TriHealth fires 150 employees for not getting flu shots

reply to post by NavyDoc

you presented it as a fundamental operation and while it might be now, it wasn't always that way and that's exactly what i said or did you breeze over it on purpose ?

for years (decades really), infectious patients weren't even isolated, so what's your point ?

only since vaccines became heavily marketed have we had a need for extreme infectious controls, ever wonder why ?

you can be as rude and condescending as you like, it doesn't change the facts.

Well something is really wrong with your hospital sanitary monitoring systems....because today

Many hospitals are some of the deadliest places ; especially if one is already sick.

So, I think some of you have an over inflated view and have lost sight of the actual TRUTH of where we are at in america.

This is NOW a third world country.

Get use to it

reply to post by NavyDoc

oh, for sanity's sake, are you so naive as to think you are the only one who knows how to interpret a study ?

science is often wrong more times than right, if you want to put your faith in it, feel free.

i directed others to the "Teaching" link.
not the manipulated study versions.

clearly, you don't understand what is printed in the article ALL readers are referred to before espousing the study results.
don't follow directions very well, do ya ?

hmmmm, 31 participants inclusive of a control group ? "cough" ok.
whatever man, you're free to buy it all you want.

i'll keep my 2cents and spend it more frugally toward saving others from such a dismal delusion.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

oh, for sanity's sake, are you so naive as to think you are the only one who knows how to interpret a study ?

science is often wrong more times than right, if you want to put your faith in it, feel free.

i directed others to the "Teaching" link.
not the manipulated study versions.

clearly, you don't understand what is printed in the article ALL readers are referred to before espousing the study results.
don't follow directions very well, do ya ?

hmmmm, 31 participants inclusive of a control group ? "cough" ok.
whatever man, you're free to buy it all you want.

i'll keep my 2cents and spend it more frugally toward saving others from such a dismal delusion.

Shrug. Obviously you don't. And I noticed that you only picked one study, and ignored the many, many others, I posted. "Cough" intellectual dishonesty much? "Manipulated study" again, the very fact that you say that is proof that you do not understand how studies work.

Here is what we have: I presented a logical and reasoned explaination of why it is proper for healthcare workers in a hospital to be inoculated.

I explained to you what a disease was.

Asked for studies, I presented many, many on the subject.

You found one phrase in one study (convenviently ignoring all of the other cites) that you didn't understand but thought it was a "gotcha moment."

I explained to you how studies worked and what "selection bias" is and how it did not mean what you think it does and how controlling and reducing it actually demonstrates that a scientific study is more valid.

At this point, you are just being willfully ignorant. No reason or logic will change your mind.

Originally posted by Artistic
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

I completely understand.

I also understand you are one of those willing to live in a dictatorship

Good luck

You asked for studies, I gave them to you. If you don't wish to learn the truth after you asked for them, that's on you. Defy ignorance, open your mind.

A control group of 31 is a joke.

In truth ; there are NO valid studies to show this flu shot is real

it is a sham.

If you want to think it is other than; good luck.

Always ; FOLLOW THE MONEY

Originally posted by Artistic
A control group of 31 is a joke.

In truth ; there are NO valid studies to show this flu shot is real

it is a sham.

If you want to think it is other than; good luck.

Always ; FOLLOW THE MONEY

No valid studies, really? How about the other 20 I posted that you ignored.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

i'm well aware what a disease is and what it is NOT.

No you didn't. I had to explain it to you. Feel free to back up your presupposition with actual facts. The fact is that the flu has always been considered a disease, you didn't understand it, and you are now backpedaling after I pointed it out for you.

you, are confused.

here ... straight from the CDC themselves ... www.cdc.gov...
[you know, the Center for Disease Control)

influenza is a virus, not a disease.
(the PC community call it a disease and that's fine by me)

Seasonal Influenza: Flu Basics
Influenza (the flu) is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses. It can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Some people, such as older people, young children, and people with certain health conditions, are at high risk for serious flu complications. The best way to prevent the flu is by getting vaccinated each year.

if you'll kindly notice, the word disease doesn't even appear on the page.
(except the title of course)

arguing vocabulary and semantics isn't helping your stance one bit.
this other nonsense is distracting from the topic and a complete derail attempt of which i will no longer participate.

Yes.

