Pregnant nurse fired for not taking flu vaccine

[abj13]

Do you have a study done on high risk pregnancies or not?
Chances are since you are avoiding the issue of this woman having a high risk pregnancy, you have no studies to back up your claim.
You keep referring to pregnancies this and that, and not a single mention of high risk pregnancies.
There is no issue with me and vaccines.
There is however an issue with a doctor forcing a high risk patient to take a vaccine that has not been studied in high risk pregnancies.

There have been multiple posts that point this out. I've posted several studies, and you've utterly refused to even read what they state or even acknowledge they discuss the thing you complain about over and over. The American Advisory Committee on Vaccines discusses the safety of the influenza vaccine. The CDC discusses the safety of the vaccine. The American Congress of OB/Gyne discusses the safety. There is no association with the vaccine and an increased risk of spontaneous abortion (AKA to laypeople, miscarriage). Several independent studies including prospective studies evaluating the safety of the vaccine including the risk of spontaneous abortion are examined. The vaccine is overwhelmingly found to be safe. And this doesn't even touch the mouse fetal studies with super high doses... but that's a discussion you couldn't even understand.

And to top if off, the US has a prospective system, VAERS tracking any data of an association with the influenza vaccine and outcomes. There has not been any association. Multiple independent researchers including posted studies over and over have not found an association.

But just like Jenny McCarthy, anytime information is presented contrary to your blind devotion to this false belief of the harm of the influenza vaccine, you ignore, ignore, and ignore. Troll on Riprorin. Somehow you ignore in every post how multiple physician groups produce recommendations in complete contradiction to your claims.

The end result is the overwhelming safety of the vaccine in pregnancy, irregardless of maternal risk factors. Period.

 

[Texashiker]

There is no association with the vaccine and an increased risk of spontaneous abortion (AKA to laypeople, miscarriage).

What study are you referring to?

You can spout out anything, but so far have refused to provide an exact quote from the studies.

But just like Jenny McCarthy, anytime information is presented contrary to your blind devotion to this false belief of the harm of the influenza vaccine, you ignore, ignore, and ignore.

You sir are lying, flat out lying.

I never ever said vaccines, much less the flu vaccine was harmful.

You are accusing me of stuff I have never said.

If anyone here is being untruthful it is you. You refuse to provide an exact quote from an exact study to back up your statements. I am not going to read an article just because you "claim" the answer is there. It is not my job to present, or even search for evidence to support your argument.

 

[abj13]

What study are you referring to?
You can spout out anything, but so far have refused to provide an exact quote from the studies.
You sir are lying, flat out lying.
I never ever said vaccines, much less the flu vaccine was harmful.
You are accusing me of stuff I have never said.
If anyone here is being untruthful it is you. You refuse to provide an exact quote from an exact study to back up your statements.

LMAO. Here's your studies, notice the title of one of them:

Moro PL, Museru OI, Broder K, Cragan J, Zheteyeva Y, Tepper N, Revzina N, Lewis P, Arana J, Barash F, Kissin D, Vellozzi C.Safety of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Live Attenuated Monovalent Vaccine in Pregnant Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Dec;122(6):1271-8. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24201689

Chambers CD, Johnson D, Xu R, Luo Y, Louik C, Mitchell AA, Schatz M, Jones KL; OTIS Collaborative Research Group.Risks and safety of pandemic h1n1 influenza vaccine in pregnancy: birth defects, spontaneous abortion, preterm delivery, and small for gestational age infants. Vaccine. 2013 Oct 17;31(44):5026-32. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24016809

Oppermann M, Fritzsche J, Weber-Schoendorfer C, Keller-Stanislawski B, Allignol A, Meister R, Schaefer C.Vaccine. A(H1N1)v2009: a controlled observational prospective cohort study on vaccine safety in pregnancy.2012 Jun 22;30(30):4445-52. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=22564554[/quote]

This has been posted several times over and over. Here's a hint, one of the studies includes "spontaneous abortion" in its title. All three actually evaluate rates of spontaneous abortions, its exactly the reason they've been posted over and over. There is no increased risk. Clearly you didn't even bother to read the title, abstract, or a single sentence of any of those studies. I've read all three, hence why they've been mentioned again and again because they are all very much relevant to the discussion here in this thread. But hey, they don't exist because you won't read them... what a lame argument.

