove Masks Don’t Work Against the Coronavirus
Q: Did a recent study in Denmark show that face masks are useless for COVID-19?
A: No. The study found that face masks did not have a large protective effect for wearers — not that masks provide no protection at all or don’t offer benefits to others...
Specializes in Specializes in L/D, newborn, GYN, LTC, Dialysis.
I did read up and talked to people more educated than myself. I get this vaccine on Dec 31 after work. I am off the next day so if I have some side effects I can rest. Of the people I KNOW who got this vaccine, the main side effects were headache, soreness at the site and mild flu-like complaints. No one has had a single complaint more than that.
I want to protect myself and my patients and particularly, family, who are not able to get vaccinated yet, so off I go. I hope to be able to spread my (hopefully, good) experience details regarding the vaccination and encourage others.
JVBT, ASN
95 Posts
You don't seem to be addressing the specific responses you have received on this.