Violation of Human Rights???

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by Wayne M

The only control needed is people control.

Those that are sick should not be out in public.

If it is a hospital workplace requirement that the employees be inoculated against an influenza virus, then all those being treated there should have an inoculation before being admitted, and all those visiting should have an inoculation. As stated before, don't forget the delivery people.

Besides having those antibacterial gels by the door of the hospital rooms, there should be a new set of sterilized clothing for each one that visits, especially hospital staff, and the clothing they are wearing when entering should be thrown away.

Why not? How far does it go?

More good points Wayne. And I suppose they could be used with regard to all vaccinations.

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by so47

As long as others don't get impacted by another's personal choice, I totally agree. But if ya don' wear a seatbelt you should not be covered by insurance since your oh so much greater injuries would Tread On Me as a fellow policy holder. You should be on your own, outa pocket, etc. Why should your idea of freedom be paid for by the rest of us? Is that Big G? Good, that's what it should be doing. Protecting the prudent from the not so much. But seatbelt usage has been pushed hard by ins. Co 'cause it impacts their bottom line. Jussayin.

A friend of mine almost died in a crash, because she had her seatbelt on. She no longer wears a seatbelt in a vehicle.
I still wear mine, not because it is law, but because I feel the odds are in my favour in most crashes. Interesting that most brain injury happens in car accidents, which would present the logic that all drivers and passengers should wear helmuts.
Getting back to the flu vaccination though, how would a nurses freedom be paid for by patients who had the flu vaccination, wouldn't they be immune to it? Oh, it seems not necessarily, according to the information provided here.

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by Francesca

...Yeah, that's what I'm sayin', all right................
Plus they can shoot you up with a microchip and track your movements, and demand a blood sacrifice involving your firstborn child, and monitor your nights out, and tell you what football team to root for, and which God to worship, and oh, just a whole bunch of other things, depending on what the Huge Conspiracy Websites y'all get your facts from comes up with.

Which websites that I have presented in this thread do you consider Huge Conspiracy Websites?

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by Francesca

How do y'all feel about "FORCED" TB testing of food service workers?

Can't get a restaurant job in Arkansas without the Invasive Needle Test!

Used to be nationwide...now not so much...

Why the change from nationwide?

[Francesca]

Originally Posted by HappyCCRVr

Which websites that I have presented in this thread do you consider Huge Conspiracy Websites?

Well, there's this one, for starters...


Not that I was talkin' to you when I posted the quote you're callin' me out on!

ON EDIT:

DANG! Yer posting so fast I can't keep up- a whole new question while I was typing????

Here goes:

Originally Posted by HappyCCRVr

Why the change from nationwide?

It's a conspiracy...

But no fair dodging my Human Rights question:

I asked you how you feel about that forced TB testing, which invasively and by means of needles threatens to deprive non-compliers of their livelihoods.

[Kayjulia]

Being retired Army I've been vaccinated against everything known to man and available to the gov. not once but twice because the Army lost my records so I had to get everything again. I've had flu shots every year since they had flu shots and I'm here to brag about it. A lot of talk about how bad vaccine shots are is just conjecture, rumor and ignorance run amok. I'll continue to get my shots and get vaccinated against everything available.
If I should go to a health facility and I get sick and or die because of somebody not getting immunized I hope my heirs sue the crap out of who ever was responsible. I don't enter a health facility to get sick but to get well and all care must be taken by that facility to protect me from getting ill or worse. If getting immunized is part of the job then get immunized or get off the property, if something happens to me somebody is going to be talking to my lawyers! JMHO on that issue.

[HappyCCRVr]

Sorry but this one is not a live link so it tells me nothing.
I haven't researched your question enough to make an informed decision, other than to learn that TB testing cannot cause one to get TB. As far as I know testing for disease is different from vaccinating.

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by Kayjulia

Being retired Army I've been vaccinated against everything known to man and available to the gov. not once but twice because the Army lost my records so I had to get everything again. I've had flu shots every year since they had flu shots and I'm here to brag about it. A lot of talk about how bad vaccine shots are is just conjecture, rumor and ignorance run amok. I'll continue to get my shots and get vaccinated against everything available.
If I should go to a health facility and I get sick and or die because of somebody not getting immunized I hope my heirs sue the crap out of who ever was responsible. I don't enter a health facility to get sick but to get well and all care must be taken by that facility to protect me from getting ill or worse. If getting immunized is part of the job then get immunized or get off the property, if something happens to me somebody is going to be talking to my lawyers! JMHO on that issue.

Have you read any information about risks with flu vaccines, or are you just going on your own personal experience to form your HO?

I'm not sure that one can successfully be sued for unknowingly spreading illness, and there must be a reason that vaccine manufacturers are employing lawyers to indemnify them from lawsuits for death or injury from them.

