The Controversy: Mandatory Flu Vaccines

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:

  • Sudden onset fever
  • Headache
  • Chills
  • Myalgia
  • Dry cough
  • Sore throat
  • Stuffy nose
  • Loss of appetite
  • Limb or joint pain
  • Difficulty sleeping
  • Diarrhea or upset stomach

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.

What is the purpose behind the push toward flu vaccines?

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.

What hospitals have created a mandatory flu vaccine policy?

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:

  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (Philadelphia, PA) - since 2009
  • Children's Mercy Hospitals and Clinics (Kansas City, MO)
  • Children's Colorado (Aurora, CO)
  • Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters (Norfolk, VA)
  • Children's Medical Center Dallas (Dallas, TX) - since 2012
  • Riley Children's (Indianapolis, IN) - since 2012
  • East Tennessee Children's (Knoxville, TX) - since 2013
  • Boston Children's (Boston, MA)
  • Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (San Diego, CA) - since 2013
  • Roger Williams Medical Center (Providence, RI)
  • Brookwood Medical Center (Birmingham, AL)
  • Johns Hopkins (all hospitals/clinics) (Baltimore, MD)
  • Driscoll Children's Hospital (Corpus Christi, TX)
  • Spohn Health System (Corpus Christi / San Antonio, TX)
  • All Connecticut Hospitals

What are some reasons that people refuse the flu vaccine?

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.

Common concerns and myths about the flu vaccination

(taken from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health outline of flu vaccine talking points for managers)

The flu shot will give me the flu

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.

I don't believe the flu vaccine actually works

Studies have shown that flu vaccination prevents flu in 70% to 90% of healthy adults younger than 65 years old.

I had the vaccination last year

You need a new vaccine every year - the virus changes over time.

What about possible adverse reactions

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.

I'm not in a high-risk group

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.

The flu vaccine made every year does not match the circulating flu strain

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%.

Knowledge is Power

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:

  1. Do you take the flu vaccine yearly? If you do not, what is the reason you do not participate (if you don't mind answering this question)?
  2. Does your employer have a mandatory influenza vaccination policy as a condition of employment? If yes, where do you work?
  3. What concerns do you have about the flu vaccine?
  4. Do you know if anyone who has been released from their job because they did not get the flu vaccine?

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

Specializes in Reproductive & Public Health.
For those who may have been under a rock, this has been the recent buzz about Peer Reviewed studies and Scientific Integrity (aka *gasp* some scientists have been hasty, inaccurate or unethical):

How science goes wrong | The Economist

Hank Campbell: The Corruption of Peer Review Is Harming Scientific Credibility - WSJ

Nobody who works in the sciences would argue that there are not serious problems with falsified data, unreproducible results, industry funding, etc etc. There are many in the field who devote their lives to identifying and trying to remedy these problems.

But for some reason, the "alternative medicine" community is loathe to admit the problems that plague their field-conflict of interest (practitioners profiting off the remedies they recommend), lack of data to support their claims, and even the scientific implausibility of things like homeopathy.

There are problems in science because scientists and medical professionals are PEOPLE. And people make mistakes, are subject to biases, and are influenced by profit. But the scientific method is the only method we have to investigate and understand the world around us.

Specializes in critical care.
Actually, we do not know how many people died from influenza because there is no mandatory reporting of adult deaths from influenza. Why is there no mandatory reporting? Because the veil would be lifted and influenza vaccination rates would plummet.

I know how we can lift a veil. How about we also let anti-vaxxers take tours through ICUs anywhere with vented patients who developed respiratory failure/arrest from the flu. Babies, asthmatic otherwise healthy people, moms, dads, sons, daughters... My tiny community hospital typically has vented flu positive patients through the whole season. It probably is rather easy to have an anti-vax position when you don't see first-hand the effects of the flu.

Hospitals have an obligation to protect patients and visitors from the spread of flu. If only 60% of people vaccinated go flu-free for the season in a poorly effective year, so be it. That means 60% of the staff will not expose others to a virus that can be deadly. Yes, DEADLY. If you've ever seen a person die from the flu, you know the scary bolding, capitalization and "scare quotes" are for emphasis, not a scare tactic.

If you've never seen a person clinging to life on a respirator from the flu, then my guess is you don't work critical care. Genuinely, I'd encourage you to volunteer on a critical care unit a few times. Just see. If the numbers can't convince you, perhaps the experience of it will.

