Nurses Promoting COVID Misinformation

[Tigerlily8]

I am aware of a former colleague (RN) who is frequently posting inaccurate information on Twitter. She is discouraging social distancing, wearing masks and mandatory vaccination. She recently has been promoting the use of unproven medications to treat Covid-19 and states the pandemic is a hoax. This behavior reflects poorly on all health care providers, especially nurses. I don’t know what I could do other than reporting her to the Texas BON. Any ideas?

[Gooday]

5 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

6 hours ago, Gooday said:

Any time you make matter-of-fact statements about any medication or vaccine you are lying.

That's a joke, right?

I listened to many of the people on this platform say anyone who spread misinformation should be reported to the board.  Then I engaged them in conversations concerning the vaccine were they Made matter of fact statements about the vaccine that I knew were not true, because I teach I read and study everything before I speak.  You shared misinformation most of our debate.  Then I shared the facts from a APA reference study and a government website.  You said there are never long-term side effects from any vaccines. I shared a government website that lists one.  I said I weighed the good and the bad concerning the Covid vaccine and decided to get the shot you accused me of spreading information for saying anything bad even existed.  I shared an article from the University of Alabama that goes over the good and yes the bad you claim doesn't exist. According to research usually adverse side affects from vaccines happen within weeks, which is why I waited and decided to get the shot, but that is not always the case.  Note the word usually in the article. Short-term adverse affects are rare, 1 in 100,000 and 1 in 1 million. Hopefully the long-term data comes back positive also.  The info in the article is readily available in the package insert.  My question is should you be reported for spreading misinformation.  You know something has been politicized when your accused of spreading misinformation for sharing the package insert info.   You Address concerns when people are hesitant you do not blow them off, insult them and lie to them.  If I were a patient and I was one of the 1 in a 100,000 that had an adverse side effect and you told me it never happens.  Is that a tort? Be honest with people.  

[GrumpyRN, NP]

7 hours ago, Gooday said:

1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114674/  A basic search of government websites will provide examples.  

 

58 minutes ago, Gooday said:

2) Then I engaged them in conversations concerning the vaccine were they Made matter of fact statements about the vaccine that I knew were not true, because I teach I read and study everything before I speak...  ...Then I shared the facts from a APA reference study and a government website... 

 

3) You said there are never long-term side effects from any vaccines. I shared a government website that lists one...   ...I shared an article from the University of Alabama that goes over the good and yes the bad you claim doesn't exist. According to research usually adverse side affects from vaccines happen within weeks, which is why I waited and decided to get the shot, but that is not always the case.  Note the word usually in the article. Short-term adverse affects are rare, 1 in 100,000 and 1 in 1 million. Hopefully the long-term data comes back positive also.  

 

4) The info in the article is readily available in the package insert.  My question is should you be reported for spreading misinformation.  You know something has been politicized when your accused of spreading misinformation for sharing the package insert info.   

 

1 & 2, If you did read and study then perhaps you read this little tit-bit;

Once publications are selected for inclusion in a database, NLM does not review, evaluate, or judge the quality of individual articles and relies on the scientific publishing process to identify and address problems through published comments, corrections, and retractions (or, as in the case of preprints, withdrawal notices).

3, How small do you want risk to be? 1 in a million sounds pretty good. Being hit by a car while crossing the road is about 1 in 4292.

4, Yes but these inserts are more legal document to prevent the company from being sued by over-eager Americans. And when I say "these" inserts I mean "all" inserts in the US.

[GrumpyRN, NP]

10 hours ago, Gooday said:

You should have repeated my concerns and engaged in patient teaching.  You should have acknowledged the truthfulness of my statement about there not being a long-term study because the statement is truthful, you should have told me about the short-term data that is now available and patient outcomes.   Millions have successfully taken the vaccine without any adverse affects. You should have shared with me the number of successful immunizations and the number of adverse reactions.

Some posters on this site have been doing nothing but this. How far do you want us to go? Horses and water springs to mind. 

[Gooday]

4 minutes ago, GrumpyRN said:

How small do you want rIsk to be?

