It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Healthcare workers should get a flu shot or lose their jobs, two health groups say

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Healthcare workers should get a flu shot or lose their jobs, two health groups say


www.latimes.com

The swine-flu scare of 2009 turned a spotlight on a controversial issue: Should healthcare workers be required to have an annual flu vaccine? Most studies suggest that healthcare workers should be vaccinated to help stop the spread of flu. But surveys show a sizable portion of people who work in hospitals, clinics and doctor's offices don't want to get an annual flu shot. According to a Rand Corp. survey issued last year, 39% of healthcare professionals said they would not get a flu vaccine, even with the threat of pandemic flu.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
As a healthcare worker myself, I have no problem with this. flu shots, Hepatitis B, TB tests, HIV... It's for my as well the patients safety to have these immunizations current.

On another note, what do people think is going to happen once Obamacare comes into effect? The easiest way to contain costs is prevention. I can here the cries of unconstitutional now.

www.latimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I have also worked in health care, and had to get all that you mentioned, but at the time of my hire, the flu shot was not mandatory like the rest were.

I had to take my husband to the ER last year, during what should have been prime flu season, and while he was waiting on tests, I was at the nurses station asking them a few questions. They told me they had seen very few patients come in with the flu, and they also all told me that none of them had had a shot, or that they would!

As you mention though, why not if it is your job to take care of people? The thought of one nurse showing up for work who might be sick with the flu, and then passing it on to patients frightens me. They could pass it on to a cancer patient, or somebody else very ill who might not have the ability to fight it off.

While I agree that it should be up to just about everybody else if they want a flu shot, I do think it should be a requirment for health care workers!



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 


Actually, the current conventional wisdom at the hospitals I've been at of late mandates that sick employees not come to work for any reason, and I've seen several sent home the last couple of years. It makes sense... An immune comprimised patient might not be able to fend off the sniffles that currently plague an otherwise healthy healthcare worker.

I support the recommendation, I just wonder how many will support the recommendation when it is mandated by the government.



[edit on 31/8/2010 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
As someone who has had to learn in the past couple of years what "underlying condition" means, and the fact that when I get something as simple as a cold, I can teeter on the edge, I don't think it unreasonable to expect that the people I go to for treatment of my "underlying condition" not give me a potentially fatal disease.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 


With the economy in the state it is in, I think that people are going to have to get the flu shot! Health care is one of the safest for job markets right now, so, unless a person wants to find themselves unemployed, they will have to bend on this one!

Also, just a little tad of common sense should tell health care workers that it is the morally correct thing to do!



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Unnecessary vaccinations are potentially very dangerous.

I think such an flu vaccine caused me to become allergic to diary because most flu vaccines have had adjuvants added to it to stretch the supply (make it cheaper) and these adjuvants consist of some of the most disgusting ingredients that can possibly be injected in people, some ingredients that are known DNA mutagens.

Parents shouldn't take the risks, I'm sure flu vaccines have caused more damage than the flu itself, not only for the generation that got them, but the next generation as well through indirect genetic alternations.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by star in a jarI'm sure flu vaccines have caused more damage than the flu itself, not only for the generation that got them, but the next generation as well through indirect genetic alternations.


You might be guessing, but I'm not. Over the average U.S. lifespan of 72 years with an average of 25,000 flu related deaths per year adds up to a paltry 1.8 million deaths... Unless you consider 1.8 million deaths acceptable "damage."



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 


I'd suggest you watch the episode of Penn and Teller Bull(slang for poo) about Vaccinations.

In their very first segment, they talk about the 1 in 110 who get autism (although it is not definetly linked to a vaccine) They have two sides, each with 110 bowling pins. In front of one, they put a plexiglass wall. Penn goes through his schpeel, then starts naming off virus, and with each, he tosses a grapefruit at the wall, at the same time, Teller is tossing a grapefruit at the unprotected group of bowling pins.

It was a very, very strong visual. Through out the show they make a strong case that all the fear mongering on vaccinations is just that, fear mongering.

There are ZERO studies that prove vaccines are more dangerous then not. After all..when was the last time someone in my generation (I am 22) got pollio...mumps...measels? I know it happens...but at the levels it used to be? Not at all.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 


Your quotes on the 25,000 deaths DUE TO flu are an exaggerated statistic. Always have been, always will be. Anyone that has the flu, and dies is placed in that statistic. Heck, you could have the flu and die from a car accident and be stuck in that statistical field. That is what they do to push the money maker. Have not had the flu shot ever and have NEVER gotten the flu. Is that a statistical anomaly?

