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
I'm primarily pro vaccine. Only have the whole cell Pertussis vaccine? Bring it on!
Flu vaccine generates a lot of money because it can be given and forced upon almost anyone. The target group that it actually helps is relatively small and slightly larger group that impacts that target group.
Then you have these rare diseases like Menkes and others that also have a small target in-need group, but little money is spent on medicine because the money would not be recovered by making a huge group take part in the treatment.
Judas Priest, how many times do you need to be told that placeboes are not used in clinical trial for cancer! Not ever!I swear, I'm beginning to seriously doubt you are really a nurse.
Apparently, one more time. I stopped reading except for yours and FlyingScot's posts, honestly. At least I learn something from those posts..
This is a known phenomenon, and this thread could go on for 200 pages (as it appears it might) and it's not likely to change anyone's mind, as I pointed out 'waaaaaay back on page 17 ...
Yes, I did see that one person who didn't have strong opinions either way but hadn't gotten flu shots in the past said that s/he has decided to get a shot this year, and that's good. But the debating with the anti-vaxx crowd, as satisfying as it may be, isn't going to change any of their minds, regardless of how compelling the evidence offered appears. In fact, the evidence suggests that, the stronger the evidence presented (to the contrary of one's existing position), the more likely one is to resist and embrace one's existing position even more strongly.
Perhaps the best response is no response at all.
You know, I think the world would be better if we just closed this thread. It is irretrievably off-topic with no hope of return and high probability of being de-railed again and again by posters with personal agendas. Not only that but the amount of extreme misinformation being offered by some posters may be putting our non-medical guests at risk as now this thread comes up in a search for alternative cancer treatments.
You know, I think the world would be better if we just closed this thread. It is irretrievably off-topic with no hope of return and high probability of being de-railed again and again by posters with personal agendas. Not only that but the amount of extreme misinformation being offered by some posters may be putting our non-medical guests at risk as now this thread comes up in a search for alternative cancer treatments.
Amen to that. While we don't give medical advice, we don't want those who come here via a search engine to think we are uneducated.
Just thought I'd add that my father has some pretty serious ailments - cardiac and pulmonary. He is terrible about seeing his HCPs unless he has to for his prescriptions. He also *hates* needles. Like, told me he'd rather have a dentist drill and feel the pain instead of getting the numbing injections.
My point?
My dad gets his flu shot every season.
Does not suffer fools gladly. My kind of guy.
Confronting Cancer Quackery | I fucking hate pseudoscienceCancer quackery (along with charlatanism surrounding HIV/AIDs) has to be one of the most noxious of all pseudoscience-based enterprises and, perhaps it's just my line of work, but I can't help but feel that it's on the rise. The reliably high prevalence of cancer represents immensely fertile ground for scammers, and alternative†treatments for it are sought by millions, supporting a steady cash-flow in the direction of fakes, phoneys, and otherwise ignorant followers of charismatic nasties. As well as fostering a generalised distrust in science and burning holes in wallets, cancer pseudoscience often steers patients away from their one and only shot at survival.
I was glad to see this today - someone wrote a good article and it is in Parents Magazine where it will be seen by many folks. It talks about flu too so it is ok for this thread.
8 Reasons Parents Don't Vaccinate (And Why They Should) - Parents.com
I was glad to see this today - someone wrote a good article and it is in Parents Magazine where it will be seen by many folks. It talks about flu too so it is ok for this thread.8 Reasons Parents Don't Vaccinate (And Why They Should) - Parents.com
That is a good article, and succinctly and graceful summarizes all the stuff we've been yammering on about on this thread for all this time. :)
It's unlikely to convert any of the anti-vaxx "true believers," but maybe some of the folks sitting on the fence with concerns rather than fixed beliefs will get the message.
macawake, MSN
2,141 Posts
My previous reply still applies. Even if you were to combine for example only organic fuits and vegetables, laetrile, shark's cartilage, massive intravenous doses of ascorbic acid and homeopathy there still isn't cause for a reasonable expectation that this could treat or cure cancer.
I actually checked that site out when you first mentioned it, I just didn't post about it.
I wasn't impressed. It seems that I can donate my car if I want to or buy very expensive DVD's.
Anecdotal testimony from anonymous people on a site that sells stuff makes my radar ping. When they also promote treatment methods that aren't proven to work, it further adds to my unease.
You've mentioned this organization over and over again in this thread, so often in fact that I started to wonder if you have a vested financial interest in that business. This may or may not be the case. Either way, I've checked it out and saw no compelling evidence to make me change my mind on various holistic cancer treatments or cures.
(my bold)
You don't seem to hold physicians/oncologists in high regard. You have previously referred to cancer treatments provided by nurses and physicians as "cutting, burning and poisoning". I don't know if I'm right, but I perceive disdain towards modern medicine. Why is this?
I'll be perfectly honest with you. I don't expect to change your mind and you won't change my mind on this particular issue. I'm responding to your posts mainly because I wish to clarify to other readers who may lack medical training, that what you're promoting here aren't viable treatments.
The thought of vulnerable and desperate cancer patients being drawn away from modern medicine and towards unproven methods frightens and saddens me.
If you or anyone else could produce solid scientific evidence regarding a holistic method, I'd be open to evaluating that evidence and change my mind if it holds water, but until then I'll put my faith in and support proven methods.