Bumex

Thanks to what research? You mean the debunked Andrew Wakefield? There is no one against flu shots that believes in real science, with the exception of certain religious individuals. The flu shot has been proven to limit transmission by increasing immune response and reducing viral loads. Believe what you want, I will believe in real science. Any one who doesn't 'believe' in real science doesn't have a solid place in nursing or medicine. We are not attacking 'beliefs.' The statement you responded to was merely stating their own opinion, which is shared by most of us in the scientific community.

DO is not on par with ND. DO is based in actual science, not pseudoscientific folklore.

This is very wrong to do. As someone who does admissions for a RN program, we’ve caught several applicants trying to pull this over just to find a RN or LPN course or reference to transcript from program previously. They get denied outright, and that follows them if they apply again. we have actually also dismissed someone who we found out about their dismissal from a previous program. They had 40k invested and dismissed without chance for appeal on academic dishonesty. They tried suing and lost. Another 10k likely lost for lawyers. Let alone the ethics behind this being wrong, this advice is flat out poor in terms of setting yourself up for success in the future.

Some people I talked to said ANNA was helpful, others have said not so much. I didn't use it myself. I think it depends on your learning style.

I took mine and passed too recently. I found the online prep exam somewhat helpful, but there were large categories of knowledge on the exam not remotely covered on the practice test. I would still suggest getting it, but you'll need something else. The Handbook of Dialysis by John T. Daugirdas previously mentioned in another post was also very helpful. I did many of my CMEs from NKF and felt they were also helpful.

Probably got booted off for being misinformed and spreading misinformation. Their threads were similar to this garbage from OP. Total misinterpretation of facts and lacking any basic understanding of scientific method.

Yup, looks like they are gone. We have a duty to stop people like this sharing junk science. 'Alternative opinions' on facts like this have no place in areas of science. Make the rest of us look incompetent to the world and to our fellow healthcare professionals.

I agree. SDN moderators would immediately remove stuff like this person is posting/misleading analysis.

Probably depends on area. In my area, most jobs are either ICU 100% or entire hospital coverage.

AGACNP 100%. Aside from the issues with FNPs working outside their scope with inpatients according to the consensus model, this is the entire point of AGACNP.

Why on earth is this necessary to say? This sounds incredibly smug for someone who seems keen on misinformation.

I think nephrology clinic nursing might also be a consideration. That way you can learn bread and butter CKD cases and management. HD patients are complex as well, but I feel that management is fairly redundant after awhile. Both are good options.

I have discussed the same topic with colleagues over both PhD(c) and DNP(c) use. My opinion of not using this has been shared by the majority. A former professor of mine had a PhD in physiology who’s wife never successfully defended her dissertation. She continued to use the PhD(c) designation before and after dropping out post 2x dissertation failure. It was obvious he was resentful of this. Clearly there were problems with someone failing defense twice, but I digress. My own opinion is use only official titles earned. Unless like the poster above, PhD(c)/DNP(c) are not awarded credentials at any institution I’ve studied at, therefore one should not use them. Personally, I wouldn’t use it anyways, as they come off as pretentious. Coursework is coursework, defense is what culminates the degree in it’s totality. Using the PhDc/DNPc, and ABD for that matter is nothing more than an ostentatious display. But again, this is my own opinion.

There are plenty of online programs that are not Walden. Online is not synonymous with for-profit.

Many facilities, including my own, will not hire grads from Walden, u of Phoenix, etc. There are good candidates that come from these places, but many more bad than the average program. NP school most of the time ends up what you make of it, so why would you want a negative name to potentially block you from jobs?

If a mask can derail you on NCLEX, I have bigger concerns about you as a nurse.

If you’re concerned about short length and affordable, find a different career path.

Resurrecting- PenNpaper- did you do the practice tests?

The three Walden grads I hired to my clinic were absolutely useless. They could not do any clinical decision making without referencing algorithms, poor history taking skills, and did not know pharmacology to even prescribe anything appropriate for hypertension if someone had a co-morbid condition. Though there are Walden grads that are likely successful out there, there are 10 more that have insufficient medical knowledge and skill.

This is not totally correct. Some universities run it as a research degree and some solely practice. Many EdD programs I have come across have full dissertation requirements. This is actually the prime reason EdDs are starting to be shut down or just converted to PhD programs. Harvard's EdD was converted into a PhD program a few years ago due to the lack of curriculum difference between PhD and EdD.

Whatever they drank, it is obviously affecting the CNS.

Either this is a satirical joke, or we have a sheep here listening to one crazy debunked nutcase. This ‘book’ from Neil z. Miller is filled with mislogic and medical inaccuracies. By the way, the guy has absolutely no medical training. Since when should we listen to someone with 1) no science background, 2) cannot understand nor replicate scientific inquiry, and 3) is obviously in it for the money? If someone was able to find such ‘truth’ on the failings of vaccines, wouldn’t he want to spread it for free? Think about that for a minute when all of you anti-vaxxers call us money hungry providers.

I think it may even be considered a federal offense to sign the mds scripts. You’d likely get in more trouble than they would.

No kidding it helps protect the person vaccinated, but that is the small picture. The larger picture is herd immunity. The few that cannot get vaccinated are then at lower risk. Furthermore, the patients we see, who are often immunocompromised to a certain degree, need more protection from basically everything. The simple mindset of looking "who is protected more" would be the direct action of the vaccination, the intellectual will look at the bigger picture of helping prevent transmission to those who need protection the most. The vaccination is only not mandatory for the following reasons: severe allergy to eggs and religious reasons. If you actually read the reference you posted, it will say that all loved ones should get it as well. The discussion isn't about nurses only getting it, the discussion is that nurses SHOULD get it due to the ethics of the profession. Maybe when you're doing your reading on the internet, google the term non-maleficence.

I cannot believe how wrong this is.