Pregnant nurse fired for not taking flu vaccine

[lotus503]

The DMV does have a listing for seat belts for different size trucks, such as 18 wheelers, or at least they did at one time.




No, I am not that dense.

So the CDC recommends vaccines for all high risk pregnant women, even if there are no studies to back up those recommendations?

If that sounds logical to you, then womens health is still in the stone age.

There seems to be some confusion here. Why does everyone keep ignoring high risk pregnancies? I keep asking for studies and CDC pages for high risk pregnancies, and everyone keeps posting links to pages for pregnancies and not a single mention of high risk.

Lets get on the same page here. the woman in the opening post had a history of miscarriages. Any study or CDC page linked to should mention history of miscarriages or at least mention high risk.

The CDC doesn't specifically state high risk it lumps high risk in with the recommendation ALL Pregnant women get vaccinated. Why? because getting the flu is worse than the vaccine for ALL pregnant women.

You are wanting to cherry pick a control group that is already accounted for.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Nice strawman there. Makes you look even more dense, you can't even present a decent counter argument.

The logic says that literally hundreds of thousands of pregnant women around the world receive the flu shot on a yearly basis with no compelling evidence of increased complication rates.

As far as studies, I'm sure someone is studying the issue for the nth time to show that again there is no risk. And that again the risk of NOT getting vaccinated and contracting influenza is far more dangerous than the vaccination itself.

And since you continue to ignore us. I'm going to be clear again.


The flu vaccine is recommended in all pregnancies. Repeat again, ALL PREGNANCIES.

Last I checked that means all pregnancies including high risk pregnancies, because the word ALL means every pregnancy.

At this point it's become ridiculous. If I had a 5 year old with crayon and paper I could show her how the logic works.

Not with this guy.

 

[Texashiker]

The logic says that literally hundreds of thousands of pregnant women around the world receive the flu shot on a yearly basis with no compelling evidence of increased complication rates.

Once again you leave out the "high risk" part.

This is not about increasing complications. as there is no argument from me that the flu vaccine is safe for normal pregnancies.

The flu vaccine is recommended in all pregnancies. Repeat again, ALL PREGNANCIES.

Last I checked that means all pregnancies including high risk pregnancies, because the word ALL means every pregnancy.

Then you should have no problem showing me a study where vast majority of the participants (and not 10%) were women with a history of miscarriages.

The CDC doesn't specifically state high risk it lumps high risk in with the recommendation ALL Pregnant women get vaccinated. Why? because getting the flu is worse than the vaccine for ALL pregnant women.

You are wanting to cherry pick a control group that is already accounted for.

In other words, screw the studies for high risk pregnancies, the cdc is just going to make a blanket statement.

 

[Zargon]

You guys are trying to store water in a colander in this thread.

LOL that is sig worthy as well.


awesome

 

[lotus503]

Once again you leave out the "high risk" part.

This is not about increasing complications. as there is no argument from me that the flu vaccine is safe for normal pregnancies.





Then you should have no problem showing me a study where vast majority of the participants (and not 10%) were women with a history of miscarriages.




In other words, screw the studies for high risk pregnancies, the cdc is just going to make a blanket statement.

Yes because the CDC doesn't feel the need to separate high risk from normal because they think the flu is worse than the vaccine for all pregnant women.

 

[Texashiker]

Yes because the CDC doesn't feel the need to separate high risk from normal because they think the flu is worse than the vaccine for all pregnant women.

Sucks to be a woman.

 

[lotus503]

Sucks to be a woman.

Why because they should get a flu shot?

 

[TraumaRN]

Sucks to be a woman.

Enough with your trolling bullshit. You clearly have no horse in this fight so you resort to sexist comments and flat out refuse to answer any of our responses. You have made the positive claim now back it up. The BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU. Not any of us.

Hey DrPizza I think it might be time to either lock up this thread or ban the OP. Kinda clear this thread is just his personal soapbox to troll.