Influenza is a virus.

NOT a disease.

reply to post by NavyDoc

i've ignored plenty of studies in my day, that doesn't mean i am lax in interpreting them.

you gave your reasoning and quite a few disagree with you, however, you seem to imply that everyone, self included, must be confused because your 'reason' is the only one that matters.
superiority complex much ?

you have yet to prove when or how influenza is classified as a disease, even by the ppl who monitor DISEASE control.

and, i have proven repeatedly that influenza is a VIRUS, not a disease ... even according to the CDC (who i seldom quote for anything)

i didn't quote a phrase from ANY study, i know better.
i quoted statements from a Reuter's article, which is hardly a "study".

i'm glad you think you've accomplished something.
perhaps someone will fall into the trap, they always do ... however, if i can throw a rope to just one, i've acctually accomplished something whereas you just keep thinkin it.

none of your logic is valid so no, it certainly won't change my mind.

One year; they used the wrong "virus" in their flu vaccines;

So, all the sheeple out there who got flu shots for that year ; it was useless anyway.

This is a sham

Always has been ; always will be

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

i'm well aware what a disease is and what it is NOT.

No you didn't. I had to explain it to you. Feel free to back up your presupposition with actual facts. The fact is that the flu has always been considered a disease, you didn't understand it, and you are now backpedaling after I pointed it out for you.

you, are confused.

here ... straight from the CDC themselves ... www.cdc.gov...
[you know, the Center for Disease Control)

influenza is a virus, not a disease.
(the PC community call it a disease and that's fine by me)

Seasonal Influenza: Flu Basics
Influenza (the flu) is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses. It can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Some people, such as older people, young children, and people with certain health conditions, are at high risk for serious flu complications. The best way to prevent the flu is by getting vaccinated each year.

if you'll kindly notice, the word disease doesn't even appear on the page.
(except the title of course)

arguing vocabulary and semantics isn't helping your stance one bit.
this other nonsense is distracting from the topic and a complete derail attempt of which i will no longer participate.

Oh, for Christ's sake. You really are reaching now. You messed up and now you are trying to parse words to keep yourself from looking silly.

If we look at the "infectious diseases" section of how stuff works, for example we see, guess what! The Flu!

health.howstuffworks.com...

I think it is kind of funny that you use the CDC to try to do your backpedaling since the CDC is also one of the biggest advocates for inoculation. Are they lying then or are they lying now? LOL.

As for your link, no kidding an educational page for the layman uses the term "illness" (although an illness is a disease as well, no? Or are you going to tell me that an illness is different from a disease now?) Those information pages also call various other diseases illnesses. You've got to realize that they need to be understandable by a sixth grader.

As for derailing the subject, I disagree. When I present a logical stance on the subject of inoculations in hospitals and come at me from an obviously ignorant and dismissive attitude and imply that I don't know what I'm talking about, I'm gonna educate you. Rather than ignorant dogma, I've presented science and have gotten the typical "oh its a conspiracy" nonsense. Defy ignorance is part of this site, no?

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

i've ignored plenty of studies in my day, that doesn't mean i am lax in interpreting them.

you gave your reasoning and quite a few disagree with you, however, you seem to imply that everyone, self included, must be confused because your 'reason' is the only one that matters.
superiority complex much ?

you have yet to prove when or how influenza is classified as a disease, even by the ppl who monitor DISEASE control.

and, i have proven repeatedly that influenza is a VIRUS, not a disease ... even according to the CDC (who i seldom quote for anything)

i didn't quote a phrase from ANY study, i know better.
i quoted statements from a Reuter's article, which is hardly a "study".

i'm glad you think you've accomplished something.
perhaps someone will fall into the trap, they always do ... however, if i can throw a rope to just one, i've acctually accomplished something whereas you just keep thinkin it.

none of your logic is valid so no, it certainly won't change my mind.

But see, here is what I'm getting at. Even the article that you quoted proves you wrong. Let's look at it again:

Seasonal Influenza: Flu Basics
Influenza (the flu) is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses. It can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Some people, such as older people, young children, and people with certain health conditions, are at high risk for serious flu complications. The best way to prevent the flu is by getting vaccinated each year.

