Hospital vaccine mandate?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The good news is that the Aussies (and the French) are showing us Americans how to do civil disobedience. I wish them well in their struggle against totalitarianism. I suspect we will have similar marches and rallies in the U.S. if those in charge keep pushing the boundaries.
Truck drivers here are threatening to do the same as their Aussie counterparts, and could grind this country to a halt if they wanted. Nurses could do the same for medical care if even 10% of them walk off the job.
You're assuming we have forgotten how to do it. We haven't, things just haven't been all that bad here yet. I often argue with more left wing folks that this country couldn't do what Australia/NZ have done because our citizens wouldn't stand for it.
 
I get where you're coming from. I definitely want people vaccinated, but not with an Orwellian type system like in Australia where they're going to have an app you must download, with facial recognition and gps tracking, where the cops will show up at your house if you don't respond to the government's texts within 15 minutes. Read about it:

Australia Traded Away Too Much Liberty: How long can a democracy maintain emergency restrictions and still call itself a free country? - The Atlantic
Wow. I'm speechless at that. What happens if you work a night shift, get texted during the day, and don't respond? Your sleep is interrupted by a police officer knocking on your door. Working out and left your phone in the locker? Either police are showing up at your gym or at your house.

It would be simpler for them to just track the GPS on someone's phone.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Wow. I'm speechless at that. What happens if you work a night shift, get texted during the day, and don't respond? Your sleep is interrupted by a police officer knocking on your door. Working out and left your phone in the locker? Either police are showing up at your gym or at your house.

It would be simpler for them to just track the GPS on someone's phone.
These are the kinds of things that reenforce a lot of people’s idea that having a government that doesn’t fear it’s people, is a very dangerous thing.
 
Last edited:
These are the kinds of things that reenforce a lot of people’s idea that having a government that doesn’t fear it’s people, is a very dangerous thing.
Thankfully we have the Second Amendment and States' Rights. Florida is looking better and better. If the $5000 penalty for demanding proof of vaccination is upheld as constitutional, how are Envision and other sheep employers going to handle it?
 
I truly don’t understand the argument against mandating vaccines to participate in society.

You also gotta wear clothing to participate in society. I don’t see people protesting that is infringing on their rights not to walk into a restaurant completely naked? You can also argue that you’ll maim yourself with one of those zippers (about the same risk of the vaccine).

Meanwhile people demand the right now to open carry AR15s on their backs into McDonalds with explicitly no requirement for any gun safety training (Texas law).

I certainly don’t want to live in a totalitarian state — but there is a middle ground which guards against unmitigated citizen stupidity. And America is the other extreme currently.
 
Last edited:
I truly don’t understand the argument against mandating vaccines to participate in society.

You also gotta wear clothing to participate in society. I don’t see people protesting that is infringing on their rights not to walk into a restaurant completely naked? You can also argue that you’ll maim yourself with one of those zippers (about the same risk of the vaccine).
If you don't understand, then there is no point explaining it again.
 
I truly don’t understand the argument against mandating vaccines to participate in society.
Whether or not you, I or anyone else agrees with the argument, it’s one of the arguments that is as old as time, and probably worth trying to understand. Understanding each other is the only way we can learn to coexist and make this world more tolerable. This pandemic has clearly highlighted differences in how we all view society. Not understanding differences of opinion will only lead to more unnecessary confrontation. Perhaps that was inevitable.
 
Whether or not you, I or anyone else agrees with the argument, it’s one of the arguments that is as old as time, and probably worth trying to understand. Understanding each other is the only way we can learn to coexist and make this world more tolerable. This pandemic has clearly highlighted differences in how we all view society. Not understanding differences of opinion will only lead to more unnecessary confrontation. Perhaps that was inevitable.
Exactly right. It's the age-old argument between personal liberty and the demands of society. We should always err on the side of personal liberty. Once freedoms however small are given up, even due to a pandemic, we are unlikely to get them back. It's like a ratchet, always moving forward, but can't move backwards. That's why we should be very careful when and how we give up freedoms to the government. Sure this is "Just a vaccine" but it has broader, longer range implications for what governments can and can't do to your body.
 
I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid. And going from your state to FL is pants on head cray-zee.
Nevada isn't what it used to be. Too many crazies from CA have moved in. The only thing keeping us from massive tax increases is the state Constitution. I've never pretended it's a great state to live in. It's better than most due to the tax environment, but if that were to change I'd leave for greener pastures.
 
If you don't understand, then there is no point explaining it again.
No, seriously, why don't I have the liberty to walk around naked? No one has ever died because they saw a naked human. No one has ended up overloading the hospitals because they saw a naked human. So if people have the right to be a plague rat, I should have the right to go outdoors without clothes on.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Nevada isn't what it used to be. Too many crazies from CA have moved in. The only thing keeping us from massive tax increases is the state Constitution. I've never pretended it's a great state to live in. It's better than most due to the tax environment, but if that were to change I'd leave for greener pastures.

Come on down to Florida, amigo.
We could use all the reinforcements that we can get from all the crazypants people from NY/NJ moving in.
 
