Work forcing the flu shot

[chinaboy]

At my place of employment they are trying to force everyone to get a flu shot. I know everyone has their own opinion on the flu shot. My opinion is that a person should have a choice in the matter. And if you keep yourself healthy and well rested there is no need to inject yourself with a shot that may not do anything. I know many people last year who got the shot and then got the flu. While I stay healthy and never have the flu. Regardless what your opinion I don't think it it right my work wants to force me into taking a drug I don't want. The last I heard people who refuse the shot will be suspended without pay until they crumble and get the shot. Today I have to spending typing the required reason why I do not want to get the flu shot. And then this will be reviewed. I'm told it will be denied no matter what I say. I kind of feel like cracking and just getting the flu shot, but I feel then I'm not standing up for my rights. Could you imagine someone telling you to take a drug or your fired. I think I would rather get fired.

 

[grizzly978]

At my place of employment they are trying to force everyone to get a flu shot. I know everyone has their own opinion on the flu shot. My opinion is that a person should have a choice in the matter. And if you keep yourself healthy and well rested there is no need to inject yourself with a shot that may not do anything. I know many people last year who got the shot and then got the flu. While I stay healthy and never have the flu. Regardless what your opinion I don't think it it right my work wants to force me into taking a drug I don't want. The last I heard people who refuse the shot will be suspended without pay until they crumble and get the shot. Today I have to spending typing the required reason why I do not want to get the flu shot. And then this will be reviewed. I'm told it will be denied no matter what I say. I kind of feel like cracking and just getting the flu shot, but I feel then I'm not standing up for my rights. Could you imagine someone telling you to take a drug or your fired. I think I would rather get fired.

1. The flu shot does work most of the time. 2. It can't hurt you so who cares if they force you to get it. They also force you to come to work on time, and to act like a professional in the workplace.

If you like your job , you should just get it. It's a 2 second shot

 

[Prada]

Wow that doesn't sound right and I avoid any shot. Many of these have not been researched extensively and I can even work with the flu anyways. I can't see how one can force you to do so without legal repercussions.

 

[E.J.]

About 6 years ago my employer was initiating the same thing. I resigned and went to my present employer. Can't force me to do something I don't wanna do. Find some other dipshit to fill my spot.

 

[Idra]

Do you complain about not being able to go to work in just your boxers too? What about being able to drive 85 on the interstate? Flu shots have been proven to be effective in preventing the spread of the flu to people with weak immune systems whom it is actually dangerous to. There is a reason you cant walk into any "center of excellence" transplant or med center without a flu shot, even as just a visitor.

You have a choice. Get a little tiny shot that has no effect other than making the people around you safer and possibly giving you a few sniffles, or get a new job.

 

[icedemon]

What kinda work do you do?

I don't know enough about the laws (or what state your in) to know if you can do something legally. I would not want to get a flu shot and I don't need one (I rarely get sick). To make you choose earning money or not based on something put into you would be a hard one with today's economy. I'd rather quit working for that kinda place, but it would depend also on my money situation and how easily it would be to get another job. Glad that I own my own business and don't have to worry about others telling me what to do and when to do it.

 

[wukillabee]

Where the hell do you work? If you're strongly against it (which it seems you are creating a thread about it), i'm sure a lawyer would have a field day with this. Not sure of many places of employment that in written agreement upon working there is a clause stating that you will have to take any drug/medication that your employer imposes on you. :banghead:

 

[asteelz]

let everyone else get the flu shot if it works so well then you cant give it to them anyway

 

[Tom]

It's all bullshit per the insert

WTF....

 

[G.I.Bro]

At my place of employment they are trying to force everyone to get a flu shot. I know everyone has their own opinion on the flu shot. My opinion is that a person should have a choice in the matter. And if you keep yourself healthy and well rested there is no need to inject yourself with a shot that may not do anything. I know many people last year who got the shot and then got the flu. While I stay healthy and never have the flu. Regardless what your opinion I don't think it it right my work wants to force me into taking a drug I don't want. The last I heard people who refuse the shot will be suspended without pay until they crumble and get the shot. Today I have to spending typing the required reason why I do not want to get the flu shot. And then this will be reviewed. I'm told it will be denied no matter what I say. I kind of feel like cracking and just getting the flu shot, but I feel then I'm not standing up for my rights. Could you imagine someone telling you to take a drug or your fired. I think I would rather get fired.

If you're that stressed about it, ask for a preservative/mercury free flu shot. Most of the controversy surrounds the use of mercury based Thimerosal. They make a Thimerosal free version for pregnant women. I go in and tell them I'm allergic to Thimerosal and get one of these. If you tell them you're allergic to the preservative Thimerosal and they can't provide it, you're out of getting it anyway.