And, from the judgmental Ixchel vault that rarely is ever opened for public consumption, if you could physically do something to PREVENT the suffering and potential death of the people you are licensed to protect, but choose not to, I honestly don't know how you can live with yourself. I mean honestly.... If you getting the flu meant your mom go it, and then she died, how would you not sit there and think, "omg I could have prevented that"?

Disclaimer: those with medical reasons for non-vaccination are completely forgiven from the above statement. I am referring only to those who are capable and have access to flu vaccines, but refuse to get them.

For those who may have been under a rock, this has been the recent buzz about Peer Reviewed studies and Scientific Integrity (aka *gasp* some scientists have been hasty, inaccurate or unethical):

How science goes wrong | The Economist

Hank Campbell: The Corruption of Peer Review Is Harming Scientific Credibility - WSJ

Yes, another research fraud comes to mind: that of Andrew Wakefield. To this day, many people still hold onto the idea that this research was done according to sound principles of research and the scientific method and believe that his research in fact proved that the MMR causes autism.

From the study size, to the method of selection of the study subjects, to the inferences made about the study's results, to the financial conflicts of interest, the whole thing stunk on ice.

Specializes in Critical Care.
http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statisticsreport.pdf

And these are only the people who knew enough to seek compensation. For every person who reports a reaction, there are thousands more whose doctors advised them that "Vaccines do no harm".

I've gotten vaccines, I've given vaccines, yet I've never come across any doctor or nurse who has told a patient that "vaccines do no harm". Everyone receiving a vaccine is also legally required to receive a VIS, which details the risks. Like pretty much any treatment, it can cause harm, but the benefits very clearly outweigh the risks. Under what calculation have vaccines done more harm than good?

Specializes in Oncology; medical specialty website.

Typical response from those of your ilk when asked to provide research to back up claims: deflect, deflect, deflect.

Specializes in Critical Care.
It's the adjuvants in vaccines, formaldehyde, thimerosol, msg, etc. that I believe do more harm than good.

Based on what? Even when consumed in much larger quantities, there is no established harm from MSG, all it's been shown to do in the human body is to taste delicious. The MSG that exists in some vaccines is infinitesimally smaller than what what is consumed, so how do you figure that MSG does more harm than the diseases being vaccinated against?

And, of course I care. I quarantine myself if I am sick, even with a cold. Are vulnerable people affected by colds? I'm one vulnerable actually, with asthma and I don't like colds either. The last time I had the flu was a few weeks after getting a flu shot about 10 years ago...so I don't see their "effectiveness" for myself or anyone else I could have spread it to. I have better effectiveness with Vitamin C and a whole-food organic diet, and that goes for all strains. I've also had only one cold in the last 10 years, which is pretty good for me, and less to spread to others as well. :yes:

I'm not a nurse, but I like to share some alternatives that may be just as if not more effective both imo, and my experience, because I do care. :) One other mentioned not minding wearing a mask for their own sake, I'd consider that a good idea for everyone concerned.

For many of the diseases we vaccinate for you can be communicable long before symptoms arise, and I sort of doubt that you row out to some sort of forbidden island whenever you have symptoms you believe to be the cold. As has been pointed out, vaccines are not 100% effective among those who receive the vaccines and for those most susceptible to the severe harm (those with impaired immune processes) a vaccine will not work, as a result breaking the chain of transmission of these diseases depends on as many people being vaccinated as possible. So when you decide you don't want a vaccine, you aren't just deciding for yourself, your deciding for someone who very much depends on you to be vaccinated to avoid death, and I'm not sure they agree with the choice you are making on their behalf.

Specializes in Adult Internal Medicine.
I can make any therapy look effective just by simply cherry-picking the available data. Which is what most researchers do, anyway.

So go ahead and do it, show us the results.

Specializes in Adult Internal Medicine.
It's the adjuvants in vaccines, formaldehyde, thimerosol, msg, etc. that I believe do more harm than good.

Formaldehyde. Sounds awful doesn't it?

The truth is that formaldehyde is actually produced in our bodies as a part of normal metabolism, and even more importantly, it plays a vital role in DNA synthesis without which we would die.

For reference, our body produces enough to make an average concentration of 2-3 micrograms per mL of blood. Figure an average size adult has about 4.5L of blood, so about 11,000 micrograms of formaldehyde in circulation.

A TIV injection has 100 micrograms maximum.

So..about that...

What's the percentage of any one getting a disease (like measles which is a mild one for most, which I had along with everyone else as a child), to one vulnerable and getting it? Is the percentage comparable to those who actually have had bad effects from vaccines (not just hypothetical)? I think those numbers should be available in order to prove how effective vaccines are to force them on anyone.

