There a difference in the mandatory imposition of these two drugs

There a difference in the mandatory imposition of these two drugs?” “RNnotPOW”, in response to http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/24/nurses-aide-sent-home-for-refusing-flu-shot-thelatest-healthcare-worker-suspended-in-push-to-make-immunization-mandatory/. Patient safety and social responsibility. Many commenters (173 comments) advocated for mandatory influenza vaccination on the basis of patient safety and social responsibility. They argued that regardless of the benefit to the person receiving the vaccine, strengthening herd immunity against the influenza in hospitals and long-term care facilities indirectly protects patients with less robust immune systems. These commenters felt that there was a duty to reduce risk to vulnerable patients. Critics replied that HCWs were only a subset of those PNPP web inside a hospital at any given time, and that herd immunity is impossible given the presence of new patients or visitors with influenza. Distrust of authorities. Many commenters (270 comments) expressed a distrust of authorities, including government, public health, and pharmaceutical companies. Some commenters speculated on whether the government would receive kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies, since the vaccine is required annually and enacting a mandatory policy would guarantee a certain number of orders each year. Others suspected the policy was put in place not to reduce risk to patients but to reduce sick time for HCWs, thereby saving money. Several commenters saw HCWs as role models and questioned their low rates of influenza vaccination. Finally, a small number of commenters distrusted the quality of watchdog activities and inspections undertaken by Health Canada to ensure vaccine safety and effectiveness. Commenters about the fnins.2015.00094 pharmaceutical companies’ role in the issue were universally negative, with sentiments ranging from resignation to outright accusations of deliberately endangering the public for profit. Some commenters believed that pharmaceutical companies’ refusal to offer compensation for adverse drug reactions in Canada was suspicious, given that compensation was offered in several other countries. Alternatives to vaccination. Many commenters (104 comments) advocated non-vaccine related methods of reducing risk of influenza. These alternatives to vaccination wcs.1183 included physical barriers to transmission (e.g., masks), improved hygiene (e.g., proper hand-washing by hospital staff), social distancing (e.g., staying home when sick), and constitutional fortification (e.g., better nutrition, vitamin C, regular exercise). Some commenters suggested these alternatives as a supplement to vaccination, while others denounced vaccines completely and advocated only these alternatives.PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0129993 June 18,7 /Perceptions of Mandatory Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare WorkersVaccine safety. Several commenters (89 comments) had concerns about the safety of vaccines. Some felt all vaccines were unsafe, fearing the effects of vaccine ingredients such as thimerosal and formaldehyde. Many expressed concerns about immune reactions, from rashes and allergies to Guillain-Barr?Syndrome, and some believed, or told personal stories of the influenza vaccine itself transmitting influenza. Several commenters cited an article by a BC researcher (Skowronski et al.) that suggested that receipt of the 2008?9 seasonal influenza vaccine made patients more vulnerable to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza virus [26]. S28463 site Influenz.There a difference in the mandatory imposition of these two drugs?” “RNnotPOW”, in response to http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/24/nurses-aide-sent-home-for-refusing-flu-shot-thelatest-healthcare-worker-suspended-in-push-to-make-immunization-mandatory/. Patient safety and social responsibility. Many commenters (173 comments) advocated for mandatory influenza vaccination on the basis of patient safety and social responsibility. They argued that regardless of the benefit to the person receiving the vaccine, strengthening herd immunity against the influenza in hospitals and long-term care facilities indirectly protects patients with less robust immune systems. These commenters felt that there was a duty to reduce risk to vulnerable patients. Critics replied that HCWs were only a subset of those inside a hospital at any given time, and that herd immunity is impossible given the presence of new patients or visitors with influenza. Distrust of authorities. Many commenters (270 comments) expressed a distrust of authorities, including government, public health, and pharmaceutical companies. Some commenters speculated on whether the government would receive kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies, since the vaccine is required annually and enacting a mandatory policy would guarantee a certain number of orders each year. Others suspected the policy was put in place not to reduce risk to patients but to reduce sick time for HCWs, thereby saving money. Several commenters saw HCWs as role models and questioned their low rates of influenza vaccination. Finally, a small number of commenters distrusted the quality of watchdog activities and inspections undertaken by Health Canada to ensure vaccine safety and effectiveness. Commenters about the fnins.2015.00094 pharmaceutical companies’ role in the issue were universally negative, with sentiments ranging from resignation to outright accusations of deliberately endangering the public for profit. Some commenters believed that pharmaceutical companies’ refusal to offer compensation for adverse drug reactions in Canada was suspicious, given that compensation was offered in several other countries. Alternatives to vaccination. Many commenters (104 comments) advocated non-vaccine related methods of reducing risk of influenza. These alternatives to vaccination wcs.1183 included physical barriers to transmission (e.g., masks), improved hygiene (e.g., proper hand-washing by hospital staff), social distancing (e.g., staying home when sick), and constitutional fortification (e.g., better nutrition, vitamin C, regular exercise). Some commenters suggested these alternatives as a supplement to vaccination, while others denounced vaccines completely and advocated only these alternatives.PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0129993 June 18,7 /Perceptions of Mandatory Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare WorkersVaccine safety. Several commenters (89 comments) had concerns about the safety of vaccines. Some felt all vaccines were unsafe, fearing the effects of vaccine ingredients such as thimerosal and formaldehyde. Many expressed concerns about immune reactions, from rashes and allergies to Guillain-Barr?Syndrome, and some believed, or told personal stories of the influenza vaccine itself transmitting influenza. Several commenters cited an article by a BC researcher (Skowronski et al.) that suggested that receipt of the 2008?9 seasonal influenza vaccine made patients more vulnerable to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza virus [26]. Influenz.