I don't buy the horror stories about flu shots. They aren't based on any hard science. However, given the option, I get Thimerosal free as I figure what the hell. They have these special batches available. I voluntarily get one each year, free with my BCBS insurance, and less risk of getting flu. It's free because older INSURED not getting the flu results in less health complications and hospitalizations. Making them free actually saves health insurance companies money.

YOUR company is doing this because it is proven to reduce workplace missed time, illness and sick days. The bottom line is that it saves them money and increases productivity.

Get Thimerosal free and take your tin foil hat off. I've researched it a lot. I'm not worried and I'm a weirdo about shit like that. Most anti flu shot people have no fucking clue what they are even talking about in my experience.

 

[Se]

Better get used to being forced to do things you don't want or need if you live in USA.

I think some people have another idea.

I don't think you should have to take it if you don't want it.

 

[The Booger]

You have three choices at my work.

1. Get the shot
2. Get a doctor's or clergy excuse
3. Quit

I chose option 1 to protect my customers even though I have reactions to the flu shot. I just go to the ER and work pays my care 100% every year. I warn them it causes tachycardia for me and they just give me some IV Lopressor and good to go. Normally happens 2-4 hours post injection.

I've seen the flu kill or cause problems that lead to a death (dehydration and AKI). I don't want to think it was my fault.

 

[Pressing]

A 2012 study out of the University of Minnesota regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines found that “current influenza vaccine protection is substantially lower than for most routine recommended vaccines and is suboptimal.”

Even the Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy and lead researcher of the study, Michael T. Osterholm, is questioning the effectiveness of the vaccine. He put it bluntly: “We have overpromoted and overhyped this (flu) vaccine, it does not protect as promoted. It’s all a sales job: it’s all public relations.”

Flu Shot Touted as ?Vaccine Against Cardiovascular Events? | The Healthy Home Economist

 

[Pressing]

A large-scale, systematic review of 51 studies, published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in 2006 which involved over a quarter of a million children, found no evidence that the flu vaccine is any more effective than a placebo in preventing influenza in children under two.

Cochrane also made the following statement:

"reliable scientific evidence confirming that influenza vaccines are effective is thin and there is plenty of reason to suspect that there may be a manipulation of conclusions when the studies are funded by drug companies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.”

What’s more, getting a flu shot may actually increase the odds of getting sick with a serious respiratory infection!

According to Dr. Paul G. King:

Based on apparently the only double-blind placebo-controlled influenza vaccination and outcomes study conducted (in healthy children 6 to 15 years of age), which has been published in a peer-reviewed journal, it is clear that getting a flu shot greatly increases the risk (by 4-plus-fold) that a person who receives it will contract and potentially spread one or more non-influenza respiratory viruses, some of which can be serious and morbid infections in humans.
In addition, the study established that the overall effect of vaccination for those who were vaccinated did not differ from the effect of giving a sterile-saline placebo when it came to protection from subsequently contracting influenza (source).

New York City Seeks Mandatory Flu Jabs for Preschoolers | The Healthy Home Economist

 

[G.I.Bro]

A 2012 study out of the University of Minnesota regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines found that “current influenza vaccine protection is substantially lower than for most routine recommended vaccines and is suboptimal.”

Even the Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy and lead researcher of the study, Michael T. Osterholm, is questioning the effectiveness of the vaccine. He put it bluntly: “We have overpromoted and overhyped this (flu) vaccine, it does not protect as promoted. It’s all a sales job: it’s all public relations.”

Flu Shot Touted as ?Vaccine Against Cardiovascular Events? | The Healthy Home Economist

They're gambling on which strains of flu will be dominant. It's merely a prediction based on models. Often some of the more prevalent strains in the flu season don't make it into the vaccine. This is why it's not effective sometimes, not because of an inherent flaw in the concept of flu vaccines. If you are vaccinated for the proper strain, you will not be infected by that one. It's still a crap shoot though.

If it reduces your chance of flew even 25%, getting a Thimerosal free flu shot is still easily worth it to me. If your wife works in education or nursing, it's a must. If you're around school age kids (your kids) you have slightly higher risk too.

It's not a fucking conspiracy. Either hedge your bet or don't. So it's not very effective. If it reduces chances any, I don't see any downside to Thimerosal free shots.

 

[Pressing]

So, this report from the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy was really interesting. They started off by saying that:

“In an effort to reduce influenza morbidity and mortality, over the last three decades the ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] has expanded the populations recommended to receive influenza vaccine. These recommendations, however, often were based on professional judgment and not on scientifically sound data.”

