I congratulate Ms. Lobato on her grasp of the very real gaps in vaccine safety and efficacy and wonder at how she managed to keep a grasp on that one quality that seems to be so efficiently squashed out of otherwise intelligent human beings in medical schools: the capacity for independent thought and inquiry.

I did, however, as the mother of two vaccine injured children, feel a pang at Ms. Lobato's question: "Just what are we willing to do to save our jobs?"

I look at my children and wonder just how many "health care" professionals kept silent, despite awakening awareness like Ms. Lobato's, to save their jobs while our children were being so grievously injured and then callously discarded. Is it only now we can expect to hear from them to save their own skins, now that the "authorities" with the dirty needles are knocking at their own doors?

Vaccination is based on a wealth of medical science. However if anyone doubts the science, it is worthwhile reading some of studies of the opponents of vaccination before taking their ill-conceived advice:

Public opponents of vaccination: a case study.
Leask J, McIntyre P.

National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance, Children's Hospital at Westmead, University of Sydney, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead 2145, Australia. juliel3@chw.edu.au

"Opposition to mass childhood vaccination is a world-wide phenomenon, particularly in industrialised countries. Unfounded claims about vaccination are perpetuated by parental lobby groups and individual spokespeople, some of whom have a medical or scientific background. This article focuses on one such spokesperson who has achieved particular notoriety. Dr. Viera Scheibner is a retired micropalaeontologist, without any formal training in health-related sciences, who tours the world claiming that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous and lead to a host of ills such as cancer and asthma. Professionals in public health or the clinical arena are from time to time called upon to publicly respond to her, or similar, claims disseminated during tours of Europe, North America or Australasia and in books and articles. Health professionals have expressed (concern) at how such spokespersons misrepresent the evidence on vaccine safety, resulting in the potential to undermine public confidence in immunisation. Media coverage, or proposed coverage, particularly of her more extreme claims, often makes health professionals engaged in immunisation feel obliged to respond. This paper describes Viera Scheibner's approach, which follows a repetitious path and is representative of that taken by other public opponents of immunisation. We conclude by suggesting how health professionals might respond in the public arena."

I’ve agreed with the author in the past on the ‘Cholesterol Screening for Children’ topic, but in this case I can’t agree.
It's quite shocking to find out that mandatory vaccinations were not already mandatory for medical staff. Wow, unbelievable!

Cornflower, great post, I can’t agree more!

I’m strongly in favour of mandatory vaccinations until I can get reliable information that tells me that unvaccinated medical staff are no risk to patients.
I find it reasonable to think that there would be certain risk when unvaccinated medical staff are in close contact with patients who may have low resistence, especially the very young or elderly.
Medical professionals may well spread the flu virus to weak patients who then will be at higher risk of developing pneumonia and even increased pneumonia deaths.

Has there been any reliable research on pneumonia (death) rates in hospitals where 100% of the staff have been vaccinated, against hospitals where most of the staff have not been vaccinated?

I doubt that this author has ever experienced a true epidemic.
If she would look at the history of outbreaks she would know that there have been many deaths from preventable childhood diseases in unvaccinated areas.

I find it VERY alarming that a tiny minority of medical professionals feel they should contribute to the scare-mongering of the anti-vaxers brigade.
I don’t know what the ulterior motive of this nurse is, but I saw in the past that doctors who contribute to this anti-vax nonsense had a vested interest by offering people unproven, alternative medicine (read: quackery).

Dr Stoller, so FACHM means that you are Fellow of the American College of Hyperbaric Medicine?
Is Hyperbolic Medicine is an evidence based treatment?
And which university did you attend to gain your MD qualification?

As for staff shortage: if all staff were vaccinated they would need less time off due to the flu.

Vaccinating health care workers helps protect patients from some common diseases (eg. rubella, influenza) at a time when they are most at risk (unborn or premature babies, the elderly or those undertaking chemotherapy for example) but it also protects the nurses themselves. Many vaccinated nurses have been reassured that they are not at risk of contracting Hepatitis following a needlestick or sharps injury. The transmission rate of Hep B and Hep C through needlesticks is significant. Does the author really believe surgical gloves would be adequate to protect against needlstick injuries? My experience is that nurses are enthusiastic about getting free vaccinations for this reason.

