Many hospitals are moving towards creating mandatory influenza vaccination policies as a condition of employment. Such mandates are causing surefire responses on both sides of the fence. What is the push behind the movement, and what is causing the pushback?
Updated:
First, let me just go over some of the symptoms of the flu, and then we will get down to business on the controversy surrounding the push to create mandatory flu vaccines for healthcare workers:
I can't think of anyone who wants any of these symptoms, or to come down with the flu, can you?
Influenza vaccination research has clearly documented the benefits of receiving the flu vaccine (Google it - you will find a plethora of information...however, I will list some links at the end of this article for your information). However, even though there is sufficient evidence to prove the benefits of receiving the flu vaccine, vaccination rates among healthcare workers are pitifully low. In 2013, only 55% of nurses in the frontlines were vaccinated.
Organizations such as The Joint Commission, the American Nurses Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Centers for Disease Control, Healthy People 2020, etc., etc., have stated their position on recommending the flu vaccine for healthcare workers in order to decrease the risk of exposure and reduce deaths. Due to this recommendation, many healthcare facilities are now creating mandatory flu vaccine policies as a condition of employment.
Employers who create mandatory policies will have exemptions, of course. Exemptions are made for medical and religious exceptions. For places that do not have a mandatory flu vaccine, they may "strongly recommend" the vaccination and may have a declination form for employees to submit if they refuse the vaccine. Additionally, some employers will enforce refusers to wear a mask during flu season while they are at work in order to protect the patients and the employee.
Evidence has shown that there are more than 36,000 deaths in the US each year related to influenza, and more than 200,000 hospitalizations. Influenza is the 6th leading cause of death. Healthcare workers are the leading cause of influenza outbreaks in the healthcare system. up to 50% of people who are infected by the flu virus do not fill ill for several days and can spread the virus to people at risk of complications and death from the flu. Additionally, evidence shows vaccination decreases mortality by 40%, decreases the spread of nosocomial infections by 43%, and decreases absenteeism by 20-30%.
Additionally, there is the ethics to consider. As healthcare workers, we have all taken an oath to "do no harm". As a nurse caring for patients who are not in their most physically healthy state, do we take the vaccination in order to prevent spreading the flu to our vulnerable patients, in order to "do no harm"? We must consider this when we make our decision to take or refuse the vaccination.
I have the names of a few hospitals, and this is by no means a comprehensive list. This is based on a ListServe survey of hospitals and these are the responses received:
Refusal may be largely due to misconceptions related to the vaccine. Fears that the immune system will cause them to get the flu, beliefs that hygiene and better nutrition are more helpful than the vaccine, fear of needles, beliefs that the vaccine does not work, and fear of side effects. Others believe that they have a constitutional right to refuse the vaccine and that mandatory policies are violating these rights.
(taken from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health outline of flu vaccine talking points for managers)
The flu shot does not give people the flu. It uses inactivated ("dead") virus. People may still catch a cold or other virus that the vaccine is not designed match.
Studies have shown that flu vaccination prevents flu in 70% to 90% of healthy adults younger than 65 years old.
You need a new vaccine every year - the virus changes over time.
Serious adverse reactions are very rare. They are explained on the CDC's Vaccine Information Statement, which is distributed when the vaccine is administered.
Local short-term reactions - such soreness at the vaccination site, slight fever, achy feeling - may occur but usually do not last long. Over the counter medicines are helpful. Even short-term reactions are much less bothersome than catching the flu and feeling very sick for days.
Your patients are at-risk, and possibly some friends and family members. You can be infected with the flu virus but not feel ill - and can still transmit flu to at-risk patients.
Inactivated influenza vaccine is effective in preventing transmission and reducing complications of the flu. In years when there is a close match between the vaccine and circulating virus strains, the vaccine prevents illness among approximately 70%--90% of healthy adults under 65 years of age. Vaccinating healthy adults also has been proven to lead to decreased work absenteeism and use of health-care resources, including use of antibiotics. Strong protection is also expected when the vaccine is not a close match with circulating strains, with 50%--77% effectiveness in these instances. In addition, effectiveness against influenza-related hospitalization for healthy adults from inactivated vaccine is estimated at 90%.
