(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?
Justthenews is John Solomon's vanity project. It is not the news, fails fact checks and is into conspiracy theories. You previously quoted Real Clear Politics which also is NOT the news. Please look up the technical definition of journalism and read their code of ethics.
That is one hypothesis. Another is that there have been less reported cases of morbidity and mortality from influenza because everything is getting lumped with Covid.
Maybe there's less influenza because people are avoiding other people and wearing masks.
Justthenews is John Solomon's vanity project. It is not the news, fails fact checks and is into conspiracy theories. You previously quoted Real Clear Politics which also is NOT the news. Please look up the technical definition of journalism and read their code of ethics.
The only "approved" sources under your definition would be left of center perspectives like ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and NPR. I doubt you would be very happy if I linked an article from The New York Post either. I consider most of the fact checking services and the networks I mentioned (left of center) little better than state control press like you would find in authoritarian states like China. Rather than denigrating the source consider the argument and either confirm or denigrate it on the merits. If Lucifer stated something and Jesus stated something (even as a Christian) I would of course consider the source yet I would still listen to their arguments and reject or accept them on the their relative merits.
53 minutes ago, subee said:
Maybe there's less influenza because people are avoiding other people and wearing masks.
Yes this is one hypothesis. I do not reject it, but I believe it is only one possibility.
The only "approved" sources under your definition would be left of center perspectives like ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and NPR. I doubt you would be very happy if I linked an article from The New York Post either. I consider most of the fact checking services and the networks I mentioned (left of center) little better than state control press like you would find in authoritarian states like China. Rather than denigrating the source consider the argument and either confirm or denigrate it on the merits. If Lucifer stated something and Jesus stated something (even as a Christian) I would of course consider the source yet I would still listen to their arguments and reject or accept them on the their relative merits.
Yes this is one hypothesis. I do not reject it, but I believe it is only one possibility.
Also, in the body of the article that you disparaged are at least four quotes:
Marisa Maez, a spokeswoman with the New Mexico Department of Health told Just the News: "When the state releases its daily COVID count, all COVID related hospitalizations are counted which includes those who are specifically hospitalized for COVID and those that test positive while hospitalized for other conditions."
Mississippi state epidemiologist Paul Byers said: "The hospitalization numbers reported to us daily represent the number of people hospitalized with confirmed COVID 19 infection, the number of people in the ICU with confirmed COVID-19, and the number of people on ventilators with confirmed COVID-19." The numbers reflect "patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection," regardless of their reason for admittance, Byers confirmed.
"The number of COVID-19-related hospitalizations reported is for all patients in the hospital with a lab-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, whether it is the primary diagnosis or a secondary one," said Charlie Gischlar with the Maryland Department of Health.
Connecticut Department of Health spokeswoman Maura Fitzgerald said the state's hospitalization numbers encompass "the number of patients anywhere in the facility that are currently positive with COVID-19."
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment said the state's numbers "include confirmed cases, and those who are under investigation for having COVID. Those under investigation could be hospitalized as a result of COVID symptoms but haven't been tested or they could be there for another reason. The same would be true for the confirmed cases."
In and of themselves they prove nothing. However, they do at least raise suspicion that covid deaths and cases are being integrated with other morbidities. I'm not even aware of anyone arguing why this would not occur. What process do you propose that currently exists prevents someone who has Covid, but is in the hospital for a stroke as not being counted as a "covid" related hospital stay?
1 hour ago, subee said:
Justthenews is John Solomon's vanity project. It is not the news, fails fact checks and is into conspiracy theories. You previously quoted Real Clear Politics which also is NOT the news. Please look up the technical definition of journalism and read their code of ethics.
So long as we trust others to "fact check" sources other than ourselves we are creating a gateway to censorship if not overt, then at least de facto in the world of ideas.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, myoglobin said:
The only "approved" sources under your definition would be left of center perspectives like ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and NPR. I doubt you would be very happy if I linked an article from The New York Post either. I consider most of the fact checking services and the networks I mentioned (left of center) little better than state control press like you would find in authoritarian states like China. Rather than denigrating the source consider the argument and either confirm or denigrate it on the merits. If Lucifer stated something and Jesus stated something (even as a Christian) I would of course consider the source yet I would still listen to their arguments and reject or accept them on the their relative merits.