You said:

i have proven repeatedly that influenza is a VIRUS, not a disease

Which is nothing like the CDC text you copied above. Influenza (colloquially known as the flu) is a disease caused by a virus known as the influenza virus. The CDC thing you posted above says the same exact thing. What you said is like saying that AIDS is not a disease, but a virus. AIDS is a disease state caused by the HIV, a virus. If you cannot even grasp this simple concept, you won't learn anything about this subject matter.


My logic is sound, my science is consistent, you won't change your mind because of blind belief.

reply to post by NavyDoc

Oh, for Christ's sake. You really are reaching now. You messed up and now you are trying to parse words to keep yourself from looking silly.

and you just can't drop the bone, no matter how picked-over it is, can ya?
rather admit your error, you go down the road of personal attack.
'nuff said.

fascits love "control" more than anything else ... see any of your posts for examples.

when or if you can explain what disease vs virus has to do with the "topic of this thread", we'll continue. otherwise, get back on topic and drop the bone already.

No employer has the right to force any employee to be penetrated in such a manner, period.

as an assumed member of the Armed Services, you have never had the option to openly 'object' ... so, your opinion does not surprise me.

however, your choice to relinquish your own freedom does not follow to the civilian population.
that is the contract YOU signed, don't try to force it on everyone else.

reply to post by NavyDoc


still can't stay on topic, can ya ?

What you said is like saying that AIDS is not a disease, but a virus. AIDS is a disease state caused by the HIV, a virus. If you cannot even grasp this simple concept, you won't learn anything about this subject matter.

AIDS is not a virus, however, it is a disease.

a respiratory illness is not a 'disease' yet.
pneumonia ?, sure, since it was first discovered.
COPD, definately.
lung cancer, absolutely.
influenza, not quite.

and your opinion is likely derived from indocrination and kickbacks, so why bother discussing it ? if you're going to be honest with everyone ... do tell, what likely kickbacks is the company receiving to force it's employees to comply ??

as much i as i agree with your concerns; are they enough to prevent you from washing your hands regularly ? or do you take special precautions to limit your exposure ?

I haven't washed my hands in almost 2 years, except for a handful of times with filtered water, but I haven't used soap for almost 2 years. No special precautions, you just need to actually become healthy primarilyby improving your nutrition and avoiding toxins, and eliminating the ones already in your body. Then you have nothing to fear from most pathogens.

A study showing that people who got a flu shot were 1.4-2.5 times more likely to get the flu: www.plosmedicine.org...

The 2009 flu vaccine was estimated to cause about 1600 to 3500 miscarriages and stillbirths, according to data the National Coalition of Organized Women collected from pregnant woman given the flu shot. The CDCs method for determining the number of miscarriage was very flawed and resulted in gross under reporting. Personally I think it was intentional. www.progressiveconvergence.com...

I could easily find lots more too, but I don't have the time or the inclination to do so right now. Anyone who wants to learn about this subject can easily find plenty of similar studies in a few minutes if they look for themselves.

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Just google it.

www.nytimes.com...

my.clevelandclinic.org...

tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.ca...

Some employers now require job applicants to take a cotinin test prior to employment to ensure that they are non-smokers and don't use any kind of quit smoking aid that contains nicotene

Health care facilities are leading the trend but private employers like Scott's Miracle Gro has such a policy as well as some municipalities

Everyone thought it was cool when it was happening to those nasty, dirty, stinky smokers but it was widely predicted that if employers could get away with controlling employee's legal choices after work hours, that it would only be a matter of time before it spread to other areas.

With trying to control health care costs as the excuse, employers can now extend their control into your private life ie flu shots, how much you weigh, whether your spouse smokes, what and how much you drink, how many children you have etc etc etc It is also only a matter of time before employers extend this trend to refusing the hire woman who may become pregnant (think of the increased health costs there).
Tired of Control Freaks

Thank you for pointing this out to me. I find this completely disgusting.

Actually, though, the forerunner for this was "drug testing," not the smoking thing. I will concede that there are some cases and certain professions where it is warranted... but for the most part I don't feel it is, and people have just been laying down their rights in exchange for a crappy paycheck.

Of course that's not how it started. Once upon a time, only govt jobs or jobs with a serious safety element, or very high-level (high paying) jobs did this. Now you have to pee in a cup just to work at walmart or some fast food place.


