TriHealth fires 150 employees for not getting flu shots

page: 9
22
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
As an ex medical worker:

A shot is an intrusive procedure ; into the body with potential harmful effects.

It is NOT the same as a hand washing requirement or a clothing requirement.

A shot can be harmful or deadly. Many people have developed allergic reactions to the flu shot and died as a result.

For an employer to NOT take this into consideration and make it a requirement for employment is being that of a dictator.




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Artistic
Contrary to popular belief:

To have to be shot up with unknown substances in order to keep a job is NOT freedom but

it is called fascism. I dictator gives an edict and all have to follow or ....


What did we come to when people can't recognize fascism??


Indeed. Now how, pray tell, does having a work requirement for a job that you are completely free to leave at any time fit the definition of fascism?
when such a "work requirement" does nothing to enhance either performance or objective, it is fascist ... if you cannot see that, you aren't looking.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artistic
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Nonsense?

No

What is next to be required?

I am frightful for America's future

when people CANT see or don't want to see the face of dictatorship

You can disagree all you like

BUT it is dictatorship that requires one to do potential harm and ask NO questions

You can live in a world like 1984 but I will NOT


Sigh. Please show me where the government did this. Please show me where the people (a minority of employees by the way) were not free to walk away. Please show me where the employees in question were not allowed to question or object. Have you read 1984? Have you ever lived in a real dictatorship?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Artistic
Contrary to popular belief:

To have to be shot up with unknown substances in order to keep a job is NOT freedom but

it is called fascism. I dictator gives an edict and all have to follow or ....


What did we come to when people can't recognize fascism??


Indeed. Now how, pray tell, does having a work requirement for a job that you are completely free to leave at any time fit the definition of fascism?
when such a "work requirement" does nothing to enhance either performance or objective, it is fascist ... if you cannot see that, you aren't looking.


You don't think that reducing the spread of a disease in a hospital would be a logical part of the performance or objectives of a hospital?

Oh, wait, you are the guy who didn't understand the concept of "disease." Nevermind.
edit on 27-11-2012 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Show me ONE study that shows a flu show decreased the spread of the dreaded flu ...

just one



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Artistic
 


show one study that shows a flu SHOT

stopped the dreaded flu

just ONE



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Where does the demand to refuse work requirements lead? Should not a cook refuse to wash his hands before preparing your food? Why should he be fired if he does not wash his hands after he takes a dump and then makes you a salad. Job requirements are a dictatorship I tell you? (See how your use of reducto ad absurdum sounds coming from the other end?)
dude, this is such a worn-out and failed argument, why can't/won't you find something relative ?

hand washing does not penetrate the person.
(if said employee is disgruntled over the flavor of soap/disinfectant, they can bring their own)

i got news for you, cooks, (when working sick), don't wash their hands after vomitting on the line (especially when there is food on the griddle so to speak) ... have seen it 1st hand more times than i'd care to count.

comparing the most common illness preventative in use today, which is non-invasive and common practice is hardly in the same ballpark as vaccinations, which are extremely intrusive, less than effective and are proven dangerous.

if you can find any other relative common demand, let's discuss it.
this argument is failed on so many levels that it detracts from the premise of the thread.
how many ppl have EVER been fired for not washing their hands ??
better question, how many employees have been reprimanded for not washing their hands ?
(any chance there are studies available ? )

how many livelihoods (as medical employees generally aren't HS graduates working part-time) have been destroyed because someone refused to wash their hands ?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 



Please show me where the people (a minority of employees by the way) were not free to walk away. Please show me where the employees in question were not allowed to question or object.
free to suffer an unknown, un-communicated consequence is not FREEDOM in the workplace.

Free to keep their jobs and object to said intrusive requirement is freedom.
free to leave is ALWAYS an option ... it is not indicative of freedom.

it is not a question of being allowed to object ... it is a question of objecting without consequence.
when the only choice is DO or LEAVE, there is no freedom.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artistic
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Show me ONE study that shows a flu show decreased the spread of the dreaded flu ...

just one



Oh, for crying out loud.