There is no association between the influenza vaccine and specific adverse effects, irregardless of outcome. You are trying to pin that there might, despite multiple studies, multiple physician organizations, stating the opposite that there is NO HARM OF THE VACCINE IN PREGNANCY. An entire system of reporting adverse reactions to the vaccine is set-up, and there is no association between the vaccine and poor outcome. If you want to support vaccines, then actually do some research on the subject. Start with reading the above studies which answers your question. Otherwise save your uninformed impressions for Jenny McCarthy's ilk.

Influenza vaccine is safe in pregnancy. The research is there (not to mention the biology of it makes sense).

 

[mikeymikec]

He doesn't do science.

Of course he does; he "does" science that supports his opinions and lifestyle. When it doesn't, he prefers to clean his AR15.

 

[AViking]

I don't get it. Why is this not locked? It's very clear that the OP is trolling. There's far too many of this threads going around that are somehow both ignorant, uneducated, and just plain stupid. The amount of obvious trolling techniques is too much.

No offense Texashiker but your trolling is over the top and far too stereotypical of a redneck, inbred, moron who has a 3rd grade education. You need to step it up if you want to be a master troll.

 

[Texashiker]

This has been posted several times over and over. Here's a hint, one of the studies includes "spontaneous abortion" in its title. All three actually evaluate rates of spontaneous abortions, its exactly the reason they've been posted over and over.

I am not going to read the article and post something to support your argument.

Your mommy and daddy might have done your homework for you in school, but this is the real world. Get off your lazy ass and post the evidence you wish to present.

And, this is not just about the vaccine, this is also a civil rights issue.

Of course he does; he "does" science that supports his opinions and lifestyle.

That is simply not true. You are making false statements.

When it doesn't, he prefers to clean his AR15.

I did not say I was cleaning my ARs. I was changing parts out. So much for your reading comprehension.

 

[Nintendesert]

DERP DERP DERP DERP!

And....

DERP!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I am not going to read

Of course not.

 

[Texashiker]

Of course not.

I will read just about anything; I love to read.

But I will not read something and try to figure out what someone wishes to present as evidence to back up their statement. It is not my job to present evidence which will confirm someones stance on an issue.

If abj13 wishes to cite an article, he should state the exact part he is referencing.

 

[Moonbeam]

I am not going to read the article and post something to support your argument.

Your mommy and daddy might have done your homework for you in school, but this is the real world. Get off your lazy ass and post the evidence you wish to present.

And, this is not just about the vaccine, this is also a civil rights issue.




That is simply not true. You are making false statements.




I did not say I was cleaning my ARs. I was changing parts out. So much for your reading comprehension.

Well, you have proved the old saw. You can tell a bigot, but you can't tell him much.

You have shown many who post here that you are blind but you still imagine you see. You make rational people angry because you deplete all our confidence in the perfectibility of the human race. The shamefulness of your performance here makes others ashamed to be human. And yet you strut around proud as punch with your brain dead arrogance. Do something about yourself for the sake of the human race.

You are wrong about the need for vaccine tests regarding pregnant women to focus specifically on high risk pregnancy because that is a subset of pregnancy generally and will naturally be included. You are wrong that some civil rights issue is involved here, but you really really really go too far when you call somebody a liar if they say your cleaning your ARs if you change out parts. If you're not doing some cleaning while changing out parts, you should be shot with them. At the least you deserve only toy guns, you motherfucking acid finger oil leaking gun metal destroying slouch.

 

[Moonbeam]

I will read just about anything; I love to read.

But I will not read something and try to figure out what someone wishes to present as evidence to back up their statement. It is not my job to present evidence which will confirm someones stance on an issue.

If abj13 wishes to cite an article, he should state the exact part he is referencing.

