Forced Flu Vaccination Suspicious

[Guest guest]

" Misty L. Trepke " <mistytrepke

Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:50:04 -0000

Subject:[s-A] Forced Flu Vaccination Suspicious

 

Comments?

Misty L. Trepke

http://www..com

 

Forced Flu Vaccination Suspicious

BL Fisher Note:

 

When adults, especially health care professionals, begin fighting

forced vaccination it is time for the vaccine police to re-evaluate

their tactics. Bottom line: the " greater good " argument will not

hold when enough individuals being asked to risk their health and

surrender their liberty figure out both are being sacrificed and

just say no.

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002057338_danny08.ht

ml

 

The Seattle Times

 

October 8, 2004

 

Danny Westneat / Times staff columnist

 

Flu shot helps job security?

 

 

Last year, the flu shot didn't work so well. It's estimated that

half the adults who came down with flu had first gotten the shot.

 

This year, some flu vaccine is contaminated. When discovered in

August, U.S. officials promised it was no big deal.

 

They were undercut this week by the British, who, citing bacterial

contamination shut down a plant that makes half our vaccine supply.

 

Now imagine, amid this mess, that your employer comes to you and

says: " Get a flu shot or you're fired. "

 

That's the predicament faced by 5,000 workers at Seattle's Virginia

Mason Medical Center. They have until Jan. 1 to get the shot, or get

canned.

 

It's believed to be the first hospital in the nation to require flu

vaccines. In doing so, it pits two ethical principles central to the

practice of medicine against each other.

 

The Hippocratic Oath says " do no harm. " The hospital argues that

vaccinating everyone reduces the chance a sick doctor or nurse will

give the flu to vulnerable patients.

 

That seems reasonable. But it's also up to patients whether to

accept any medical care, from surgery to drugs. Typically patients -

in this case, the staff - are free to assess the risks and benefits,

and decide what is injected into their bodies, without being

threatened.

 

The union representing the hospital's 600 nurses filed suit last week

against the mandatory shots.

 

Like most ethical conundrums, this one has no easy answer. In this

case, though, I side with the nurses.

 

The reason? Our nation's flu program is in shambles.

 

We're being treated to a press frenzy this week about how citizens

allegedly are panicking to get their flu shots before supplies run

out. But I'd argue the opposite: Unless you're in one of the high-

risk groups, who would want one?

 

Consider the nation's medical professionals. They talk unceasingly

about how everyone should get shots. But they don't follow this

advice themselves.

 

Only 36 percent of America's health-care workers get vaccinated -

about the same rate as the rest of us, according to the U.S. Centers

for Disease Control and Prevention.

 

In their court filing, the nurses go so far as to allege that

requiring flu shots violates the hospital's duty " to maintain a safe

and healthy workplace. " They contend the shots pose risks, and that

the hospital's backup plan - antiviral medicine - is even worse

because those medicines have " significant side effects. "

 

Add to that the constant problems with the vaccine supply and its

spotty record at warding off flu. It hardly inspires confidence,

does it?

 

I'm not saying the flu shot is categorically bad. It's one of the

safer vaccines, and vulnerable people, such as the elderly, should

consider getting it.

 

Even if Virginia Mason ends up backing away, its policy is part of a

movement toward " universal vaccination. " The idea is that the only

way to beat the flu for anyone is to give shots to everyone.

 

Until healthy, intelligent doctors and nurses are willing to take

the shot without being forced, count me out.

 

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Friday. Reach him at

206-464-2086 or dwestneat.