20.^ Hoen AG, Buckeridge DL, Charland KM, Mandl KD, Quach C, Brownstein JS (September 2011). "Effect of xpanded US recommendations for seasonal influenza vaccination: comparison of two pediatric emergency departments in the United States and Canada". CMAJ 183 (13): E1025–32. doi:10.1503/cmaj.110241. PMC 3176865. PMID 21930745. //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176865/.
21.^ Nicholas Bakalar (September 19, 2011). "Prevention: Flu Shots' Benefits Seen in Hospital Study". The New York Times. www.nytimes.com...
22.^ Katayose M, Hosoya M, Haneda T, et al. (February 2011). "The effectiveness of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in children over six consecutive influenza seasons". Vaccine 29 (9): 1844–9

b Jefferson T, Rivetti D, Rivetti A, Rudin M, Di Pietrantonj C, Demicheli V (2005). "Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines in elderly people: a systematic review". Lancet 366 (9492): 1165–74. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67339-4. PMID 16198765.
50.^ Nichol, K.L.; Nordin, J.D.; Nelson, D.B.; Mullooly, J.D.; Hak, E. (2007). "Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine in the community-dwelling elderly". The New England Journal of Medicine 357 (14): 1373–1381. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa070844. PMID 17914038.
51.^ Vu, T.; Farish, S.; Jenkins, M.; Kelly, H. (2002). "A meta-analysis of effectiveness of influenza vaccine in persons aged 65 years and over living in the community". Vaccine 20 (13–14): 1831–1836. doi:10.1016/S0264-410X(02)00041-5. PMID 11906772.
52.^ Nordin, J.; Mullooly, J.; Poblete, S.; Strikas, R.; Petrucci, R.; Wei, F.; Rush, B; Safirstein, B et al. (2001). "Influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing hospitalizations and deaths in persons 65 years or older in Minnesota, New York, and Oregon: Data from 3 health plans". The Journal of Infectious Diseases 184 (6): 665–670. doi:10.1086/323085. PMID 11517426.
53.^ Simonsen L, Viboud C, Taylor RJ, Miller MA, Jackson L (October 2009). "Influenza vaccination and mortality benefits: new insights, new opportunities". Vaccine 27 (45): 6300–4. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.07.008. PMID 19840664.
54.^ a b Osterholm, MT; Kelley, NS; Sommer, A; Belongia, EA (2012). "Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis". The Lancet Infectious Diseases 12 (1): 36–44. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70295-X. PMID 22032844. Also discussed in "Efficacy and Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis". journalistsresource.org... JournalistsResource.org, retrieved February 2, 2012


And that is a fraction of the studies, from reputable SCIENTIFIC journals with proper statistical analysis and peer review in a half-minute google search.
edit on 27-11-2012 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Those who don't see a problem with this:

SHOW one study that shows a decrease of the dreaded flu in an entire hospital or facility after all employees had the flu shot.

to require a flu shot of all employees ; a facility needs to have these studies....

because if one person dies of a flu shot; due to a "requirement ; I can assure you;

a family will want something ; get it??



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


You don't think that reducing the spread of a disease in a hospital would be a logical part of the performance or objectives of a hospital?
it never has been, why would it be now ?
for years (decades really), infectious patients weren't even isolated, so what's your point ?

stated goals and intended ones are seldom the same.
as a navy man, surely you already know this ?


Oh, wait, you are the guy who didn't understand the concept of "disease." Nevermind
no, i'm the OLD fart who remembers a time before it was classified as a disease.
illness, sickness, condition ... all of the above, however, it was not classified as a disease until much later.
and to be totally honest, it is a sub-classification ... it is an infectious disease.
but i suppose the general perception is as a "doc", what you say counts, right ?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Where does the demand to refuse work requirements lead? Should not a cook refuse to wash his hands before preparing your food? Why should he be fired if he does not wash his hands after he takes a dump and then makes you a salad. Job requirements are a dictatorship I tell you? (See how your use of reducto ad absurdum sounds coming from the other end?)
dude, this is such a worn-out and failed argument, why can't/won't you find something relative ?

hand washing does not penetrate the person.
(if said employee is disgruntled over the flavor of soap/disinfectant, they can bring their own)

i got news for you, cooks, (when working sick), don't wash their hands after vomitting on the line (especially when there is food on the griddle so to speak) ... have seen it 1st hand more times than i'd care to count.

comparing the most common illness preventative in use today, which is non-invasive and common practice is hardly in the same ballpark as vaccinations, which are extremely intrusive, less than effective and are proven dangerous.

if you can find any other relative common demand, let's discuss it.
this argument is failed on so many levels that it detracts from the premise of the thread.
how many ppl have EVER been fired for not washing their hands ??
better question, how many employees have been reprimanded for not washing their hands ?
(any chance there are studies available ? )

how many livelihoods (as medical employees generally aren't HS graduates working part-time) have been destroyed because someone refused to wash their hands ?




