I have to say that I am completely outraged by the push for mandated flu shots. What happened to personal freedom, especially to make our own healthcare decisions? And please spare me the "it's about the patient's" **** ****. First of all, the vaccine is up to 60% effective on a good day and is supposed to create antibodies to 3 strains of the virus. Problem is, there is hundreds of them out there. Not only that, but the chances of you actually getting the flu is small. Think about how many people got the flu shot and still got sick. Works Great! Let me also make it clear, I am not "anti-vaccine" because I do feel they have a place in our society. The mandatory ones we get as children actually have a much higher success (i.e. MMR 95% +) and we only have to get a series of them ONCE! It is simply outrageous that we are mandated to get this shot EVERY year. Forced to inject myself with countless chemicals, every year for a false sense of security? People need to step out the herd and really educate themselves. Did you know that hospitals that require all employees to have flu shots have an incentive to do so? Try following the money.... The bottom line is, we are hired as healthcare professionals to educate, and execute healthcare on patients, but we can't make our own healthcare decisions? If a patient is admitted into the hospital he should be educated on the risks of the flu, and the risks/benefits of a flu shot. The patients are the ones who should be offered the vaccine upon admittance. Both of us being vaccinated against the same exact thing is over-kill. After all we are trying to protect the patients, right? Before you head the line of yearly injection, why don't you think about the effects it might have on your body 20+ years from now. Your guess is as a good as anyones......
No, you are again showing a lack of understanding of these concepts and perpetuating another flu vaccine myth. Surgical masks are only mildly effective in preventing flu transmission. That is assuming the masks are changed often, changed when they become even slightly damp (from sneezing or coughing), and worn correctly.
"The modalities discussed here, face masks and UV light, have been largely overlooked. They are modest and far from the cutting edge of science. Nonetheless, they offer the potential of mitigating a potentially uncontrollable pandemic."
My lack of understanding? These articles discuss the effectiveness of wearing a mask.
Yes a lack of understanding, and I stated everything correctly.
]"Surgical masks are not designed or certified to prevent the inhalation of small airborne contaminants. These particles are not visible to the naked eye but may still be capable of causing infection. Surgical masks are not designed to seal tightly against the user's face. During inhalation, much of the potentially contaminated air can pass through gaps between the face and the surgical mask and not be pulled through the filter material of the mask. Their ability to filter small particles varies significantly based upon the type of material used to make the surgical mask, so they cannot be relied upon to protect workers against airborne infectious agents. Only surgical masks that are cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be legally marketed in the United States have been tested for their ability to resist blood and body fluids." https://www.osha.gov/Publications/respirators-vs-surgicalmasks-factsheet.html
Surgical masks maybe helpful in preventing the flu when worn correctly and consistently worn which is often not the case.
"The modalities discussed here, face masks and UV light, have been largely overlooked. They are modest and far from the cutting edge of science. Nonetheless, they offer the potential of mitigating a potentially uncontrollable pandemic."
For someone that wants a 100% effective vaccine and 100% no side-effects then I would think this statement wouldn't even be worth you considering or is it just because it has the potential to support your flawed anti-flu vaccine stance. The simple fact is still the same it still is not as effective as the flu vaccine.
They are just as effective as the flu shot. The flu shot is only moderately effective, and that is if the strain that is circulating in the community, is the one that is given in the vaccine.
For someone that wants a 100% effective vaccine and 100% no side-effects then I would think this statement wouldn't even be worth you considering or is it just because it has the potential to support your flawed anti-flu vaccine stance. The simple fact is still the same it still is not as effective as the flu vaccine.
I don't expect any vaccine to be 100% effective or 100% safe. I think that there are plenty of other resources other than the beloved CDC, that suggest the flu shot should be a choice, not a mandate.
They are just as effective as the flu shot. The flu shot is only moderately effective, and that is if the strain that is circulating in the community, is the one that is given in the vaccine.
It is expected to be around 70-80% for healthy adults this year, so how is that moderately effective. Did you know it takes 90+% of the population to be vaccinated to stop measles outbreaks?
I don't expect any vaccine to be 100% effective or 100% safe. I think that there are plenty of other resources other than the beloved CDC, that suggest the flu shot should be a choice, not a mandate.
The CDC does most of the systematic literature reviews but that does not mean they control the research. The CDC are the easiest one stop place to find relevant literature on influenza. You can easily find the same information through a pubmed (although it will take a lot longer) literature search or through the WHO website.
What professional medical or nursing organization, state health department, federal health service, national health service, international health organization does not recommend getting the flu vaccine?
You still have not provided one peer-reviewed scientific article to support HCWs not getting the flu vaccine.
Jordan1230 What is your educational/work background, because it seems your only purpose on this board has been to try refute the importance of flu vaccines?
It is expected to be around 70-80% for healthy adults this year, so how is that moderately effective. Did you know it takes 90+% of the population to be vaccinated to stop measles outbreaks?
It's expected to be that effective. But who knows if it actually is. According to the CDC website, the effectiveness can range "widely". Do you think that someone who is vaccinated should enter a patient's room without a mask?
It's expected to be that effective. But who knows if it actually is. According to the CDC website, the effectiveness can range "widely". Do you think that someone who is vaccinated should enter a patient's room without a mask?
That is initial estimates based on facts which are consistent with 50-80+% historical findings. I think most logical people if told they had a 50-80% chance of not getting the flu and even greater chance of having reduced symptoms if you do get the flu by getting the flu shot would get the flu shot.
The last sentence does not make sense to me. Are you saying should someone enter a room without PPE if the patient has confirmed influenza or is on airborne precautions? Then the answer would be no and the answer would be the same if they had the chickenpox, HiB, measles, TB, etc.
Jordan1230 What is your educational/work background, because it seems your only purpose on this board has been to try refute the importance of flu vaccines?
jordan1230
56 Posts
My lack of understanding? These articles discuss the effectiveness of wearing a mask.