I wish there were some site, functioning as a kind of updatable, user-driven database, which cataloged which companies had certain policies or practices, so that we the public know which companies we truly would want, or not want, to show our financial support for, by buying their products or using their services. Corporate leeches may command and control just about everything these days, but there is still a way we can take some control and "punish" them, if only enough people do it. One or two people is not an effective boycott.

But how would one go about finding this stuff out?

reply to post by NavyDoc


Navydoc

I have read one of the studies you provided:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Effect of expanded US recommendations for seasonal influenza vaccination: comparison of two pediatric emergency departments in the United States and Canada. Hoen AG, Buckeridge DL, Charland KM, Mandl KD, Quach C, Brownstein JS.

The study period in this study is suspicious all by itself.

We examined data for 2000/2001 through 2008/2009 and estimated relative changes in visits to the emergency department for influenza-like illness at two pediatric hospitals, one in Boston, Massachusetts, and the other in Montréal, Quebec, following the US policy change. Models were adjusted for virologic factors, seasonal trends and all-cause utilization of the emergency department."

Now why would they use a study period of 9 years when in fact, the critical difference between the control group (Canadian Hospital) and the subject group (US hospital) occurred only during the 2006/2007 season?

Despite the stated goals of the study, the data used for the study included more years when the control group and the subject group were exactly the same then the number of years in which they were different.

The study also states that they controlled for:

Models were adjusted for virologic factors, seasonal trends and all-cause utilization of the emergency department.

However, they did not control for which kids had been vaccinated and which hadn't? Is it possible that some Canadian parents chose to get the vaccination even in the absence of a recommendation.

Further, although the results of the study were statistically significant (in mathematical terms) the results were clinically insignificant (ie less than 200 % difference). In any study, a difference of less than 200 % is considered to be due to chance or bias by the researcher.

I am quite sure that you are intelligent enough to google the difference and meaning of the words statistically significant vs clinically significant.

Why did they not report the number of Canadian kids that were included in the study as a separate number from the US kids?

Then it would have been possible to determine clinical significance. Without that information, this study is worthless and is more likely to be a pr exercise bought and paid for by the pharmaceutical companies.

I am not saying that there are no valid studies out there but this one sure isn't one of them.

Out of the 20 studies you provided - could you pick out the one that you think proves your point the best?
Tired of Control Freaks

reply to post by iwilliam


Jwilliam

You are very welcome

What I find most frightening about these policies is that these companies are not trying to "foster a healthy workplace" by "protecting other employees" from the frightening second hand smoke, which apparently is more toxic than sarin gas.

No, these policies are implemented to create a SMOKER-FREE policy. They don't want to ban second hand smoke - they want to ban PEOPLE who smoke. Even if they only smoke on their own time and in their own home.

Tired of Control Freaks

reply to post by iwilliam

I wish there were some site, functioning as a kind of updatable, user-driven database, which cataloged which companies had certain policies or practices, so that we the public know which companies we truly would want, or not want, to show our financial support for, by buying their products or using their services. Corporate leeches may command and control just about everything these days, but there is still a way we can take some control and "punish" them, if only enough people do it. One or two people is not an effective boycott.

But how would one go about finding this stuff out?

perhaps, this would be the best place to build one ... i'm game, any volunteers willing to submit their local information ?

here in FL, the entire medical industry via current law supports mandated vaccinations.
here are a couple other links that may be of interest.

www.know-vaccines.org...
[color=amber](some points of interest of which many aren't aware)

•Individual healthcare providers are not required by law to offer any vaccines to patients or ensure that any patients are vaccinated with any vaccines. CDC State Immunization Laws for HealthCare Workers and Patients

•No vaccines are required by law for adoption within the US. No statutory requirement

•No vaccines are required by law for travel except yellow fever for travel to certain countries in South Africa and tropical South American and meningococcal vaccine is required by Saudia Arabia during the Hajj. wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/content/vaccinations.aspx

•Social welfare assistance applicants who fail to vaccinate because of religious reasons ARE eligible for assistance. Welfare applicants cannot be denied assistance for declining vaccines due to religious conflict. No statutory requirement

•Medicaid patients are not required by law to receive any vaccines. No statutory requirement

community.advanceweb.com...
www.nationalnursesunited.org...
www.nofluforyou.com...