 

[Mxylplyx]

So the OP appears to believe that even with a sufficiently large sample of data that encompasses both low and high risk pregnancies, the only way to draw conclusions on high risk pregnancies is if the study focused only on specific risk groups, even if enough data was collected to assess the risk across all risk groups. OP, why do you not realize any elevated risks to high risk pregnancies would have been revealed in the broader study of pregnancies in general?

 

[mikeymikec]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscarriage#Causes

Miscarriage is not a single condition with a single cause. Saying "have studies been concluded regarding this medication with people who are more likely to miscarry" is like saying "have the effects of paracetamol been studied specifically with people who get more headaches than other people?" - there's a load of unrelated reasons why someone might get more headaches than the average person, just like there are a load of reasons why someone might miscarry which share no common factors.

+1 Mxylplyx's post (#184).

 

[glenn1]

Hey DrPizza I think it might be time to either lock up this thread or ban the OP. Kinda clear this thread is just his personal soapbox to troll.

Agree.

 

[Fatdog]

Sucks to be a woman.

Especially in Texas.

 

[Texashiker]

Kinda clear this thread is just his personal soapbox to troll.

That is simply not true.

Rather than presenting any evidence to backup your claim you ask a moderator to shutdown anyone who challenges the status qua.

The woman in the opening post has a history of miscarriages.

All I ask for is a study on women who have a history of high risk pregnancies. As of yet nobody as presented such a study.

 

[lotus503]

That is simply not true.

Rather than presenting any evidence to backup your claim you ask a moderator to shutdown anyone who challenges the status qua.

The woman in the opening post has a history of miscarriages.

All I ask is for a study on women who have a history of high risk pregnancies. As of yet nobody as presented such a study.

The only one that has decided there needs to be a separate study of high risk pregnancies is you.

Because you are unwilling to accept that the studies including all pregnant women include high risk as well.

What I find strange that you have not asked for, is the study that shows the issue of contracting the flu in high risk pregnancies.

Your not concerned about the flu just the flu vaccine, its fing weird frankly.

 

[Moonbeam]

That is simply not true.

Rather than presenting any evidence to backup your claim you ask a moderator to shutdown anyone who challenges the status qua.

The woman in the opening post has a history of miscarriages.

All I ask for is a study on women who have a history of high risk pregnancies. As of yet nobody as presented such a study.

But you hang onto the idea that one is required whereas the first thing I thought of was the fact that such a study wound not be required because alarm bells would have gone off in pervious vaccine studies if there were an issue.

 

[mikeymikec]

The cycle of Texashiker's responses continues:

Ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence...
I'm not a troll!
You haven't presented any evidence!
Ignore some more...

 

[Texashiker]

The only one that has decided there needs to be a separate study of high risk pregnancies is you.

We have studies for everything else, so why not this part of womens health? I bet the government spent more money on studying some endangered lizard than high risk pregnancies.

Honestly, I find it rather insulting to women that their health is studied so little.

Your not concerned about the flu just the flu vaccine, its fing weird frankly.

The woman in the opening post was fired for not taking the flu vaccine, that is the topic of this thread.

The cycle of Texashiker's responses continues:

Ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence...
I'm not a troll!
You haven't presented any evidence!
Ignore some more...

Show me a linked article in this thread where the focus group was high risk pregnancies.

That is all I ask, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[lotus503]

I want to be honest an open with you TexasHiker, hopefully you can benefit from my experience on the issue.

I too used to have real issues with vaccines, my wife has worked for years with kids who have autism. I was convinced via anecdotal evidence that there had to be some link between immunizations and autism. I spent literally hours digging up information that supported my viewpoint. That caused me to look at other vaccines and potential issues with them, I spent a lot of time researching polio because there is a lot of information surrounding it. I watched several documentaries read and then read some more.

and what I came away with is yeah sometimes people have adverse reactions to vaccines, sometimes its horrible but in almost all cases they had some underlying genetic defect that affected the immune system when they were injected.

The most widely studied and reported was the former live polio vaccine. The problem is, although some people are going to have a problem it pales in comparison to the problems we will have if people stop vaccinating. Vaccination are only effective if everyone gets them, the less people the less effective.