All healthcare facilities will be facing the choice of creating a mandatory influenza vaccination in the near future, if they have not already. In order to make an informed decision on the topic, we must have information. Knowledge is power. Before you make a blanket statement on pros or cons, have the information you need, know the research, and make an educated decision.
Please respond to this article by answering the following questions:
References
American Association of Family Practitioners. (2011). AAFP supports mandatory flu vaccinations for healthcare personnel. Retrieved from: AAFP Supports Mandatory Flu Vaccinations for Health Care Personnel
ATrain. (2014). To accept or refuse the flu vaccine. Retrieved from: ZZZ_133_Influenza: Module 7
CDC. (2014). Vaccination: Who should do it, who should not and who should take precautions. Retrieved from: Vaccination: Who Should Do It, Who Should Not and Who Should Take Precautions | Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC
Influenza Action Coalition. (2015). Influenza vaccination honor roll. Retrieved from: Honor Roll: Mandatory Influenza Vaccination Policies for Healthcare Personnel
Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. (2014). Talking points for managers. Retrieved from: http://tinyurl.com/p6nbg2u
National adult and influenza immunization summit. (2015). Vaccinating healthcare personnel. Retrieved from: Vaccinating Healthcare Personnel - National Adult and Influenza Immunization Summit
NursingTimes. (2014). Why do health workers decline flu vaccination? Retrieved from: http://www.nursingtimes.net/Journals/2014/11/28/y/k/x/031214-Why-do-health-workers-decline-flu-vaccination.pdf
TJC. (2012). R3 Report: Requirement, rationale, reference. Retrieved from: http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/R3_Report_Issue_3_5_18_12_final.pdf
Just to broaden your outlook.
Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the Community and the Household
I found it she was right it has been 47-60% over the five years before this year, but was much less in years before. So it did have a good run at roughly 50% of preventing people from getting "flu like symptoms".
U.S. Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network
Quit bogarting the kettle corn...pass this way...
I'm making regular popcorn with butter and salt.
No, I had not read all the previous posts ......................I don't know if Dr. Sherry Tenpenny's website has been mentioned, but there is access there to a whole library of medical research on vaccines. When I have time to read your post, I will be happy to respond.
Oh dear, that woman is just plain nuts. Please don't go hang around with her.
She recently put an article on her FB page about using bleach enemas to cure autism and wrote "Something to chew on". Seriously, she's nuts.
Dear FlyingScot,
You wrote:
"Quote from concerned lady
OMG when did you graduate nursing school? In the 1800s?
MY REPLY: SOMETIMES IT FEELS THAT LONG AGO ;-)
BUT, YOUR HUMOR IS OFF, A TAD, BY OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.
------------------------------------
You wrote: "FTR, I work closely with an infectious disease doctor in a large renowned university medical center with a top 10 certified cancer center. I showed him your post. I wish I had a picture of the look on his face. Please stop spreading this utter nonsense. At the very least it's not helping your cause."
My reply: I'm sure the look on that doc's face was priceless. By the way, has your doctor ever heard of the "Cancer Control Society"? Cancer survivors in this generous group, graciously share their own holistic experiences of how they conquered their cancers, for no charge at all, with whoever asks these wonderful souls. I wonder if your doctor would poo poo these cancer survivors, too, because he might be more into cutting (surgery), burning (radiation), and poisoning (chemotherapy), rather than using holistic methods.
My "cause" is seeking the truth, and preventing sickness and suffering due to adverse effects of any meds, including big pharma's sacred cow of vaccines.
I await the Congressional testimony of CDC (Centers for Disease Control) top scientist (phD) William Thompson, who is a "whistleblower", and who wants to get the truth out, about the cover-up of data showing a connection (causal) between some vaccines and AUTISM.
Sincerely, Concerned Lady
Re: Do you have concerns regarding the natural levels of those chemicals in our bodies through diet and environmental exposures?
I don't. Well, it depends. There's a difference between eating an apple with orificenic, and it being isolated and placed in my drink, or injected in my vein. The body processes things naturally when in the correct environment. It would depend on the amount of environmental exposure and how it's exposed to it. Injecting it directly into the body is not natural and there will be and have been bad results.