Tell me, with the swine flu scare, did they actually test to see if it was H1N1, of course they did not, they said everyone that showed symptoms of the "flu" had H1N1.

As for the problems associated with the vaccinations, of course no one is going to have accurate statistics either. Who does the testing and data collection on this? The very ones that could be held liable for the damages.

Sounds kind of counter intuitive to me.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Your quotes on the 25,000 deaths DUE TO flu are an exaggerated statistic. Always have been, always will be.


Actually, 25,000 is a conservative estimate based on 23 years of statistics:


How do the new estimates compare with the 36,000 figure that is often cited as an estimate of annual flu-associated deaths?
The 36,000 estimate was presented in a 2003 study by CDC scientists published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), using similar statistical modeling techniques, but only refers to a period from 1990-91 through 1998-99. During those years, the number of estimated deaths ranged from 17,000 to 52,000, with an average of about 36,000. The JAMA study also looked at seasonal influenza-associated deaths over a 23 year period, from 1976-1977 and 1998-1999. During that period, estimates of respiratory and circulatory influenza-associated deaths ranged from about 5,000 to about 52,000, with an average of about 25,000. While the 36,000 number is often cited, it’s important to note that during that decade, most of the seasons were influenza A (H3N2) prominent and H3N2 influenza viruses are typically associated with higher deaths rates. CDC believes that the range of deaths over the past 31 years (~3,000 to ~49,000) is a more accurate representation of the unpredictability and variability of flu-associated deaths.


www.cdc.gov...

Emphasis mine.

I invite you to provide an academic reference that spans a similar window of time that will support your assertion.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2


Penn goes through his schpeel, then starts naming off virus, and with each, he tosses a grapefruit at the wall, at the same time, Teller is tossing a grapefruit at the unprotected group of bowling pins.

It was a very, very strong visual. Through out the show they make a strong case that all the fear mongering on vaccinations is just that, fear mongering.


Lol grapefruit bowling debunking?

Vaccinations can work- the problem is that they are vaccinating people with cheaply made vaccinations that are filled with toxins.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 


No, not grapefruit debunking.

Like I said, take a look at the show. I'll warn that there is strong language though.

The grapefruit thing was a visual aid. The two use them regularly on their show.

They also tackle the "toxins" in the vaccines. The short of it: either act as preservatives for the vaccine, or to kill the virus. All at levels that are not harmful to humans.

Mirthful Me, I just realized I never really replied to your topic, so here it goes:

I think medical professionals should consider it in their best interest to get vaccinated. They know their kind do the testing on these things and ultimately know the real statistics...or at least they should, if they are paying attention to their job.

[edit on 8/31/2010 by iamsupermanv2]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 


Heya, Ive been seeing this discussion pop up now and then recently, and this is my stand on it:

If a Healthcare worker gives flu shots, they should have a flu shot/vaccine. This will give the customers peace of mind that it is safe. If a Healthcare worker is in a line of work that does not handle flu shots/vaccines, they should have every right to trust in the ways they reduce risk to their own health, whether it be keeping everything sanitary or taking vitamins, and everything in between. I mean, if a healthcare worker does not care for their own health by keeping a clean environment and maintaining their immune system, then what are they doing in that line of work?
And to restate my view: Worker gives flu shots, they should have a flu shot. Worker doesn't give flu shots, they should not have to get a flu shot.

Temp



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Mirthful, if you are a healthcare worker this thread is a disgrace to yourself and your profession (what ebver it may be within healthcare) not to mention a blantant 'screw you' you to your fellow workers who may have done alot more research and have alot more experience than you do and made an informed decision concerning their body and what goes in it.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tempest333
And to restate my view: Worker gives flu shots, they should have a flu shot. Worker doesn't give flu shots, they should not have to get a flu shot.


So, to restate your view: the health care worker who treats me for my underlying condition, or a health care worker who is stationed in the ICU, or pretty much anyone who is around people with compromised immune systems, these should be allowed to give me (and the rest) something that is rather likely to kill us?