 

[glenn1]

The cycle of Texashiker's responses continues:

Ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence, ignore post/evidence...
I'm not a troll!
You haven't presented any evidence!
Ignore some more...

It's the same tactic as those who argue against evolution. The OP has made his point and he has added no additional value in 100+ comments, if not more. So fine, I'll give the troll what he wants - no study which singles out "high risk pregnancy" exists and healthcare professionals should be given whatever reasonable accomodations that the OP sees fit. Congratulations. Now let's lock the thread.

 

[Moonbeam]

All I want, no more and no less, is to be show, said the blind man who did not know that he couldn't see.

 

[lotus503]

We have studies for everything else, so why not this part of womens health? I bet the government spent more money on studying some endangered lizard than high risk pregnancies.

Honestly, I find it rather insulting to women that their health is studied so little.




The woman in the opening post was fired for not taking the flu vaccine, that is the topic of this thread.




Show me a linked article in this thread where the focus group was high risk pregnancies.

That is all I ask, nothing more, nothing less.

You cant have a conversation on the vaccine for something unless you want to include the ailment its being supplied for, that's just ridiculous.

The CDC did not separate women of high risk because it concluded that all pregnant women are better off taking the vaccine vs getting the flu, ALL including high risk pregnancies.

 

[Texashiker]

So fine, I'll give the troll what he wants - no study which singles out "high risk pregnancy" exists and healthcare professionals should be given whatever reasonable accomodations that the OP sees fit. Congratulations. Now let's lock the thread.

How am I trolling if there is no study of high risk pregnancies.

Now onto the next part of the thread,

If there is no study, how can the employer force her to take the vaccine?

I too used to have real issues with vaccines, my wife has worked for years with kids who have autism. I was convinced via anecdotal evidence that there had to be some link between immunizations and autism.

Lets be clear, I am NOT opposed to vaccines in any shape, form or fashion.

So I do not know where you get this "I too" business.

The CDC did not separate women of high risk because it concluded, ALL including high risk pregnancies.

Without a study there is no proof.

All the cdc has is speculation.

 

[glenn1]

How am I trolling if there is no study of high risk pregnancies.

Now onto the next part of the thread,

If there is no study, how can the employer force her to take the vaccine?

You're right, it can't.

Thread lock.

 

[TraumaRN]

That is simply not true.

Rather than presenting any evidence to backup your claim you ask a moderator to shutdown anyone who challenges the status qua.

The woman in the opening post has a history of miscarriages.

All I ask for is a study on women who have a history of high risk pregnancies. As of yet nobody as presented such a study.

Here let me be a little more clear for you, I'm asking that this be shut down because you refuse to listen to anyone. You refuse to look at data. You have DELIBERATELY IGNORED numerous posters, myself included, who have literally thrown the answer into your face like a F5 tornado.

Here is the definition of "all" from the webster dictionary since you are so frigging dumb to not understand what it means.

all adjective \ˈȯl\
: the whole, entire, total amount, quantity, or extent of

: every member or part of

: the whole number or sum of


Is that clear enough? There needs to be no specific study because of the ENTIRE population of ALL pregnancy there is no increased risk for miscarriage or any other complications from the flu vaccine

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/nivw/influenza-pregnancy-letter.pdf

Read that letter. Notice where it says Risk of premature labor and delivery is increased in pregnant women with influenza

Doe you know what they call premature labor before a fetus is viable??


MISCARRIAGE

There was no extra risk for this original woman to be vaccinated. The flu vaccine is safe for all pregnant women INCLUDING WOMEN WHO ARE CONSIDERED HIGH RISK FOR MISCARRIAGE.

 

[Texashiker]

There was no extra risk for this original woman to be vaccinated. The flu vaccine is safe for all pregnant women INCLUDING WOMEN WHO ARE CONSIDERED HIGH RISK FOR MISCARRIAGE.

Show me a study to backup that statement.

Show me a study where the focus group was high risk pregnancies.

That is all I ask, nothing more nothing less.