As the majority of health care workers actually care about their patients health as well as their own I can't believe there will be too much opposition to this policy - apart from those who have to do the paperwork. As for the ones who either don't care or are so misinformed as to confuse indoctrination with education then we could probably do without them in the health sector anyhow.

There is no conspiracy and those who are involved in causing unfounded health scares should hold themselves responsible for the refusal in some developing countries to vaccinate their children against killer diesases such as polio.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4862012.stm

On the other hand the more responsible majority can be reassured that vaccination is saving millions of lives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1964966.stm

If there is any real evidence in reputable journals of a significant risk that has not been properly investigated and then refuted by evidence based research then I would be interested to read it. As far as I am aware nearly all cases of serious adverse affects have been found to be just coincidental. Just because something has been reported as a possible adverse effect does not prove a cause and effect.

It is sad that medical professionals can be so ignorant. The real threat in this story is the ignorant and potentially dangerous advice being given by Lobato, an “independent health researcher”. I suggest Ms Lobato should get more of her information about vaccines from reputable medical sources rather than from anti-vaccine conspiracy websites. Some obvious errors:

1) There is no mercury in Australian vaccines http://www.ncirs.usyd.edu.au/facts/f-thiomersal.html .
2) Vaccines are not primarily responsible for auto-immune diseases. The association of auto-immune diseases is 10 to 20 times more common with a bout of infections disease than it is with vaccination. http://image.thelancet.com/extras/02art9340web.pdf
3) Vaccines do not ‘suppress’ the outward signs of illness. They prime the immune system to stop the illness taking hold in the first place.
4) There have not been 17-20 deaths from Gardasil in the US. There have been deaths reported after the vaccine was given, but these are all from causes not associated with the vaccine http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaers/gardasil.htm There have been over 30 million young women treated with Gardasil in the US, the small number of deaths following vaccination is probably not at a higher frequency than for the common population. In contrast, more than 20,000 women are diagnosed each year with cancers caused by HPV http://www.cdc.gov/std/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm and 5000 deaths each year.

One of the most important actions of vaccination is that herd immunity to infectious diseases can help protect some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Those with medical conditions that do not allow them the protection of vaccination. Those like Ms Lobato who argue against vaccination are putting these vulnerable members of society at risk.

Ms. Lobato should be ashamed of writing such a dangerous anti-vaccine article and should be ashamed of her ignorance as well.

A collaborative program between the CDC and the US Department of Defense says that multiple vaccines may not be safe for everyone (at least in adults being inoculated for military service).

Most health care workers are adults so this is relevant.

“We have preliminary findings from one of our many on-going research studies that suggest a relationship between adverse events and multiple vaccinations exist. These findings will require validation, but heighten our concern for the current clinical practice of multiple vaccinations.”

That rather remarkable statement came from US Army Colonel Renata J. M. Engler, MD, director of the Vaccine Healthcare Centers Network (VHCN) a “collaborative network” of the Defense Department - and the CDC.

She went on to say:

“The standard of care (ie, when mixing vaccines) is to minimize drug exposures because of the recognition that the more drugs being used, the greater the chance of a reaction and potentially a serious adverse event.”

Col. Engler’s statements were included in a November 26 letter (http://www.ageofautism.com/files/kirby_2008_1126_walter_reed_vaccine_healthcare_centers_network_2.pdf) to Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). Maloney had written to inquire (http://www.ageofautism.com/files/kirby_2008_0916_letter_to_vhc_final_2.pdf) about a 2007 VHCN presentation suggesting that 1-2 percent of all service members were suffering serious adverse effects from their shots.

VHCN and CDC officials “estimate that between 1 and 2 percent of immunized individuals may experience severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death. Some of these events may occur coincidentally following immunization, while others may truly be caused by immunization."

VHCN Power Point presentation (http://www.ageofautism.com/files/kirbymilvax1.ppt).

The slides suggest that among active duty and reserve service members, up to 48,000 individuals may have sustained serious vaccine injuries which might need to be classified as "casualties,” and may require teaching "new skills" to some of those injured.

So, giving multiple vaccines to adults is not as black and white as the very angry posts to this forum make it seem. There will, in all likelihood, be collateral damage. Australia should disclose what is known to health care workers (not just info from "pro-vaccine" websites) and be prepared to take care of the "coincidental" casualties.