WHO statistics on measles:

Key facts

  • Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.
  • In 2013, there were 145 700 measles deaths globally – about 400 deaths every day or 16 deaths every hour.
  • Measles vaccination resulted in a 75% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2013 worldwide.
  • In 2013, about 84% of the world's children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 73% in 2000.
  • During 2000-2013, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 15.6 million deaths making measles vaccine one of the best buys in public health.

WHO | Measles

"Mild disease for most"? Tell that to the 145,700 kids around the world who died of measles in 2013.

Specializes in Mental Health, Gerontology, Palliative.
I didn't leave it out. I just don't find it credible, sorry. Why behavioral changes after vaccines yet "healthy" and normal before is not explained, and, the growing number of cases that were rare at one time, along with other physical problems that just so happen after vaccines as well, and sadly, I've read many. I wouldn't accept it if it were my child. Parents know the changes in their children better than anyone.

The Onset of Autism: Patterns of Symptom Emergence in the First Years of Life Interesting article

Hi Cayenne06,

Thank you for your kind words about my hubby's fight against prostate cancer.

He doesn't do mega doses of Vitamin C, but, he does try to avoid carcinogens in air, food, water, etc.

He eats organic food when possible. He likes and eats red cabbage, carrots, (organic), dandelion leaves in salad, etc.

He takes some supplements, including some (gasp) apricot KERNELS in moderation.

He uses some medicinal mushrooms (in capsule form), and he takes several other supplements recommended by the book:

"A Holistic Approach to Prostate Treatment", written by Aaron E. Katz, M.D., Director-Center of Holistic Urology, Columbia University Medical Center (NYC).

His PSA dropped for a while, and his urologist, who is NOT into holistic health at all, is OK with waiting another 6 months for an additional biopsy.

Contrary to what SOME people think here, I'm not against all surgeries, but I am against unnecessary ones.

I'm not against certain meds, when needed, but I do recognize potential adverse effects.

I also witnessed a nurse kill a patient, a long time ago, after the patient had a cholecystectomy done by "practicing" doctors-to-be, and they had overly manipulated his pancreas, leading to what became fatal pancreatitis.

Each rotation ignored what was happening to him, until the patient was literally at death's door. Then, the head nurse "finished him off", by running his I.V. in at a high rate (mercy killing, she probably thought).

The sad and ironic thing is that this poor man had said, when he first came into the hospital, that he would never leave alive, and I (innocent of mal-practice, way back then) said that of course he would be OK...

In another sad case (death from aplastic anemia, due to a very adverse effect of the antibiotic chloramphenicol), a resident told me that if the family knew what had happened, there would be a lawsuit for sure--but everyone covered that case up, too.

So, forgive me if I'm not bowing down to science being worshiped like a deity.

I urge you and others to QUESTION AUTHORITY.

Sincerely, Concerned Lady

Nobody who works in the sciences would argue that there are not serious problems with falsified data, unreproducible results, industry funding, etc etc. There are many in the field who devote their lives to identifying and trying to remedy these problems.

But for some reason, the "alternative medicine" community is loathe to admit the problems that plague their field-conflict of interest (practitioners profiting off the remedies they recommend), lack of data to support their claims, and even the scientific implausibility of things like homeopathy.

There are problems in science because scientists and medical professionals are PEOPLE. And people make mistakes, are subject to biases, and are influenced by profit. But the scientific method is the only method we have to investigate and understand the world around us.[/QUOTE]

Well ok then! Now you know why it's so funny to me for anyone to tout "the science" when it can easily be corrupted. But then you end up with... But the scientific method is the only method we have to investigate and understand the world around us.

And it is... if it's not corrupted... which being human .... kind of circular there, but, that's why no one entity (of humans...who are corruptible) can claim authority, in particular, when it comes to "science" or, more correctly their "science" (now you know why I put it in quotes most often) to make others accept it as the only authoritative "science"...especially when it comes to being invasive in health, with things that are highly questionable to be used as such.

Another thing is, it's admitted that vaccines are not 100%, that those who are vaccinated may get the flu anyway (as I did the last time I had a vaccine) and spread it to the vulnerable just like anyone else, yet, they're declared "safe" without actually knowing, only assuming... so it's a game of chance with that too. Of course you bring up the "odds" according to your "math" ... which may be cooked ...being that humans are ... well...anyway :)