4 ms·
At least once a week, I have an adult discussion based on facts and lived truths with antivaxers, many of whom are registered nurses in the US. Why are they la
by daddylongstroke 5y ago
At least once a week, I have an adult discussion based on facts and lived truths with antivaxers, many of whom are registered nurses in the US. Why are they labeled antivaxers by society (that's usually my first question). The response generally comes down to the greater society not understanding the negative health outcomes from the routine vaccinations nursing and other hospital staff have to undergo in the US. I'll tell you what a virologist at the Cleveland Clinic told one of these RNs who cannot get the flu or other vaccines anymore, as they now threaten her life (and that of her family's). "First, you are not crazy. You are exactly the type of patient I see day in and day out: A hospital staff member, being treated by non-virology MDs as a nut case (in many cases being dropped by the doctor's office due to lack of adherence to treatment), because you accused the vaccines you take of causing your arteritis or vasculitis. Well, you're correct. You're potentially genetically predisposed, like a substantial chunk of our population, to severely increased risk of vasculitis and ultimately death by organ failure or aneurysm, by receiving any vaccine on a regular basis. You should not get a vaccine, and nobody in your family should receive regular vaccines. Yes, your completely incurable vasculitis is likely caused by the flu vaccines you've been mandated to receive year in and year out by your employer. No, the flu vaccine is not really effective at all when you look closely at the data, especially in the population it purports to be targeting specifically (the old)."
- michaelmrose 5y agoYou are guilty of a rhetorical trick. It goes like this. Some expert in ___ holds this position because he knows all about ___ wherein the person is am expert and does indeed hold the belief. The implication is that he holds the belief which is absolutely true but leaves out the fact that the belief is not only a minority position amongst the general population but even more so amongst experts meaning expertise leads one to reject the position. The flu vaccine very very rarely causes vasculitis and almost all cases resolve favorably. One meta study of the literature identified 65 cases ever. Meanwhile it's not unusual to see 20-60k annual deaths in the United States. Statistically not getting a flu vaccination for fear of vasculitis is like not wearing a seat belt in case one wants to escape the car quickly in case one happens to get out quick in case you decide to drive into a lake today. You have misunderstood the figures on flu vaccinations. It's commonly 30-60% effective at preventing infection. If this was just true about the under 65 it would still mean fewer under 65 able to spread it to 65+ but fortunately it isn't true. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-benefits.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-benefits.htm https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0066312 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...