The reactions were 1 in 100, 000 for one condition and 1 in a million for another condition.  I know inserts are put there to cover manufacturing butts but I also know the info in those inserts are true.   Even in the example I gave of long term adverse affects the recommendations were to change when the immunization is given to avoid the side effect not to withhold the vaccine.  They did not learn this until years latter.   Like I said, I believe vaccine is safe and the risks are minimal.   My issue was with people threatening anyone who talks about side effects and labeling them.  

[subee, MSN, CRNA]

8 hours ago, Gooday said:

https://www.uab.edu/reporter/resources/be-healthy/item/9544-what-are-the-long-term-side-effects-of-covid-vaccines-3-things-to-know

Here is an exhaustive study that outlines side effects that have been noted with the covid vaccine and the benefits of getting the vaccine.  This article is pure Science, not politics, people bashing, or any of that stuff, just honest science.  This is the kind of article that convinced me to get the shot.  Informed consent.  I studied and weighed my options.  Any time you make matter-of-fact statements about any medication or vaccine you are lying.  Every medication or vaccine comes with a package insert that tells the risk and benefits, I have never seen one that has none.  They are minimal with covid but they are there and patients should be taught those risks.   

This article only offered evidence that the vaccine was safer than Covid.  The mRNA vaccines are NOT associated with Guillain Barre as other flu vaxes are.  If you want something 100% safe, we could all drink a glass of water.

[toomuchbaloney]

2 hours ago, subee said:

This article only offered evidence that the vaccine was safer than Covid.  The mRNA vaccines are NOT associated with Guillain Barre as other flu vaxes are.  If you want something 100% safe, we could all drink a glass of water.

Not in many cities in the USA...

4 hours ago, Gooday said:

You shared misinformation most of our debate. 

Apparently you don't know what misinformation is...that would explain a great deal. 

[subee, MSN, CRNA]

15 hours ago, Gooday said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114674/  A basic search of government websites will provide examples.  

If this is where you are doing your research, no wonder you are confused.  In this thread and others, it is been repeatedly shown that this is a clearing house for any study that arrives on the desk.  Some are peer-reviewed and others or not.  There is even a disclaimer that folks should be making clinical decisions on what they read at this website.  I went through 32 "studies" on Ivermectin and not one was definitive or even well conducted.  Yet, the Ivermectin supporters always refer to these studies as proof of it's effectiveness.  Obviously, they haven't even read the studies individually but, I don't know, because there are 32 which could show promise, think that means that proves effectiveness?

[Hannahbanana, BSN, MSN]

On 10/1/2021 at 4:08 PM, Horseshoe said:

When does this stop????

When? When they're all dead or long-term sick, or enough of them are dead or long-term sick that it gets everybody else's attention, oer every employer requires vaccination (this is proving up to 98% effective in some places!).

[jeannepaul, BSN]

On 9/26/2021 at 4:19 PM, toomuchbaloney said:

No, it's not the same thing.  Many mistakes were made in 2020 relative to covid.  

I'm not certain why you think that crisis care decisions involve deciding who is responsible or why other deadly health conditions have anything to do with a pandemic of a dangerous contagion.  Why do you think that blame is being assigned to covid patients? 

Meanwhile, unvaccinated covid patients are much more likely to require acute hospitalization and take up beds and staff resources that prevent all of the other health care needs that you listed from receiving safe and adequate care.  The unvaccinated covid patients sometimes get really sick and about 1% of them die after using lots and lots of health resources.  

Vaccination helps to prevent all of that.  

I disagree

[toomuchbaloney]

12 minutes ago, jeannepaul said:

I disagree

With which part?

[Guest219794]

3 hours ago, jeannepaul said:

I disagree

 

3 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

With which part?

The part where the facts don't match up with a belief system.  

 

[Gooday]

Here is everything you need to know about COVID-19 from the FDA.  Covids package insert.   Please study before making accusations of  Misinformation.   The default setting in our day is accusation instead of conversation and I believe its the root of 90% of our nations divisiveness and problems.   

EUA 20734_Full PI-HCP FS_Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine_FINAL_22Sep2021 (2).pdf