(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?
@jadencpn and others who disagree with my statement
The United States has never ,in my knowledge and research, acted this quickly to dispense a vaccine that has only been developed in less than a year to the general public.In the past, it usually required 10-15 years of research before a vaccine was made available to the general public. For example, The Influenza vaccine was available in the 1930s BUT was not approved and dispensed to the general public until 1945. Our country has always been careful when it came to vaccines, why the change now?
Perhaps you aren't aware that there is a WORLD WIDE PANDEMIC that is killing large numbers of people world wide and overwhelming/threatening to overwhelm health care systems, and that Covid 19 has mutated so that it is transmitted even more easily/effectively. This is considered to be a situation that requires a very rapid response.
Specializes in Physiology, CM, consulting, nsg edu, LNC, COB.
2 hours ago, Aries22 said:
The United States has never ,in my knowledge and research, acted this quickly to dispense a vaccine that has only been developed in less than a year to the general public.In the past, it usually required 10-15 years of research before a vaccine was made available to the general public. (2)
For example, The Influenza vaccine was available in the 1930s BUT was not approved and dispensed to the general public until 1945. (3)
Our country has always been careful when it came to vaccines, why the change now? (4)
OK, a few misconceptions here. I’m not under any illusion that it will change your mind, but for those who are interested in facts...
1) The several vaccines for this novel coronavirus *have* been tested in large populations all over the world and in the US, with over 40,000 people in the US alone for one study, for example. This is in full conformity with good practice in the current state of knowledge in modern immunology.
2, 3) Said current state of the art in immunological knowledge, vaccine preparation, and study populations have made this accelerated pace possible. The ways that past vaccines were created required many arduous steps with older technology. This RNA-based substance can be mass-produced in vitro for testing and then ,if it passed that, for packaging and distribution in a much shorter time than, say, the flu or polio or other vaccines of seventy-plus years ago (2021 - 70 = 1951) in which live virus were cultured in chick embryos inside actual eggshells, killed, concentrated, and distributed.
And no chickens involved, LOL. This novel technology for RNA-based vaccination was only discovered recently. Scientists around the world tested it, found it valid, and were thrilled to have such a tool to bring to this effort. This is not evidence of carelessness or heedless ness, but of progress in science.
4) Your assumption that the US has not been careful and this is a change from past or practices is therefore unfounded. Remember, many of the leaders in this field have firsthand memory and experience going back decades, and they recognize medical breakthroughs when they see them. The several vaccines now coming out are the results.
Specializes in Physiology, CM, consulting, nsg edu, LNC, COB.
4 hours ago, Aries22 said:
I have never had the Flu shot or the flu, even though I have been around peop;e who had it. However, I am starting LPN school and have to take the Flu shot because it's mandatory. I told them that I'm allergic to eggs but I was told that there is A flu vaccine for people with that allergy. However, I was informed that I didn't have to take the COVID vaccine. I told the lady that I wasn't going to take that vaccine. Not everyone has had a good response to it. Also, why rush out a vaccine that has not been properly tested? I would look for another job if you are required to take the COVID vaccine. It's your body, your health. I certainly would not have been going to this program if it were mandatory. Stick to your guns!!
I trust you will learn more when you actually go to nursing school. Your assumption of improper testing is invalid. The need for facilitating rush distribution is not evidence of poor research, study, testing, or manufacturing. You have no evidence that it is less effective than necessary for large populations.
Specializes in Physiology, CM, consulting, nsg edu, LNC, COB.
On 2/1/2021 at 7:15 AM, Kitiger said:
I wonder; did they draw that out of a hat? Are there any studies out that we average Joe people can see?
The studies on wait times between doses are based on people who got their doses with different wait times, LOL. Yes, many vaccines need boosters or multiple states for effective protection, and this was a best guess at the beginning. Now that larger numbers are coming into play, there’s more data. The short answer is that there appears to be no increased risk of illness in up to 42 days (6 weeks) between doses. There’s a study on now looking at whether taking two different vaccines may make for even better protection than two doses of the same one.
You can sign up for regular updates from the CDC, on Medscape, from the NEJM, and many other outlets for updates on these and other studies both past and ongoing. Most are free. I see several every day.
Specializes in Physiology, CM, consulting, nsg edu, LNC, COB.
You can go to C-Span, WhiteHouse.gov, and CDC.gov for video of Anthony Fauci’s news briefings, the New England Journal of Medicine COVID updates (which are free), www.idsociety.org for updates on current vaccine status and research trials, for starters. The late Esme used to have a link called “let me Google that for you” which is still good advice. Medscape, the AJN, and a host of other reputable PEER-REVIEWED resources are out there. Beware of anything labeled “pre-print” because it is likely not peer-reviewed. There are also a lot of older publications that looked important but if you have had even rudimentary education on evaluating research “studies” turned out to be nonsensical hash from questionable sources, with poor sample sizes, no controls, bogus statistics, and no way to duplicate to check for replication.
