What is your opinion on getting the flu shot?

[Surg-OncRN]

Hi, I have gotten the flu shot every year for the past seven years I have been a nurse. I have decided that I have heard enough to convince me to not take it from now on. It is not mandatory at my facility but they push it very strongly. In other words, I have to think of a very good excuse for not taking it. I want to hear your thoughts and opinions on this and what I should do. Thanks!

[JustMeRN]

Sorry, but my two patients with documented chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy clearly trump your story.

And to respond to your first reply to my post; the common theme I have seen in this thread is that it is the nurse's responsibility to protect their patients by getting a flu vaccine which is touted as being safe. The problem is is that there are risks with the flu vaccine. I have seen it in person and on paper. Check out the numbers for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: from 1998- 2013 there were 1157 injury claims and 67 deaths filed for the influenza vaccine. 642 of these cases were compensated and 125 were dismissed.

Take a look at the insert for this year's Fluvirin vaccine. It states that, "There are, however, no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women........., this vaccine should be used during pregnancy only if clearly needed." And yet in last week's L.A. Times they quote a doctor as saying that the flu vaccine is safe for pregnant women at any stage of pregnancy. And since 1997 they have only studied a total of 397 geriatric patients in clinical trials with this vaccine.

What I don't understand is why some nurses get so bent out of shape when a fellow nurse chooses to decline a medical intervention. Do you really feel like your safety is threatened, and if so why? Do you have proof of an unvaccinated nurse giving the flu to someone? Is it the 30,000 yearly flu deaths you have heard about?

And you seriously need to help your husband find out why he is so susceptible to illness.

My point was that your seeing patients with documented vaccine reactions is anecdotal, not that they had reactions. You admit yourself your experience in the area is limited. You will have nurses that work acute or long term neuro that will also relay stories of patients with GBS following flu, and ICU nurses who will relay stories of severe and fatal flu infections occurring on a regular basis. You can only relay stories of what you know based on your experience, and that is not a good basis for medical decision making. Statistics, research and study show flu is a very serious illness, and flu shots are a safe practice.

Vaccine courts are are not in any way shape or form a good reference point. Vaccine injury claims are self reported, making VAERS all but useless for reference purposes. When medical professionals find a claim plausible it moves to vaccine court. You do realize that In vaccine court there is no burden of proof for the plaintiff. You don't have to prove without a doubt that your illness was caused by vaccines, only that it's a possibility, no matter how remote. So it is much easier to win a vaccine claim than you seem to think. On that same subject, you claim 642 claim of vaccine injury were deemed possible enough to go to trial, with 125 payouts between 1998-2013 (though it would be helpful if you can verify these numbers I will assume they are factual). If you compare that to the number of flu vaccine doses administered during that time period the rate of verifiable damage is ridiculously small. There were 57-155 MIILION doses dispensed EVERY YEAR during the time frame you quoted. I'm not even going to bother to do the math here. (Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Total Doses Distributed

| Health Professionals | Seasonal Influenza (Flu)). Your looking at 125 verified cases of vaccine damage in probably more than a billion doses, the risk of vaccine damage is much to small to even be considered really.

Now, let's compare to morbidity and mortality of flu. I'm only going to post a general estimate here, because we could get bogged down if I looked at actual numbers in every year in the 15 year time period you are referencing. So Harvard health estimates 36,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalization a year in the U.S. Due to flu. Again, I don't think it's necessary to do the math to point out that 125 compensated for vaccine injures in 15 years is exponentially smaller than 36k deaths yearly.

As as to your last question no, I don't get bent out of shape when a nurse wants to refuse vaccination. I think it's ridiculous for said nurse to expect to remain employed in high risk or critical care areas while refusing vaccination. Evidence is not on your side. Medical opinion is not on your side. You havnt a leg to stand on when claiming flu shots are dangerous, they are not. Is the flu shot a magic bullet that keeps patients safe? No, but it's one of many best practices that combined help to reduce the spread of illness. When you become a nurse you are agreeing to put yourself in harms way on a regular basis. Your are agreeing to be exposed to all sorts of pathogens, but at the same time we expect our employers to protect us to some degree with PPE and best practice infection control practices. Which is exactly what requiring a flu shot does.

Now, what I do get bent out of shape about is nurses using their position as a platform to spew pseudoscience and fear. Nurses failing to understand the science behind vaccines and the mountains of evidence that supports the safety and efficacy of vaccines infuriates me. Nurses who actively discourage patients from "dangerous" vaccines makes me absolutly furious. But that's a whole other thread.