There you go again. The article is the exact part he was referencing. But don't read it. You are better off brain dead. We don't want you starting any threads which claim that high risk pregnancy women are experiencing spontaneous abortions and violation of their galactic rights by cosmic rays generated by CDC virus testing equipment leaking into the exhaust systems of flying saucers. You might just become delusional enough that you fire yourself and try to sue yourself in court.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Moonbeam, your hate and anger is overflowing again. I hear holidays affect people with your condition and it shining through quite clearly in your words.

 

[abj13]

For those who are actually interested in reading and understand the subject, here's another study, one I like a little less because of the methods, but overall hits the point again. They reviewed twenty years worth of whether any adverse effects were seen in pregnancy from the influenza vaccine, all off of VAERS.

Moro PL, Broder K, Zheteyeva Y, Walton K, Rohan P, Sutherland A, Guh A, Haber P, Destefano F, Vellozzi C.Adverse events in pregnant women following administration of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine and live attenuated influenza vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1990-2009. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Feb;204(2):146.

Twenty years worth of reports. Absolutely no association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and a specific adverse effect including spontaneous abortion.

The vaccine has been found safe repeatedly by independent studies, physician organizations, and reports of of VAERS. Even mice given supratherapeutic doses of vaccine don't even have negative outcomes.

 

[Moonbeam]

Moonbeam, your hate and anger is overflowing again. I hear holidays affect people with your condition and it shining through quite clearly in your words.

Merry Christmas. Thank you for the lump of coal. I'll put it in my Christmas stocking along with the rest of the universe.

 

[piasabird]

There is no guarantee a flu vaccine will help you.

 

[mikeymikec]

That is simply not true. You are making false statements.

Ooh, burn, you got me there.

How about justifying your response by quoting previous posts you made to prove me wrong?

I did not say I was cleaning my ARs. I was changing parts out. So much for your reading comprehension.

You could be rodgering your ARs for all the difference it makes to your apparent attitude. When you said it, you were basically saying "I can't be arsed to read that ever". An advantage of discussion forums like this is the lack of time sensitivity; if you felt it was more important of perform maintenance on your firearms at a given moment, you could come back to the forums later and make an effort to study the arguments and supporting sources. Instead, you made it plain that you weren't interested, yet you still want to continue this "discussion". Hence, if science doesn't support your arguments and lifestyle, you're not interested.

There is no guarantee a flu vaccine will help you.

Now come up with a list of things in the field of healthcare that there is a guarantee of. I'll start the list for you: Death.

 

[TheVrolok]

lol, these TH anti-vaccine nutter threads are hilarious. Why does anyone even give this guy the time of day anymore? He is delightfully happy in his ignorance.

 

[DrPizza]

lol, these TH anti-vaccine nutter threads are hilarious. Why does anyone even give this guy the time of day anymore? He is delightfully happy in his ignorance.

Because anyone on the Internet might read the thread. Once again, the thread has hit the point where any rational person will realize the nurse was wrong, there is no increased risk. And, it should be obvious at this point that the only person arguing against it is either a troll, else...

 

[classy]

I worked at a hospital for 3 years, if you are going to be dealing with patients, you have to get vaccinated. It also will help to protect your family at home as well.

 

[Texashiker]

Because anyone on the Internet might read the thread. Once again, the thread has hit the point where any rational person will realize the nurse was wrong, there is no increased risk.

Do you have a study to back up your opinion?

And not a vaccine study on pregnant women, she was high risk.

And, it should be obvious at this point that the only person arguing against it is either a troll, else...

I am not arguing against vaccines, never have and never will.

It appears that I am the one getting trolled. Just about everyone posting is either refusing to acknowledge or ignoring the high risk aspect.

abj13 has yet to acknowledge or even mention high risk pregnancies. When challenged on this point he is like a stuck record posting the same thing over and over. He can not get past this "flu studies on pregnant women prove it is safe." There is no argument from me that the flu vaccine is safe for pregnant women. There is no argument there, never has been, never will be.

Do we have a study of the flu vaccine on high risk women with a history of miscarriages? Yes or no? It is that simple.

 

[TheVrolok]

Do we have a study of the flu vaccine on high risk women with a history of miscarriages? Yes or no? It is that simple.