So, in translation, they’re saying that over the past few years, there’s been a lot of pressure on people to get the flu shot with the idea that it’s gonna prevent sickness and death, but that recommendation has been based more on professional judgment than data. And Tom Jefferson, who has done a lot of work in this area, he’s been the lead author on several of the papers, the meta-analyses and reviews that were published by the Cochrane Collaboration, which is an independent group that does meta-analyses of studies on various topics to try to reach some consensus. And over the last several years, Tom Jefferson and his group have published a number of papers in this area, so he says:

“We have conducted four reviews since the late 1990s. We calculated that you need to vaccinate between 33 and 99 people to prevent a single case of flu, depending on the match between the vaccine and the circulating strains of the virus. I want people held accountable for wasting taxpayers’ money on these vaccines. The reviews have been available for years and nothing has been done.”

Now, those are really strong words from an independent researcher. For anyone who’s read scientific papers, you will know that that kind of strong language is seldom used, and even in interviews outside of the papers themselves, researchers are very wary of using language like that because, of course, if their viewpoint evolves over time, then that could look bad. Just the nature of science, a good scientist is to keep an open mind, and so that will sometimes preclude making a strong statement like that, but nevertheless, that was the statement he made, and he’s the one who’s been doing these reviews.

The Truth About Flu Shots (and What to do Instead)

 

[Pressing]

The Canadian press recently broke the story that new research confirms initial findings that the flu vaccine appeared to actually increase people's risk of getting sick with H1N1, and cause more serious bouts of illness to boot.

According to the Vancouver Sun:1
"Researchers, led by Vancouver's Dr. Danuta Skowronski, an influenza expert at the B.C. Centre for Disease Control, noticed in the early weeks of the [2009 H1N1] pandemic that people who got a flu shot for the 2008-09 winter seemed to be more likely to get infected with the pandemic virus than people who hadn't received a flu shot. Five studies done in several provinces showed the same unsettling results."

New Study Confirms: Flu Vaccine Really Does Increase Your Risk of Serious Pandemic Flu Illness
In March last year, ABC News reported:2
"There is renewed controversy surrounding influenza vaccines, with some studies showing people immunised against the seasonal flu might have been at greater risk during the swine flu outbreak...

'What was a bit surprising when we looked at some of the data from Canada and Hong Kong in the last year is that people who have been vaccinated in 2008 with the seasonal or ordinary vaccine seemed to have twice the risk of getting swine flu compared to the people who hadn't received that vaccine,' [Professor Collignon from the Australian National University] said.

ANU microbiologists say it is the opposite of what vaccines should do.

Professor Collignon says the findings of the study also highlight the benefits for healthy people who are exposed to some illnesses. 'Some interesting data has become available which suggests that if you get immunised with the seasonal vaccine, you get less broad protection than if you get a natural infection,' he said.

'It is particularly relevant for children because it is a condition they call original antigenic sin, which basically means if you get infected with a natural virus, that gives you not only protection against that virus but similar viruses or even in fact quite different flu viruses in the next year.'

'We may be perversely setting ourselves up that if something really new and nasty comes along, that people who have been vaccinated may in fact be more susceptible compared to getting this natural infection.'"

**broken link removed**

 

[Pressing]

They're gambling on which strains of flu will be dominant. It's merely a prediction based on models. Often some of the more prevalent strains in the flu season don't make it into the vaccine. This is why it's not effective sometimes, not because of an inherent flaw in the concept of flu vaccines. If you are vaccinated for the proper strain, you will not be infected by that one. It's still a crap shoot though.

If it reduces your chance of flew even 25%, getting a Thimerosal free flu shot is still easily worth it to me. If your wife works in education or nursing, it's a must. If you're around school age kids (your kids) you have slightly higher risk too.

It's not a fucking conspiracy. Either hedge your bet or don't. So it's not very effective. If it reduces chances any, I don't see any downside to Thimerosal free shots.

I guess you are not aware of increasing other health risks by getting these shots.

Go ahead, argue with the studies. SMFH

 

[ericraven2003]

It's not a fucking conspiracy. Either hedge your bet or don't. So it's not very effective. If it reduces chances any, I don't see any downside to Thimerosal free shots.

Thank you.

 

[G.I.Bro]

I guess you are not aware of increasing other health risks by getting these shots.

Go ahead, argue with the studies. SMFH

As to healthy adults and Thimerosal free shots, no. There really aren't any. The concerns about mercury/Thimerosal are really just speculation and myth at this point. But I avoid it anyway out of extreme caution.

The only potentially valid health concerns with Thimerosal free I see would be getting a shot in peak flu season when already exposed to a strain not in the vaccine. The temporary immune system stress/response to the vaccine could POSSIBLY make you temporarily more vulnerable to another strain. This was the threat to school children and upper respiratory highlighted in your article. This is why you get it before the flu season starts. I'm not arguing with studies. The studies merely point out the effectiveness of flu vaccine is overhyped and they're not that effective some seasons.

Everything else out there is mostly bs and even what's not is based on the preservative Thimerosal, not the inactive viruses of a preservative free vaccine.

Stop spreading your baseless FUD. The meatheads here are easily impressionable. ;-)