Dude, when someone does not understand even the basic concept of what a disease is, how can we even explain it to them?

Handwashing is extremely relative, but, since you don't understand the basic principles of what we are talking about, you cannot even see the relevence of it.

How many people have died or injured by poor sanitary practices at restaurants? You buds on the line are part of the problem, no? I'd fire them, but then I'm one of those foolish people that care about my customers. State law indicates fines for not washing hands before going to work and a simple google search brough up 18,200,000 hits on the sunject. So yeah, people get disciplined for not washing their hands if they are caught.

I want to be a deep sea diver but I don't want to wear the equipment provided? Why not be fired? Firemen have to wear protective gear. The examples of compromises for jobs are countless and the answer always remains the same...you are free to go elseware if you cannot come to terms with the requirements.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artistic
Those who don't see a problem with this:

SHOW one study that shows a decrease of the dreaded flu in an entire hospital or facility after all employees had the flu shot.

to require a flu shot of all employees ; a facility needs to have these studies....

because if one person dies of a flu shot; due to a "requirement ; I can assure you;

a family will want something ; get it??



Look above you. I posted several studies that prove that exact thing. You just didn't bother to look because you don't understand.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


:lol
that's a good one ... journalistsresource.org... ... ladies and gentlemen, this is exactly why we now have journalists vs reporters.

for those who want a good chuckle, read the link titled "Teaching Notes".
in which you'll notice the very first instruction BEFORE all others is ...

Read the study-related Reuters article titled “World Needs to Update Its Flu Vaccines.”
so, i did ... and should you.


for your enjoyment --> the opening line reads ...

(Reuters) - As Americans line up for flu shots, they should consider that the vaccines may be far less effective than thought, according to a new study.
thanks, navydoc, appreciate the help



more from the link ...

found that the most common flu vaccine in the United States is effective for 59 percent of healthy adults, well below the 70 percent to 90 percent level previously reported.
- snip -
There is also a lack of information about how well the vaccine works in children and in adults over the age of 65, he said. These two groups are most at risk from flu-related illness or death.
- snip -
They narrowed their analysis to 31 studies that tested for the presence of flu in laboratory tests rather than counting an increase in flu antibodies -- a faster method but one that researchers say tends to overestimate the vaccine's efficacy.

They also limited results to those that used randomized controlled trials or other observational methods that did not have "selection bias," which could lead to sicker people getting excluded from the study.
yet, these are the studies we are supposed to put our bodies in jeopardy over ??



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I completely understand.

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

Good luck



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Artistic
 


AND

don't come crying when they want one of your kidneys "donated" for you to keep working

because believe it or not, this is where it is leading



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


You don't think that reducing the spread of a disease in a hospital would be a logical part of the performance or objectives of a hospital?
it never has been, why would it be now ?
for years (decades really), infectious patients weren't even isolated, so what's your point ?

stated goals and intended ones are seldom the same.
as a navy man, surely you already know this ?


Oh, wait, you are the guy who didn't understand the concept of "disease." Nevermind
no, i'm the OLD fart who remembers a time before it was classified as a disease.
illness, sickness, condition ... all of the above, however, it was not classified as a disease until much later.
and to be totally honest, it is a sub-classification ... it is an infectious disease.
but i suppose the general perception is as a "doc", what you say counts, right ?





Know how I know you don't know what you are talking about? It is this part:



it never has been, why would it be now ?


Infection control is a major part of the function of a modern hospital and it is a major part of the JHACO inspections.