[eatenbylocusts]

You need to read my post again. Please put as much effort into it as you put into your long-winded rejection of facts that you choose to ignore. There were only 125 cases rejected, not paid out. Come on, do the little work and go back and see the numbers that were paid out. And then you state the flu vaccine is safe! Good job putting your head in the sand and refusing factual information that is as close as your vaccine insert which has enough sense not to at least deny there is a risk. Your arguments lose all credibility when you refuse to deny there is any risk.

You have another problem with your glorifying of the flu vaccine; the proof of its effectiveness in your own experience only can show the vaccine did not cause you any IMMEDIATE harm (check back in 20 and see if there is some neuropathy for unknown reasons). The fact that your loved ones and you did not get the flu does not prove the vaccine protected anyone.

You do realize why there is such a push to vaccinate staff don't you? Here's a tip. It isn't about health. I could give the answer, but I want to see if you have actually done some independent reading.

My point was that your seeing patients with documented vaccine reactions is anecdotal, not that they had reactions. You admit yourself your experience in the area is limited. You will have nurses that work acute or long term neuro that will also relay stories of patients with GBS following flu, and ICU nurses who will relay stories of severe and fatal flu infections occurring on a regular basis. You can only relay stories of what you know based on your experience, and that is not a good basis for medical decision making. Statistics, research and study show flu is a very serious illness, and flu shots are a safe practice.

Vaccine courts are are not in any way shape or form a good reference point. Vaccine injury claims are self reported, making VAERS all but useless for reference purposes. When medical professionals find a claim plausible it moves to vaccine court. You do realize that In vaccine court there is no burden of proof for the plaintiff. You don't have to prove without a doubt that your illness was caused by vaccines, only that it's a possibility, no matter how remote. So it is much easier to win a vaccine claim than you seem to think. On that same subject, you claim 642 claim of vaccine injury were deemed possible enough to go to trial, with 125 payouts between 1998-2013 (though it would be helpful if you can verify these numbers I will assume they are factual). If you compare that to the number of flu vaccine doses administered during that time period the rate of verifiable damage is ridiculously small. There were 57-155 MIILION doses dispensed EVERY YEAR during the time frame you quoted. I'm not even going to bother to do the math here. (Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Total Doses Distributed

| Health Professionals | Seasonal Influenza (Flu)). Your looking at 125 verified cases of vaccine damage in probably more than a billion doses, the risk of vaccine damage is much to small to even be considered really.

Now, let's compare to morbidity and mortality of flu. I'm only going to post a general estimate here, because we could get bogged down if I looked at actual numbers in every year in the 15 year time period you are referencing. So Harvard health estimates 36,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalization a year in the U.S. Due to flu. Again, I don't think it's necessary to do the math to point out that 125 compensated for vaccine injures in 15 years is exponentially smaller than 36k deaths yearly.

As as to your last question no, I don't get bent out of shape when a nurse wants to refuse vaccination. I think it's ridiculous for said nurse to expect to remain employed in high risk or critical care areas while refusing vaccination. Evidence is not on your side. Medical opinion is not on your side. You havnt a leg to stand on when claiming flu shots are dangerous, they are not. Is the flu shot a magic bullet that keeps patients safe? No, but it's one of many best practices that combined help to reduce the spread of illness. When you become a nurse you are agreeing to put yourself in harms way on a regular basis. Your are agreeing to be exposed to all sorts of pathogens, but at the same time we expect our employers to protect us to some degree with PPE and best practice infection control practices. Which is exactly what requiring a flu shot does.

Now, what I do get bent out of shape about is nurses using their position as a platform to spew pseudoscience and fear. Nurses failing to understand the science behind vaccines and the mountains of evidence that supports the safety and efficacy of vaccines infuriates me. Nurses who actively discourage patients from "dangerous" vaccines makes me absolutly furious. But that's a whole other thread.

[JustMeRN]

You need to read my post again. Please put as much effort into it as you put into your long-winded rejection of facts that you choose to ignore. There were only 125 cases rejected, not paid out. Come on, do the little work and go back and see the numbers that were paid out. And then you state the flu vaccine is safe! Good job putting your head in the sand and refusing factual information that is as close as your vaccine insert which has enough sense not to at least deny there is a risk. Your arguments lose all credibility when you refuse to deny there is any risk.

You have another problem with your glorifying of the flu vaccine; the proof of its effectiveness in your own experience only can show the vaccine did not cause you any IMMEDIATE harm (check back in 20 and see if there is some neuropathy for unknown reasons). The fact that your loved ones and you did not get the flu does not prove the vaccine protected anyone.

