I know (well, knew) a COVID-skeptic (it’s just another flu!) nurse practioner. They’re in the minority, but they’re definitely out there. Unfortunately higher education is not necessarily always enough to outweigh our species’ truly staggering capacity for self-deception.
This is a really good post because it points to a core issue that has been driving me bonkers about all things related to covid, be it social distancing requirements, masking, vaccines etc.
The counterpoint has been bleating the word FREEDOM and essentially foaming at the mouth. Our system of freedoms goes back to the great thinkers of the Enlightenment, men like John Locke, Richard Price, Joseph Priestley et al. Several of the Founding Fathers would qualify as great thinkers on a person’s rights and freedoms as well. Something all of these people shared in common is not a single one of them believed in the idea of unlimited freedom with no restrictions, they believed in freedom within the constraints of a society that does have the right to regulate problematic behaviors, and they also believed in duties, society was not supposed to be a free for all of everyone saying fuck everyone else and I have to contribute nothing. These thinkers who literally shaped the underlying ethos of natural rights that inform the very “freedom chants” the covidiots spew believed strongly in social responsibility. That means while they may have varying opinions on the level of taxation you should have to pay, they had no objection to the concept of paying taxes for the common good. They had no issue with things like a military draft, as a consequence and requirement of being in a free society. Most of them would have had very little issue with covid vaccination mandates and social distancing requirements, had they been writing in the 21st century instead of the 18th.
The political philosophy of the modern “FREEDOM” people is not a serious philosophy, it is the screaming of children who believe life should be about nothing but having wants fulfilled with no duties to anyone or anything.
You forgot “for themselves” as most of them are more than happy to curtail many freedoms of others.
I fully support this nurse’s right to quit instead of getting vaccinated. I fully support my right to think she made a stupid decision based on misinformation and a lack of concern over the health and welfare of her patients.
She didn’t quit nursing. She became a nurse elsewhere. We want her to get her ass vaccinated. Barring that, we want her employer and potential employers to not employ her until she does.
Is “The freedom to spread a pandemic” a real thing to you?
I know a couple of people who didn’t get vaccinated until it was vaccinate or get tested weekly or lose your job. But they were surrounded by people telling them to get vaccinated- they may still not have gotten the vaccine if they thought they would be praised for refusing it
One thought: Wasn’t the nurse remiss in allowing a patient to become so attached to her that her sudden absence caused such a terrible reaction? Wasn’t the nursing home remiss in not setting up guards against this?
Considering the staff shortages at nursing homes that has been going on for a very long time, “proper personal relationships between staff and clients” ranks about 378th on their Top 500 Things We Should Deal With List.
Vaccines are the closest thing to “miracle drugs” that we have. Early in the 20th century, Smallpox killed over 300,000,000 people but, after the advent of the vaccine, the last known natural case was in Somalia in 1977. By 1910, frequent polio epidemics became regular events throughout the developed world primarily in cities during the summer months. At its peak in the 1940s and 1950s, polio would paralyze or kill over half a million people worldwide every year. Again, after the polio vaccine was created and dispensed in mass, there has been no known case of polio in the United States since 1979.
Any supposedly educated health care professional who intentionally avoids them is unfit for the profession.
I can agree that it might be a fine line between helping patients and becoming too personally involved, but considering that a caregiver might suddenly disappear for any number of reasons - it would be in the patient’s best interest to prevent too great an attachment.
I agree with you, but the line between “What Is” and “What Should Be” is as wide as sixteen lane freeway.
I’m not sure how they would stop it, other than by either being consistently nasty to the patients, or by rotating people so that patients were always being taken care of by a stranger. The disadvantage of the first is obvious; the disadvantage of the second (besides their very likely not having enough personnel) is that if any of the patients are in some stage of even early dementia, which is very likely, they’ll find this very confusing and quite possibly threatening. Also, it would deprive them of anything resembling friendships when they’re already in a situation highly conducive to unpleasant loneliness. – Friendships with other residents carry the same problem, as those people can move/be moved elsewhere or they may die.
Trying to encourage multiple attachments seems more likely to be useful than trying to prevent any.
A mandate seems reasonable. This is a public health issue. Her not getting vaccinated affects my health. Should I be allowed to run around punching people in the face because of “freedom”?
Only if you swear that your personal religious beliefs make you do that. No need for proof; your solemn word that you belong to The Church Of Punching Strangers In The Face will be enough.
Honestly, it kind of reminds me how like a generation ago, 2nd Amendment proponents absolutely bent over backward to promote gun safety and safe gun handling and now it’s all about posting pictures of yourself pointing a loaded gun at your balls to show your masculinity or something.
It’s like the “great responsibility” part just got chucked at some point.
Can someone please tell the number and types of vaccines, since their inception, that had long-term side effects, serious or not? I believe that I heard (no cite) the number was “zero”. My friend’s son wouldn’t get vaxxed because he thought it might impact his ability to have children. He is an EMT. WTF? He was even preparing to move to Florida to avoid vax requirements. Then he got covid. Fortunately, not too serious of a case. I’m not sure how having had it impacts the vaccine requirements in NJ or his decision about getting the shot now.
P.S. - Screw religious exemptions.
You’re right, the answer is none. My wife is my cite - she has two published books on vaccines from a real publisher.
There are immediate or rapid side effects, but no long term ones.
To be fair, mRNA vaccines are entirely new. It’s not entirely bonkers to be concerned about this kind of unknown.
When the vaccines were new the message was, “these vaccines passed all the standard trials.” My argument at the time was, “For all we know, these trials aren’t looking for the right problems. This is breaking new ground (with incredible promise to be sure) but we don’t even know what sorts of problems these things can cause.”
The more I learn about how this technology works and the more time that passes, the less concerned I am. My wife and I have been vaccinated for months now because after millions of doses had been given and nearly a year of time passed from the initial doses, it became clear the risk of long-term complications from the disease are much higher than the risk of long-term complications from any vaccine.
But I don’t think my concern was unreasonable.
The smallpox vaccine left a scar at the site of the injection. It was a purely cosmetic issue, and although it was long-lasting, it’s not like it popped up and surprised people long after they had the injection. That’s the only one I know of. And of course, as with adverse vaccine reactions generally, it was but a shadow of what the disease would’ve entailed. You wanna talk scars, let’s look at the people who didn’t get the smallpox vaccine!