Is there any reason to suspect that the data from all the studies on flu vaccines in pregnancy should not apply to high risk pregnancies? Not every scenario is studied (for various reasons), especially if current data can be appropriately extended to other populations.

How about the fact that the CDC, along with the AAFP, AAP, ACNM, ACOG, AMA, ANA, APhA, AWHONN, NFID, NIVS among others all recommend the flu vaccine for all pregnant women?

You need to stop anchoring, it's silly.

 

[abj13]

Do you have a study to back up your opinion?

And not a vaccine study on pregnant women, she was high risk.

I am not arguing against vaccines, never have and never will.

It appears that I am the one getting trolled. Just about everyone posting is either refusing to acknowledge or ignoring the high risk aspect.

abj13 has yet to acknowledge or even mention high risk pregnancies. When challenged on this point he is like a stuck record posting the same thing over and over. He can not get past this "flu studies on pregnant women prove it is safe." There is no argument from me that the flu vaccine is safe for pregnant women. There is no argument there, never has been, never will be.

Do we have a study of the flu vaccine on high risk women with a history of miscarriages? Yes or no? It is that simple.

:facepalm: Multiple studies have been posted addressing the very question, over and over, and over. You choose to ignore them because they contradict your weak attempts to troll your poorly investigated and researched thread.

Better yet, we haven't seen a single piece of evidence that the influenza vaccine increases the risk of an adverse effect. What does? Influenza INFECTION. A few studies have found an association between maternal vaccination against influenza and decreased risk of premature delivery.

There are multiple reasons why physician organizations like the ACIP, AAP, ACOG, etc specifically state the vaccine is safe in pregnancy. Its not made up on conjecture or proposed ideas like Riprorin would like to distort the truth. These recommendations are based off of the multitude of studies demonstrating vaccine safety, monitoring of the VAERS system, and general medical experience. I think everyone can acknowledge the reality of this medical situation, and ignore the trolls who want to hide behind their purposeful choice of ignorance.

Anyone who is objective and wants an open mind to the subject, read the studies in their entirety, you'll come to the same conclusion that multiple physician groups have found. And it will reinforce the absurdity and pettiness of the trolls in this thread.

 

[Fatdog]

Do you have a study to back up your opinion?

And not a vaccine study on pregnant women, she was high risk.



I am not arguing against vaccines, never have and never will.

It appears that I am the one getting trolled. Just about everyone posting is either refusing to acknowledge or ignoring the high risk aspect.

abj13 has yet to acknowledge or even mention high risk pregnancies. When challenged on this point he is like a stuck record posting the same thing over and over. He can not get past this "flu studies on pregnant women prove it is safe." There is no argument from me that the flu vaccine is safe for pregnant women. There is no argument there, never has been, never will be.

Do we have a study of the flu vaccine on high risk women with a history of miscarriages? Yes or no? It is that simple.

The stupid is extra strong in this one. Keeps asking for proof, then won't read provided proof.

Hmm... The fact it's reproducing scares me no end.

 

[Texashiker]

:facepalm: Multiple studies have been posted addressing the very question, over and over, and over. You choose to ignore them because they contradict your weak attempts to troll your poorly investigated and researched thread.

I do not know if you are a teacher, or a supervisor, just lazy, used to bossing people around,,,, or just used to someone doing your work for you.

I am not your peon, nor your dog, nor your servant, nor will not do anything you tell me.

Now get off your lazy ass and post "exactly" what you keep referring to in those studies.

 

[abj13]

Hahaha. Calling the kettle black huh? You don't want others to tell you what to do, but then turn around and demand people to do what you want. Hilarious. What a hypocrite. The utter definition of a troll, Riprorin. What did you get banned for in the past?

Anyone who is genuinely interested in the science and immunizations, read those studies. Don't read the attempted summation of someone who hasn't read a line of the relevant literature on the subject, and is only here to troll.

Influenza vaccine and its safety in pregnancy has a multitude of support behind it. A sampling of the data behind this support has been repeatedly posted in this thread. Physician groups took the time to read the studies and data, and found it to be safe. If one isn't willing to read the data and studies, don't make statement about its safety.