You do realize why there is such a push to vaccinate staff don't you? Here's a tip. It isn't about health. I could give the answer, but I want to see if you have actually done some independent reading.

so instead of debating any of the numbers I posted you choose personal attack? Great job trying to prove your point. My apologies on mixing up your numbers. So 400ish confirmed vaccine reactions receiving payout out of around a billion doses given in a 15 year time fram. 30k deaths a year (or 450k in 15year time frame) in the US alone due to flu. No deaths attributed to flu vaccine. I never said vaccines didn't carry a risk, but the risk is minuscule. If anyone has their head in the sand I think it might be you. Flu is a known killer, flu vaccine is known to be extremely safe.

Oh oh package inserts, true indication of antivax nonsense when some tells you to "read the insert". Nonsense. Almost as bad as "do your research". Yes, I am fully aware that vaccination carries financial benefits for hospitals. Hospitals also get a bonus if they can prevent hospital readmissions, and prevent pressure ulcers, and bonuses for good patient satisfaction scores. Your point?

[eatenbylocusts]

Don't take it personally, it I may get fired up when someone wants to force interventions on me and others without having all the facts, it. becomes hostile when challenged. You are still misquoting my figures: it is 642 compensated (not 400ish) and there were 67 deaths. And this is a good time to point out that these are only ones that were filed and pursued. It isn't a stretch of the imagination to know that many were never reported and there are many people who do not know about the VICP. And you made a comment about how it was easy to get a judgment. This statement is just ridiculous and without basis. Patients and their families battle for years to get a judgment despite having overwhelming proof even.

I need to leave now, but to address your comment about numbers and another comment about having a problem with nurses who spread fear: the numbers put out by the CDC every year that everyone quotes are not figures of flu deaths. They are estimates which include deaths from respiratory and circulatory causes. Seems like spreading a bit of fear doesn't it?

In the meantime can you provide some good quality studies that show non-vaccinated health care providers spread flu to patients or even co-workers? I'm sure you can find it since mandatory flu vaccines wouldn't be mandated without proof, right? Evidence based practice and all.

[mystcnurse, MSN, APRN, NP]

so instead of debating any of the numbers I posted you choose personal attack? Great job trying to prove your point. My apologies on mixing up your numbers. So 400ish confirmed vaccine reactions receiving payout out of around a billion doses given in a 15 year time fram. 30k deaths a year (or 450k in 15year time frame) in the US alone due to flu. No deaths attributed to flu vaccine. I never said vaccines didn't carry a risk, but the risk is minuscule. If anyone has their head in the sand I think it might be you. Flu is a known killer, flu vaccine is known to be extremely safe.

Oh oh package inserts, true indication of antivax nonsense when some tells you to "read the insert". Nonsense. Almost as bad as "do your research". Yes, I am fully aware that vaccination carries financial benefits for hospitals. Hospitals also get a bonus if they can prevent hospital readmissions, and prevent pressure ulcers, and bonuses for good patient satisfaction scores. Your point?

The numbers of deaths from flu and hospitalizations from flu and "flu related illnesses" are all, basically anecdotal as well. There is as much lack of science in the influenza vaccine research, epidemiology, and reactions to (why does VAERS exist, if it is USELESS?) as there is in any anecdotal evidence.

[JustMeRN]

Don't take it personally, it I may get fired up when someone wants to force interventions on me and others without having all the facts, it. becomes hostile when challenged. You are still misquoting my figures: it is 642 compensated (not 400ish) and there were 67 deaths. And this is a good time to point out that these are only ones that were filed and pursued. It isn't a stretch of the imagination to know that many were never reported and there are many people who do not know about the VICP. And you made a comment about how it was easy to get a judgment. This statement is just ridiculous and without basis. Patients and their families battle for years to get a judgment despite having overwhelming proof even.

I need to leave now, but to address your comment about numbers and another comment about having a problem with nurses who spread fear: the numbers put out by the CDC every year that everyone quotes are not figures of flu deaths. They are estimates which include deaths from respiratory and circulatory causes. Seems like spreading a bit of fear doesn't it?

In the meantime can you provide some good quality studies that show non-vaccinated health care providers spread flu to patients or even co-workers? I'm sure you can find it since mandatory flu vaccines wouldn't be mandated without proof, right? Evidence based practice and all.

before we go any further, back up your numbers with a link please. And also a link to where you got your information from regarding time process of vaccine court compensation.

You our climbing down the rabbit hole and starting to border on conspiracy theory with your suggestions that there is some sort of cover up or under reporting.