As amazed as some are that there are questions regarding vaccines, I'm just as if not more amazed at how bad effects from vaccines are mocked and dismissed, and vaccines could be nothing but "harmless" so easily. Of course there now will be "yes buts" regarding the "risk/benefit" and the insistence that others take them based on your "science", as if there is only one "science" and it's yours. There is not one "science" ... that's like saying there's only one "religion" or one "philosophy". There are millions of scientists and many disagree with one another. New "science" is discovered every day. The surprising thing is in this age, after going through world wars fighting tyranny, that such sane, civilized people can be just as tyrannical with their "science" in vaccines. This shouldn't even be a discussion. No one should be forced to take anything against their will or what you believe is "science", that can change on a dime tomorrow. I can assure you, if you or one of your own children were one of the sacrificial lambs, "taking one for the herd", you wouldn't be defending any of it.
No, this picture does not belong here because the subject is a vaccine of dubious VE. If other vaccines had the same VE as the Influenza vaccine, then they would be taken off of the market.
But just to humor you, let us take a look at point #3 in the picture: "Have you ever had polio?(Neither have I, thanks to vaccines.)" Replace the word polio with flu, and all the weight disappears from that statement. BTW, certain polio vaccines have been known to give people polio.
The difference between radical vaxxers and radical non-vaxxers is........:no:none. There are both good and bad aspects of all vaccines. Its just that with the flu vaccine there is so much bad that it simply crushes the benefit of any good that comes from it.
------------------------------------
My reply: I'm sure the look on that doc's face was priceless. By the way, has your doctor ever heard of the "Cancer Control Society"? Cancer survivors in this generous group, graciously share their own holistic experiences of how they conquered their cancers, for no charge at all, with whoever asks these wonderful souls. I wonder if your doctor would poo poo these cancer survivors, too, because he might be more into cutting (surgery), burning (radiation), and poisoning (chemotherapy), rather than using holistic methods.
My "cause" is seeking the truth, and preventing sickness and suffering due to adverse effects of any meds, including big pharma's sacred cow of vaccines.
I await the Congressional testimony of CDC (Centers for Disease Control) top scientist (phD) William Thompson, who is a "whistleblower", and who wants to get the truth out, about the cover-up of data showing a connection (causal) between some vaccines and AUTISM.
Sincerely, Concerned Lady
"My" doctor believes in the judicious and correct use of antibiotics as well as a healthy lifestyle. He practices western medicine because it has the science to back it up. He does not "cut", "burn" or administer chemotherapy outside of antibiotics. Your use of pejorative words to describe the medicine that so many of our awesome physicians provide is extremely distasteful. These are people who truly care about their patients and only want the best for them.
The look on his face was in response to your complete and epic lack of knowledge about microbiology and "sciency stuff" (love Sheldon's mama) and that you are, allegedly, a nurse. It had nothing to do with your views on vaccination. He is very glad you retired.
There have been a few posters on this thread who have given reasonable thought to why they won't take the flu vaccine. While the majority might disagree with them at least they aren't coming off like crackpots.
Frankly, with statements about viral "shedding" you have done more damage to your personal cause than any of us "vaxxers" could.
There is not one "science" ... that's like saying there's only one "religion" or one "philosophy". There are millions of scientists and many disagree with one another. New "science" is discovered every day. The surprising thing is in this age, after going through world wars fighting tyranny, that such sane, civilized people can be just as tyrannical with their "science" in vaccines. This shouldn't even be a discussion. No one should be forced to take anything against their will or what you believe is "science", that can change on a dime tomorrow. I can assure you, if you or one of your own children were one of the sacrificial lambs, "taking one for the herd", you wouldn't be defending any of it.
The scare quotes are "science" are telling. And you are incorrect- there is only one "science." Science is a methodology for gaining knowedge about the world, not a set of static facts or beliefs. That is one of the main differences between science based medicine and "alternative" (scare quotes!) medicine.
My reply: I'm sure the look on that doc's face was priceless. By the way, has your doctor ever heard of the "Cancer Control Society"? Cancer survivors in this generous group, graciously share their own holistic experiences of how they conquered their cancers, for no charge at all, with whoever asks these wonderful souls. I wonder if your doctor would poo poo these cancer survivors, too, because he might be more into cutting (surgery), burning (radiation), and poisoning (chemotherapy), rather than using holistic methods.
Cancer patients are frequently swindled into spending thousands and thousands of dollars on ineffective or potentially harmful "natural" cancer remedies. It's very sad.
Tex.
232 Posts
Yes. Post it.