I sure hope that you're not a health care worker.

Who gives a crap if I think the shot is safe because the guy giving it to me has taken it? I want to know that if I'm going in to see my doctor, I'm not going to leave worse off because someone was afraid of a needle or listened to idiots claiming that immunizations cause autism.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Simply put, if you work FOR someone else, you obviously must agree to their conditions for employment. If the company you work for requires that you wear a tie, or do a drug test, or tell them the name of your stepsister's dog, or stand on your forehead, there's no arguing - either you meet the conditions of employment, or you refuse to do so. Just like any contract - terms are terms. Once agreed upon, those terms must be fulfilled.
As far as I know, terms of employment in many cases are subject to change - that is, a business can implement a new policy, and if you want to continue to work for that business, you must fulfill this new policy. If the government mandates that a business implement a policy, then in order to continue to exist within the system that the government controls, that business must implement that policy.
It's all about contracts. If you want something, you're likely going to have to do something else in return. If you want the US government to keep you in its slave system, then you have to follow its policies. If you want to be a health care worker within said system, you have to follow those specific policies. I'm not saying the policies are right or wrong - I'm just saying that, in order to work within this screwed up system, you have to give up certain human rights, and you have to comply with certain policies/"laws".



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ktorvalds
 


I totally agree but I think MM is talking about gov't regulation for HC people to have the flu hot. Any workplace can set their own limits and you either go along with it or you find another job. If the gov't mandates it you have no choice where you work in this field.

This is a tricky one. If you're working in the HC field you're working with people that are immune compromised a lot of the time. That said, your body is yours. I have never had the flu shot, wouldn't have the flu shot because they don't really know what flu they are going to be combating. Guess work and I would rather have my immune system work itself out by itself. Makes the body stronger.

That means that even if you get the shot you may still contract the flu and pass it on to your patients, who it could kill. Universal Precautions works better imo. You're sick, you don't come to work. If you're not sick, you could still be a carrier. Gloves, masks, everything you can do to prevent an immune system that is compromised from being attacked. MRSE comes to mind.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astr0
Mirthful, if you are a healthcare worker this thread is a disgrace to yourself and your profession (what ebver it may be within healthcare) not to mention a blantant 'screw you' you to your fellow workers who may have done alot more research and have alot more experience than you do and made an informed decision concerning their body and what goes in it.


I anxiously await your dissertation, supported by peer reviewed studies regarding the "alot" more research and "alot" more experience that you obviously have. This yet to be composed compelling read should redefine the standard by which all erudite treatise are judged.

As far as the "blantant screw you" goes, I wonder how the family members of people who have died as the result of healthcare provider to patient infections feel about your "alot" more stance regarding immunization. Obviously you are of the "screw them" crowd... How enlightened and altruistic of you.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astr0
Mirthful, if you are a healthcare worker this thread is a disgrace to yourself and your profession (what ebver it may be within healthcare) not to mention a blantant 'screw you' you to your fellow workers who may have done alot more research and have alot more experience than you do and made an informed decision concerning their body and what goes in it.




I anxiously await your dissertation, supported by peer reviewed studies regarding the "alot" more research and "alot" more experience that you obviously have. This yet to be composed compelling read should redefine the standard by which all erudite treatise are judged.



I am stunned that you profess to be a healthcare professional and yet lack such basic skills - reading / comprehension is not your strong point I see.

"Who may have"

See? I pointed it out to you so its nice and easy. On that note, why would I write a dissertaion on the subject of people who 'may have' more experience than you making informed decisions? are you saying there is peer reviewed worked on you and your personal experience? what utter rubbish. Lets have a look at your next little piece.



As far as the "blantant screw you" goes, I wonder how the family members of people who have died as the result of healthcare provider to patient infections feel about your "alot" more stance regarding immunization.


Hospital aquired infections are a sad part of medicine world wide and you as a professional should know that. You should also know that it is impossible even in a hospital theatre with fully scrubbed staff to avoid infection cases. I indeed shall take a long hard look at literature and publications / research to see how many patients have died of hospital aquired 'flu'.

Oh and if you are a healthcare pro - you should also know that relatives coming into hospital are a large part of the problem - as are flowers in vases with water in them.

Well - I guess I'll just have to shake my head and be dead glad you are not my unit manager or any of the former managers I have worked for.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join