And what hat ecmxactly are you trying to get at claiming that because the official cause of death post flu is respiratory failure due to pneumonia or circulatory failure due to sepsis? Those are complications of flu, prevent flu and it doesn't happen. How is that fear

mongering?!

[JustMeRN]

The numbers of deaths from flu and hospitalizations from flu and "flu related illnesses" are all, basically anecdotal as well. There is as much lack of science in the influenza vaccine research, epidemiology, and reactions to (why does VAERS exist, if it is USELESS?) as there is in any anecdotal evidence.

are you serious? I'm not even sure what to say. Test positive for flu, die of known complications, death is flu related. That is not anecdotal, it's statistical evidence. And vaers is completely useless to anyone other than public health professionals investigating vaccine reaction. Vaers is a self reporting system, not a epidemiological report.

[mystcnurse, MSN, APRN, NP]

are you serious? I'm not even sure what to say. Test positive for flu, die of known complications, death is flu related. That is not anecdotal, it's statistical evidence. And vaers is completely useless to anyone other than public health professionals investigating vaccine reaction. Vaers is a self reporting system, not a epidemiological report.

There ARE no epidemiological reports. There is plenty of evidence that there is no real evidence. Look for yourself. Estimates are as useful as anecdotal evidence. The bottom line is: the vaccination's efficacy is highly questionable, as is the long term SAFETY of any YEARLY vaccination. Nobody KNOWS. Years ago, antibiotics were prescribed like candy. And now, we are facing a future where NONE of them work. You do not know that this vaccine is safe long term. So, if you want it, get it. I choose not to. And no amount of corporate bullying will make me change my mind. I would consider it if there were actual evidence that it is safe long term, that it actually works, and that it truly keeps patients "safe". Personally, I think everyone should wear a mask all the time in the hospital. EVERYONE. That would keep patients safe. For sure. Especially from those health care providers who mistakenly believe that they are not able to pass the flu on to their patients because they have a little dot on their badge.

[eatenbylocusts]

Oh oh package inserts, true indication of antivax nonsense when some tells you to "read the insert". Nonsense. Almost as bad as "do your research". Yes, I am fully aware that vaccination carries financial benefits for hospitals. Hospitals also get a bonus if they can prevent hospital readmissions, and prevent pressure ulcers, and bonuses for good patient satisfaction scores. Your point?

You called me anti-vax. I am not. I am anti forced medical treatment and reckless and misleading health care. My two kids are fully vaccinated minus yearly flu shots and HPV. Both my kids are on the autism spectrum. I received all my childhood immunizations plus some extra because an over-zealous school nurse didn't have all my records on school vaccination day. I developed juvenile rheumatoid arthritis in elementary school. This is an auto immune condition. I was diagnosed with another auto immune condition 18 years ago. What research have you done on vaccines and people with such conditions? The vaccine makers haven't done any research, or at least none they are willing to share.

Have you ever read a vaccine insert? That is a pretty bizarre response.

From your response I must assume you are not aware of the real reason there is a stronger push for vaccination. The healthy people 2020 goal is for 90% of health care workers to have the flu vaccine. If organizations do not meet a certain percentage they will be penalized with a loss of medi-caid reimbursement. Maybe that doesn't bother you, but it bothers me that health care decisions are being motivated by money instead of what is best for a patient.

More to come.

[eatenbylocusts]

are you serious? I'm not even sure what to say. Test positive for flu, die of known complications, death is flu related. That is not anecdotal, it's statistical evidence. And vaers is completely useless to anyone other than public health professionals investigating vaccine reaction. Vaers is a self reporting system, not a epidemiological report.

Estimating Seasonal Influenza-Associated Deaths in the United States: CDC Study Confirms Variability of Flu

| Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC

Please read the CDC link which explains how they come up with their number. All these people were not tested and found to have the flu. I explained this to some co-workers during a meeting and I was met with blank stares. How can the CDC put out this information in bold and allow people to use these numbers as fact? I will be interested to hear your thoughts after reading it.

[mystcnurse, MSN, APRN, NP]

3000 to 49,000. Seems very scientific to me! Not!

[JustMeRN]

Estimating Seasonal Influenza-Associated Deaths in the United States: CDC Study Confirms Variability of Flu

| Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC

Please read the CDC link which explains how they come up with their number. All these people were not tested and found to have the flu. I explained this to some co-workers during a meeting and I was met with blank stares. How can the CDC put out this information in bold and allow people to use these numbers as fact? I will be interested to hear your thoughts after reading it.

im not sure exactly why you think this is a smoking gun of some sort? It makes perfect sense to me. Can you pinpoint the parts you think means flu is not a serious and deadly disease?