Exactly right. It's the age-old argument between personal liberty and the demands of society. We should always err on the side of personal liberty. Once freedoms however small are given up, even due to a pandemic, we are unlikely to get them back. It's like a ratchet, always moving forward, but can't move backwards. That's why we should be very careful when and how we give up freedoms to the government. Sure this is "Just a vaccine" but it has broader, longer range implications for what governments can and can't do to your body.
That's a lot of logical fallacies to pack into one paragraph.
 
It won't be long, that if you're a healthcare facility that has an outbreak of COVID among employees with spread to patients, and it turns out your staff isn't vaccinated, you'll be shutdown by health departments. If a hospital had an outbreak of measles that spread to patients, and it was found the staff wasn't vaccinated, they'd similarly be shutdown.

We can get this done while respecting individual choice. A private employee makes a choice to have the vaccine or not. A private employer makes a choice whether to require the shot, or not. Then employees and employers can proceed accordingly and make their choices, who their going to hire, and where they're going to work. No government-forced injections, fees, fines, lockdowns or jail.
 

Not good. Mu variant, possibly resistant to vaccines (which would also be resistant to previous infection). Other variants listed may also be resistant.
 
We also don’t know if it’s more infectious/transmissible than the other variants.

Each mutation comes at a cost to the virus, otherwise it would have occurred already.
 
Exactly right. It's the age-old argument between personal liberty and the demands of society. We should always err on the side of personal liberty. Once freedoms however small are given up, even due to a pandemic, we are unlikely to get them back. It's like a ratchet, always moving forward, but can't move backwards. That's why we should be very careful when and how we give up freedoms to the government. Sure this is "Just a vaccine" but it has broader, longer range implications for what governments can and can't do to your body.
So you would be opposed to the latest texas law? That’s attacking personal liberty at its core.
 
Our hospital is just saying that you have to wear an N-95 if you are not vaccinated. Of course, the people who do this do it half-assed, so it's not a very effective policy.
What about your hospital? Any hospital you know of impose a vaccine mandate that is actually effective?
People who aren't vaccinated are being fired at both of the large hospital systems I work at, deadlines are the end of this month for both
 
The position doesn’t make much sense to me. They’re awaiting data on rates of myocarditis, which thus far seems more common in children with covid than children with the vaccine. If the options were not getting covid and not getting vaccine, I might find the idea persuasive.

yet the reality is the options are likely get vaccine and get covid or get covid without vaccine.

it seems to me that they are afraid of an error of commission more than an error of omission. Seems poorly considered.
 
...
You also gotta wear clothing to participate in society. I don’t see people protesting that is infringing on their rights not to walk into a restaurant completely naked? You can also argue that you’ll maim yourself with one of those zippers (about the same risk of the vaccine).
...
Not in Vermont No clothing required though you can't strip in public. Don't know if you can walk into a restaurant either -
 
No, seriously, why don't I have the liberty to walk around naked? No one has ever died because they saw a naked human. No one has ended up overloading the hospitals because they saw a naked human. So if people have the right to be a plague rat, I should have the right to go outdoors without clothes on.
Move to Vermont. No lewd and lascivious but naked is ok.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
It won't be long, that if you're a healthcare facility that has an outbreak of COVID among employees with spread to patients, and it turns out your staff isn't vaccinated, you'll be shutdown by health departments. If a hospital had an outbreak of measles that spread to patients, and it was found the staff wasn't vaccinated, they'd similarly be shutdown.

We can get this done while respecting individual choice. A private employee makes a choice to have the vaccine or not. A private employer makes a choice whether to require the shot, or not. Then employees and employers can proceed accordingly and make their choices, who their going to hire, and where they're going to work. No government-forced injections, fees, fines, lockdowns or jail.
Not in my state. The state is actively campaigning against vaccinating healthcare workers, and against vaccine mandates. The University hospital has mandated, while the rest, including mine, are refusing, and also considering getting rid of other mandatory vaccinations such as flu etc.
 
Not in my state. The state is actively campaigning against vaccinating healthcare workers, and against vaccine mandates. The University hospital has mandated, while the rest, including mine, are refusing, and also considering getting rid of other mandatory vaccinations such as flu etc.
The hospitals that aren't mandating yet are probably thinking they can fix their staff shortages by all the unvaccinated workers now trying desperately to get jobs.
 
Nevada isn't what it used to be. Too many crazies from CA have moved in. The only thing keeping us from massive tax increases is the state Constitution. I've never pretended it's a great state to live in. It's better than most due to the tax environment, but if that were to change I'd leave for greener pastures.
Taxes in Nevada might be advantageous. But get real, Nevada is literally a toxic waste dump!
 
Not in my state. The state is actively campaigning against vaccinating healthcare workers, and against vaccine mandates. The University hospital has mandated, while the rest, including mine, are refusing, and also considering getting rid of other mandatory vaccinations such as flu etc.
I never thought I’d live to see the day that entire states were anti-vaxers.
 
