Starting this one to open up the discussion about what can be done in WV to force healthcare institutions and providers to be accountable. As a nurse, many of the things I’ve been seeing and hearing about since the pandemic have alarmed me. Red flags regarding ethics. I hope to do what I can legally to dismantle any unethical/immoral behavior and practice to foster better trust between healthcare systems and the people of WV.
Patients’ having the right to try and be treated with medications that may go against hospital protocols, but are shown by individual physicians to be useful.
Healthcare whistleblower/insider information that might be useful as legal ammo against hospitals, clinics, pharmacies.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) states on its site that it is required by law for healthcare professionals to report suspicious/potential adverse vaccine reactions (with a specified list). With regard to the newest “vaccines”…are healthcare facilities requiring their doctors, nurses, PAs, and pharmacists to be formally trained in the system and what they should look for in reporting?
To kick this off I will say this: I’ve begun digging a little into my own workplace and finding that it is not recognized policy for training in the VAERS system. This would seem to be negligence at least, and considering how healthcare administrators/executives like to lean on the defense that, “we’re just following federal orders,” it is a contradiction. Especially in light of brand new shots that are still under EUA status. I am curious to know if any insider healthcare professionals have done any digging as well? If we can produce solid proof to an attorney willing to represent a group of us, could this help to tear down the already violatory shot mandates? I have interesting info that could help on this front.
I would think that if local community members knew that their healthcare facilities (including the biggest employer in the state) aren’t training their healthcare professionals in the VAERS system (they’ve had since 1990 to do so), then they themselves could also seek legal counsel against the shot mandates. Caving to the shot mandates is one thing in itself…but caving to the shots if your local professionals aren’t even trained in reporting adverse events… that’s even worse!
What about personal responsibility? Because we aren’t trained on something by an employer is an excuse not to train ourselves and advocate for our patients (which is a primary responsibility as a nurse)? I see your point and am playing devils advocate. We, as nurses, do have a personal responsibility, though, to advocate and do what is ethical and right.
Yes everyone is personally responsible and should hold themselves to high standards. What I find alarming is this…I’ve been in nursing since 2008 and I don’t ever recall learning about this system that we’re required by law to utilize. I was never trained in it. There’s a possibility that I have personally cared for a great number of vaccine injured patients and never knew any better. I can only recall a very small time frame of nursing education dedicated to vaccines. And all they do is teach us what to look for in the immediate time frame (1-2 hrs) after an injection is given. They never taught us people could have strong reactions or even become disabled 1-4 weeks later. Since I’ve learned about VAERS I’ve done my own reports. But I don’t see much evidence that my own coworkers care to report. And a handful that I’ve asked so far also tell me they never knew of VAERS til I brought it up. And with these COVID shots the potential for injury/death seems to extend even further (months) from injection. One teen I met couldn’t walk right 6 months after injection. Needed physical therapy and assistance. They thought she was stroking…a teen with no prior history except a sibling with seizures.
I think it would be useful to dig up the law that requires this reporting. In my very limited search on this topic, it appeared to be voluntary, and I couldn’t find any sort of penalty for failing to report. Speaking personally, the total immunity of liability (for pharma/government/hospital/employer/etc.) was the primary factor in my family’s decision to avoid it altogether.
For the first bullet, does it mean that patients should essentially be able to prescribe their own treatment? Whether yes or no, what is the intended action item from this effort? Something codified in law? I’m curious why hospital protocols have been so weird in the first place and in contradiction of verified treatment methods.
Yes I agree. I’m having trouble finding the exact law. It is repeated several times throughout the VAERS system. I searched around and found this…any healthcare facility taking part in the federal COVID-19 vaccine program is subject to the reporting requirements. It seems to be worded in such a way that only people giving the vaccines are required to report. However, the “unexpected” injuries and deaths found on VAERS are happening within 1-2 days or as long as 1-4 weeks later. So the required reporting also seems to extend to all healthcare professionals that can give any injection (within their scope) and possess the skills to assess for reactions/adverse events. This includes pretty much all RNs, pharmacists, PAs, and doctors. For example, VAERS talks about required reports of hospitalizations after vaccination. While a patient may have been vaccinated at their doctor’s office, they could show up 5 days later having seizures all of a sudden, their doctor’s office wouldn’t be responsible to report since they didn’t assess the incident.
No, it would give patients the legal right to question the protocol being suggested (they already have the right to refuse any and all treatment), and produce protocols or suggested treatments that have evidence of success elsewhere. Like the FLCCC Alliance’s hospital treatment protocol which includes Ivermectin. Most hospitals will refuse that one particular med. I believe we have some state legislators actually presenting a bill or two which would give patients the backing to try/suggest such treatments inside facilities. Mainly it would protect the jobs of physicians who chose to use the controversial treatment (that goes against their hospital protocols) if they feel, according to their expertise and research that the treatment would offer enough benefit.