[HappyCCRVr]

Lawyers ruled in favour of nurses

Perhaps most of you recall that by the end of 2002, the news media reported that thousands of medical first responders and emergency room doctors refused to take the free smallpox vaccinations, even following later assurances from the Department of Homeland Security that those vaccinated would receive free and full insurance to cover possible adverse reactions. There were so many doctors and hospitals that refused the vaccine that the Department of HHS changed the directive to a voluntary recommendation, in order to calm a controversy liable to raise public awareness to the fact that vaccines pose risks.
In September 2004, Virginia Mason Medical Center wanted to be the first hospital in the nation to make flu shots mandatory for its staff and volunteers in an effort to protect patients. In response to a reported 55 percent immunization rate among the 5,000 staff members (vaccinations are free for staff members), all staff members—which included nurses but not doctors—were informed that they would be fired if they don’t receive the flu vaccine for that year.
The Washington State Nurses Association (WSNA), representing 12,000 nurses in Washington state, released a statement5 opposing this requirement, stating in part:
“Registered nurses understand better than anyone both the benefits as well as the side effects of the flu vaccine and must have the personal choice to decide whether or not to receive the vaccination. Educating nurses and other staff about the importance of the vaccination and allowing each individual to make a decision with regards to the vaccination is what we would support,” said Lauralee Mayorkinos, RN, WSNA local unit chair at VMMC.
Barbara Frye, Director of Labor Relations for WSNA, said nurses are most concerned that what “should be a matter of individual choice” is being taken from them under threat of job loss. “Getting stuck with a needle with a drug in itself is invasive,” Frye said. “Nurses are well-educated on this issue, and they know that there is no drug or vaccine that doesn’t have a potential health risk.”
Indeed, that year some flu vaccine was found to be contaminated. Another case of bacterial contamination shut down a British plant that made half the U.S. supply of vaccines. In the prior year, it was estimated that half the adults who came down with flu had first received the shot. In the court filing to stop the vaccine requirement, WSNA wrote that requiring flu shots violates the hospital’s duty “to maintain a safe and healthy workplace.” It contended the shots pose risks, and that the hospital’s alternative for religious or health reasons—an antiviral medicine—is even worse because those medicines have “significant side effects.”
On January 7th, 2006, The United States District Court ruled in favor of WSNA. The nurses union wrote that it “oppose[s] any health care facility threatening to fire people if they do not submit to the mandatory vaccination, especially in the absence of a declared public health emergency…”
Finally, on January 26, 2006, the union filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging that Virginia Mason Medical Center “retaliated and discriminated against the registered nurses for exercising their contractual right to refuse flu vaccination by forcing them to wear masks.” Their press release continued: “According the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), ‘no studies have definitively shown that mask use by either infectious patients or health-care personnel prevents influenza transmission.’”

Mortalities from vaccination

[Grimesy]

In as much as this is an RV related web site I will assume everyone drove to work in their RV.

Nuf Sed!

Don G.

[sc3283]

Happy, if this has been asked prior..my apologies

While I understand your concern and ways of thinking...I do feel tho that any employee should be able to accept anything themselves that they sell, market, use, push, prescribe, give etc as part of their job. If a person is unwilling of such, I see that person to be a hypocrite. If it is good enough for 1 to make their living, it should be good enough for themselves. (not trying to be rude, just giving my opinion)

Now you having stated your concerns with a simple flu shot.....let me ask(because this is FAR to popular a past time in these modern times).....do you smoke cigs? smoke dope? drink alcohol?

Not trying to be rude...just trying to understand this whole dilemma your involved with at your job. I have heard many pot smokers go off on tangents about how bad something can be..as they attempt to tell me pot is safe

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by Grimesy

In as much as this is an RV related web site I will assume everyone drove to work in their RV.

Nuf Sed!

Don G.

We are sitting in our RV's Just Conversation ing.
There are other threads more related to RVs, this is 'just conversation' as described,
"This is a forum for friendly, professional, informal exchange of "NON-RV" related subjects"

not nuff said yet LOL but thanks for dropping in

[HappyCCRVr]

Originally Posted by sc3283

Happy, if this has been asked prior..my apologies

While I understand your concern and ways of thinking...I do feel tho that any employee should be able to accept anything themselves that they sell, market, use, push, prescribe, give etc as part of their job. If a person is unwilling of such, I see that person to be a hypocrite. If it is good enough for 1 to make their living, it should be good enough for themselves. (not trying to be rude, just giving my opinion)

Now you having stated your concerns with a simple flu shot.....let me ask(because this is FAR to popular a past time in these modern times).....do you smoke cigs? smoke dope? drink alcohol?

Not trying to be rude...just trying to understand this whole dilemma your involved with at your job. I have heard many pot smokers go off on tangents about how bad something can be..as they attempt to tell me pot is safe

1. Yes, perhaps that is why Doctors take a hypocritic oath - they won't take what they prescribe to their patients, and they won't give it to their families either. Interesting isn't it?
2. No. No. In moderation. Why do you ask?
3. This is not about my job, but if you go to the first post, you can see who's job it is. Then if you go up a few posts, you can see a bit of history of what has happened when Washington State tried to impose the same conditions on their nurses.

[Jack1234]

Originally Posted by HappyCCRVr

I would say that is for individuals to choose for themselves, with regard to vaccinations. That is invasive, especially with what we now know about them, and the FDA.

A wise man makes his own decisions - an ignorant man follows public opinion. Chinese proverb

I'm curious ... Are you objecting to "all" vaccines or just the flu vaccine?

It seems you can find someone...somewhere making an argument against everything. I mean Muslim Clerics in Nigerian argue against the Polio vaccine based on the idea that this vaccine is laced with HIV and infertility drugs. Do you believe this? Do you seriously feel the Polio vaccine is useless and has been ineffective in helping to virtually eradicate a dreadful disease?

Do you travel outside the US? For example, when we volunteered to work in a wild animal sanctuary in Africa, we chose the very expensive Rabies vaccine over the risk of contracting rabies which is virtually fatal in humans......for that matter (for travel purposes) we have also been vaccinated for Cholera, Yellow Fever, Typhoid, Tetanus, Hepatitis and we have been known to take Malaria pills. Do you or would you travel throughout the Third World without travel vaccines & protection?

Do you really feel that taking travel vaccines against known infectious diseases is -an ignorant man follows public opinion?