Flu was always classified as a disease. Care to point out when it was not in the, oh, last 100 years or so? You don't understand it. That's cool, isn't ATS' motto "fighting ignorance?" That's what I'm doing here.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 

i'm well aware what a disease is and what it is NOT.
the PC version is what this is and i accepted that, posts ago.

save your demeaning commentary or expect a full return.

i didn't ask about ppl dying from poor sanitation in restaurants

i asked how many EMPLOYEES have been fired for "specifically" not washing their hands.
(seems you are the one with comprehension challenges)

don't see how "buds on the line" are a problem, we aren't breaking the rules.
nor do we have "authority" to DO anything about it, what's your point ?

, yeah, line cooks firing each other ...

that'd work well


hmmm, "if they are caught" ... not if they "object" though.
interesting perspective you have there.

lousy analogy, but hey, don't let us interefere with your cranial conundrum.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


:lol
that's a good one ... journalistsresource.org... ... ladies and gentlemen, this is exactly why we now have journalists vs reporters.

for those who want a good chuckle, read the link titled "Teaching Notes".
in which you'll notice the very first instruction BEFORE all others is ...

Read the study-related Reuters article titled “World Needs to Update Its Flu Vaccines.”
so, i did ... and should you.


for your enjoyment --> the opening line reads ...

(Reuters) - As Americans line up for flu shots, they should consider that the vaccines may be far less effective than thought, according to a new study.
thanks, navydoc, appreciate the help



more from the link ...

found that the most common flu vaccine in the United States is effective for 59 percent of healthy adults, well below the 70 percent to 90 percent level previously reported.
- snip -
There is also a lack of information about how well the vaccine works in children and in adults over the age of 65, he said. These two groups are most at risk from flu-related illness or death.
- snip -
They narrowed their analysis to 31 studies that tested for the presence of flu in laboratory tests rather than counting an increase in flu antibodies -- a faster method but one that researchers say tends to overestimate the vaccine's efficacy.

They also limited results to those that used randomized controlled trials or other observational methods that did not have "selection bias," which could lead to sicker people getting excluded from the study.
yet, these are the studies we are supposed to put our bodies in jeopardy over ??






Oh for christ's sake. Do you even know how to read a journal artical? Obviously you don't even understand the concept of a randomized controlled trial. That is what we call science. Part of the objective it to eliminate false positives or negatives.
Here let me help:



Randomised controlled trials are the most rigorous way of determining whether a cause-effect relation exists between treatment and outcome and for assessing the cost effectiveness of a treatment. They have several important features:

•Random allocation to intervention groups

•Patients and trialists should remain unaware of which treatment was given until the study is completed-although such double blind studies are not always feasible or appropriate

•All intervention groups are treated identically except for the experimental treatment

•Patients are normally analysed within the group to which they were allocated, irrespective of whether they experienced the intended intervention (intention to treat analysis)

•The analysis is focused on estimating the size of the difference in predefined outcomes between intervention groups.

Other study designs, including non-randomised controlled trials, can detect associations between an intervention and an outcome. But they cannot rule out the possibility that the association was caused by a third factor linked to both intervention and outcome. Random allocation ensures no systematic differences between intervention groups in factors, known and unknown, that may affect outcome. Double blinding ensures that the preconceived views of subjects and clinicians cannot systematically bias the assessment of outcomes. Intention to treat analysis maintains the advantages of random allocation, which may be lost if subjects are excluded from analysis through, for example, withdrawal or failure to comply. Meta-analysis of controlled trials shows that failure to conceal random allocation and the absence of double blinding yield exaggerated estimates of treatment effects.1



Obviously you don't understand the science behind a trial because you obviously do not evenunderstand what the term "bias" as in selection bias or control bias mean. Here, let me help you:



Selection bias is a statistical bias in which there is an error in choosing the individuals or groups to take part in a scientific study.[1] It is sometimes referred to as the selection effect. The term "selection bias" most often refers to the distortion of a statistical analysis, resulting from the method of collecting samples. If the selection bias is not taken into account then certain conclusions drawn may be wrong.


For a study to be valid you want a randomized controlled trial and to eliminate bias. C'mon. How can you understand the subject without an inkling of the basics? You sound like those guys who get upset that female students have to show male professors their thesis simply because it sounds dirty and they don't know what it is.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   

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.





top topics
 
22
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join