The position doesn’t make much sense to me. They’re awaiting data on rates of myocarditis, which thus far seems more common in children with covid than children with the vaccine. If the options were not getting covid and not getting vaccine, I might find the idea persuasive.

yet the reality is the options are likely get vaccine and get covid or get covid without vaccine.

it seems to me that they are afraid of an error of commission more than an error of omission. Seems poorly considered.
What is the actual risk of getting covid if you’re not vaccinated? I tried to look up the data and couldn’t find it. Im not sure it’s 100% despite many people assuming so; and that affects the risk benefit ratios greatly of vaccination.
 
What is the actual risk of getting covid if you’re not vaccinated? I tried to look up the data and couldn’t find it. Im not sure it’s 100% despite many people assuming so; and that affects the risk benefit ratios greatly of vaccination.
Since it's become clear that COVID isn't going anywhere, I think it likely will be 100% given enough time. I just don't know what that time frame is.
 
Everyone has already been or will be infected with COVID-19 at some point or another. My money is bet on most already having been infected with future infections potentially round two. Majority will be asymptomatic or have mild symptoms. I’m not sure how this idea perpetuates that anyone will completely avoid a widespread easily transmissible viral disease.
 
What is the actual risk of getting covid if you’re not vaccinated? I tried to look up the data and couldn’t find it. Im not sure it’s 100% despite many people assuming so; and that affects the risk benefit ratios greatly of vaccination.

Since it's become clear that COVID isn't going anywhere, I think it likely will be 100% given enough time. I just don't know what that time frame is.
I think that’s a fair question and thought process. I don’t know the exact answer, but I know the estimate is contingent on the r0.

with delta that number has become closer to the values for chickenpox or measles (though it’s still not quite that bad it’s closer to them than flu now) leading to my assumption that everyone will get it.

and I completely agree with veers on this, without everyone getting vaccine or equivalent immunity chances of effectively reaching herd immunity are zero: vaccinated people will also catch it.

even a small community of anti vaccination folks leads to a few measles and rubella outbreaks, and they’re a lot less prevalent
 
We certainly don’t want COVID to be used as an excuse to make experimental treatments routine. On the other hand, there is something called the Right to Try Act (2018) that gives terminal patients the right to try experimental treatments. My guess is the judge was trying to balance those two concepts, but I don’t know for sure. I’m not a lawyer.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
We certainly don’t want COVID to be used as an excuse to make experimental treatments routine. On the other hand, there is something called the Right to Try Act (2018) that gives terminal patients the right to try experimental treatments. My guess is the judge was trying to balance those two concepts, but I don’t know for sure. I’m not a lawyer.

And the judge is not a doctor!

The undersigned Doctor, per decree of some law that may exist, commands that Lawless Lawyer, Esq, represent Stooge McDoogle in his felony case. The lawyer MUST REPRESENT HIM NO MATTER WHAT.
 
As a physician, I don’t ever want to be in a position where a judge is intervening in the care I’m providing. As a patient, I don’t ever want to be in a position where a judge is intervening in the care I’m receiving.

Regardless of the outcome, when either happens, I’m not having a good day.
 
I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.

But if we’re going to sanction people for prescribing it, on the grounds it’s “experimental” and not fda approved, are we going to sanction everyone who used the COVID vaccines before full FDA approval?

Are we going to sanction all the hospitals giving their workers vaccine boosters right now while “experimental” and not FDA approved?

Also, if ivermectin is certain not to work, and people are going to be sanctioned for using it, are those currently performing clinical trials ivermectin right now, also going to be sanctioned? If not, why not?

Furthermore, what if those trials turnout positive?

Do we undo the sanctions? Do we then instead sanction those not using it?

These are just some questions I have.

I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.
 
I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.

But if we’re going to sanction people for prescribing it, on the grounds it’s “experimental” and not fda approved, are we going to sanction everyone who used the COVID vaccines before full FDA approval?

Are we going to sanction all the hospitals giving their workers vaccine boosters right now while “experimental” and not FDA approved?

Also, if ivermectin is certain not to work, and people are going to be sanctioned for using it, are those currently performing clinical trials ivermectin right now, also going to be sanctioned? If not, why not?

Furthermore, what if those trials turnout positive?

Do we undo the sanctions? Do we then instead sanction those not using it?

These are just some questions I have.

I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.
Did the FDA issue an advisory against the COVID vaccine like they did with ivermectin?
 
Did the FDA issue an advisory against the COVID vaccine like they did with ivermectin?
I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.

No, the FDA didn’t issue an advisory against the vaccine. But why are they issuing advisories against ivermectin in COVID as if it’s a settled question, yet simultaneously allowing clinical trials investigating its use?

“It doesn’t work. It can’t work. It’s dangerous!” but,

“Study it. Determine if it works. Because it might work. Or it might not. But I t’s safe and FDA approved for use in humans (if you have strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis worms).”

Which is it?

They’re not only sabotaging the results of any trials that might turn out positive, but if negative, making it look as if those reasearching it’s use right now, and the FDA by allowing it, are doing something dangerous, wrong and sanctionable.

If they’re going to talk tough about sanctioning people, fine. Do it. But at the same tone, shut any clinical trials looking into its use, immediately. This having it both ways stuff, is garbage.

I don’t support the use of ivermectin in covid.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.