I just realized it was Aries being asked for confirmatory references, but these are still good for anyone who wants a deeper dive into this fascinating and important topic. If you don’t want to learn more and your mind’s made up, well, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. Or as the redoubtable wit Dorothy Parker famously said, “You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.”
There are still employers who don't require vaccines. I'm not being required, and I don't want it. Why take a high-risk mRNA "vaccine"? It is effective for only a year, "maybe," according to my physician. Trust your instincts and intelligence.
I'm hoping for legal challenges to tyrannical employers. Why was merely wearing a mask in the face of an unknown virus deemed safe enough, but now with better treatments, prophylaxis, and herd immunity, wearing a mask is not safe enough? Wearing a mask is "not enough protection" when the vast majority of people recover without complications, even without treatment. Long term side effects of mRNA "vaccines" are yet unknown, and sudden deaths are downplayed. Being denied the right to weigh and choose our own risks must be challenged. God bless and good luck.
There are still employers who don't require vaccines. I'm not being required, and I don't want it. Why take a high-risk mRNA "vaccine"? It is effective for only a year, "maybe," according to my physician. Trust your instincts and intelligence.
I'm hoping for legal challenges to tyrannical employers. Why was merely wearing a mask in the face of an unknown virus deemed safe enough, but now with better treatments, prophylaxis, and herd immunity, wearing a mask is not safe enough? Wearing a mask is "not enough protection" when the vast majority of people recover without complications, even without treatment. Long term side effects of mRNA "vaccines" are yet unknown, and sudden deaths are downplayed. Being denied the right to weigh and choose our own risks must be challenged. God bless and good luck.
There have been no recorded deaths from Covid vaccines. In the original human study done, 6 people did die. But 4 of them were people who received saline and the other 2 died from previously diagnosed serious illnesses. Wearing a mask was NEVER deemed enough. Not one person ever claimed that a mask would protect an individual 100%. Mask wearing become recommended after we figured out that the large majority (60-80% of cases were passed by asymptomatic carriers). And where is this herd immunity that you claim is protecting us now? We will never have herd immunity until enough people take the vaccine. We have no proof yet that people who have taken the vaccine cannot spread it to others - hence masking required until we prove otherwise. It's not as simple as person A and person B scenario. Mask wearing has to be viewed from the context of the bigger picture of what happens when hundreds of thousands of people wear masks.
Specializes in Pediatrics, Pediatric Float, PICU, NICU.
50 minutes ago, NVBurch said:
There are still employers who don't require vaccines. I'm not being required, and I don't want it. Why take a high-risk mRNA "vaccine"? It is effective for only a year, "maybe," according to my physician. Trust your instincts and intelligence.
I'm hoping for legal challenges to tyrannical employers. Why was merely wearing a mask in the face of an unknown virus deemed safe enough, but now with better treatments, prophylaxis, and herd immunity, wearing a mask is not safe enough? Wearing a mask is "not enough protection" when the vast majority of people recover without complications, even without treatment. Long term side effects of mRNA "vaccines" are yet unknown, and sudden deaths are downplayed. Being denied the right to weigh and choose our own risks must be challenged. God bless and good luck.
First post on allnurses I see ? no need to put the word vaccines in quotation marks. Care to explain how you don’t have the right to weigh and choose your own risk?
The reason you don't have the right to weigh in and choose your own risk is because by refusing to take the vaccine you are putting others at risk. It's not all about me me me. It is about thinking of society as a whole and the safety of our patients.
By refusing to take the vaccine and perpetuating myths you reflect an irresponsible attitude.
Specializes in Pediatrics, Pediatric Float, PICU, NICU.
2 minutes ago, maryellen12 said:
The reason you don't have the right to weigh in and choose your own risk is because by refusing to take the vaccine you are putting others at risk. It's not all about me me me. It is about thinking of society as a whole and the safety of our patients.
By refusing to take the vaccine and perpetuating myths you reflect an irresponsible attitude.
I was asking specifically NVBurch, as that poster made the statement “Being denied the right to weigh and choose our own risks must be challenged” and was suggesting that the vaccine wasn’t safe and results in sudden death.
Susie2310
2,121 Posts
Perhaps you aren't aware that there is a WORLD WIDE PANDEMIC that is killing large numbers of people world wide and overwhelming/threatening to overwhelm health care systems, and that Covid 19 has mutated so that it is transmitted even more easily/effectively. This is considered to be a situation that requires a very rapid response.