Yes this is one hypothesis. I do not reject it, but I believe it is only one possibility.
Are you presuming to tell another what their definition of "approved" sources includes and excludes?
Are you presuming to tell another what their definition of "approved" sources includes and excludes?
Lucifer is a liar.
No I am saying consider arguments rather than dismissing a point simply because it comes from a source of which you don’t approve. The point being made should stand or fall on its own.
Specializes in Mental health, substance abuse, geriatrics, PCU.
6 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
No I am saying consider arguments rather than dismissing a point simply because it comes from a source of which you don’t approve. The point being made should stand or fall on its own.
The issue is that the legitimacy of the point being made is often influenced by its source. So when your sources are a step up from the tabloids in the super market, people who don't believe every conspiracy theory they hear, might be skeptical.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
52 minutes ago, myoglobin said:
No I am saying consider arguments rather than dismissing a point simply because it comes from a source of which you don’t approve. The point being made should stand or fall on its own.
That is what the conspiracy theorists and quacks want people to believe. All manner of crazy opinions can be self published on Youtube or media outlets having no journalistic or scientific standards or ethics.
I'm guessing that you must inform your professional practice with similarly sourced and accepted opinion in your specialty. That would be correct, right?
That is what the conspiracy theorists and quacks want people to believe. All manner of crazy opinions can be self published on Youtube or media outlets having no journalistic or scientific standards or ethics.
I'm guessing that you must inform your professional practice with similarly sourced and accepted opinion in your specialty. That would be correct, right?
I subscribe to the latest journals but I consider opinion from all sources. If something is bias (left or right wing) it does affect credibility, but it does not automatically discredit an argument or news item (especially if like the quotes that I provided they can be independently verified). Why not discuss (or even debate) the underlying issue(s) without the ad hominems? I always try to examine different perspectives. If I am in a room full of conservatives I tend to be the most hated person in the room. Conversely, if I am in a room full of liberal/socialist I will often create equal dislike. My intent is to examine issues from different perspectives and at some point arrive at something that approaches truth.
The issue is that the legitimacy of the point being made is often influenced by its source. So when your sources are a step up from the tabloids in the super market, people who don't believe every conspiracy theory they hear, might be skeptical.
Also, it is fine to be skeptical. My point is simple. What do "you" believe (what mechanism) is preventing people who have covid 19 who also suffer a co morbid condition (MI, stroke, influenza) from being counted as Covid hospitalization or death? I have talked to coworkers (that I worked with until late 2019) and they cannot articulate any difference. People are tested for Covid and if they are positive it is a Covid related hospitalization (and if they die death). Now with some of these victims Covid is absolutely a primary (or strongly contributing) factor however with others it is "along for the ride". How do you assert these to groups are being seperated?
Also, it is fine to be skeptical. My point is simple. What do "you" believe (what mechanism) is preventing people who have covid 19 who also suffer a co morbid condition (MI, stroke, influenza) from being counted as Covid hospitalization or death? I have talked to coworkers (that I worked with until late 2019) and they cannot articulate any difference. People are tested for Covid and if they are positive it is a Covid related hospitalization (and if they die death).
Well we do know that Covid actually causes strokes and MI's so how is the pathologist supposed to decide whether the person with history of low EF or previous partial carotid obstruction would have lived for more years if they had not had Covid. You have an admitted thinking disorder. How can you be so sure that you are so right and that every problem has a right or wrong answer? You seem to be unable to live with uncertainty. I don't like it either but I can admit that we have always lived in uncertain times and accept it.
myoglobin, ASN, BSN, MSN
1,453 Posts
This article hints at the question that I am raising https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/covid-hospitalizations-reach-new-highs-states-failing-distinguish . However, without detailed studies it is difficult to answer in what percentage of hospitalizations (or deaths) Covid was either a primary cause, major contributor, or just along for the ride.