|
Post by JohnV on Aug 12, 2019 20:17:12 GMT
Why would a simple ornament pose a risk to patients? I'd say waiting rooms in hospitals where other patients are coughing their lungs out and sneezing and breathing their tuberculosis out, and poorly-trained/educated staff, is more of a risk than a metal cross. Of course, she wouldn't want to take a nap in a magnetic resonance machine in case someone turned it on. Dealt with that. maybe ...... but to be honest it sounded like a justification trotted out to support a poor decision
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 20:18:39 GMT
maybe ...... but to be honest it sounded like a justification trotted out to support a poor decision These things are normally based on research and an evidence base. Not a whim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 20:22:40 GMT
There are some clinical areas were such watches would not be permitted. Equally its about risk management. A watch will often be considered an essential tool for the job for a nurse, and when worn would often be required to a type in a fob that was able to be kept regularly cleansed. A chain around the neck would not be considered an 'essential' tool for the job. I wonder how many nurses have showers before going to work, or use dental floss and brush their teeth every day. I dont know. But quite what you fetish about in your own time really is your own busines.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Aug 12, 2019 20:24:51 GMT
Especially one they have worn to work for how many years. Also the fact that they walk, drive, cycle and catch the bus in their uniforms to the hospital. I don't mind as i get to see all the pretty nurses in their uniforms. Nurses are not allowed to travel to work in uniform these days - infection control. At least that is the case for Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. This seems a little odd. Given that nurses are not permitted to wear crosses because of the risk of cross infection: if said nurse arrives in her 'normal' clothes, then changes into her (sorry, his or her) uniform, is there not the possibility of cross infection (regardless of religious belief) from the nurse's body, to which his or her 'normal' clothes were touching, to his or her uniform? This seems more likely to me, than an infection the nurse may be transporting being limited to their religious metal ware. Perhaps nurses should be required to bathe in disinfectant before starting a shift. Better safe than sorry!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 20:30:05 GMT
Nurses are not allowed to travel to work in uniform these days - infection control. At least that is the case for Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. This seems a little odd. Given that nurses are not permitted to wear crosses because of the risk of cross infection: if said nurse arrives in her 'normal' clothes, then changes into her (sorry, his or her) uniform, is there not the possibility of cross infection (regardless of religious belief) from the nurse's body, to which his or her 'normal' clothes were touching, to his or her uniform? This seems more likely to me, than an infection the nurse may be transporting being limited to their religious metal ware. Perhaps nurses should be required to bathe in disinfectant before starting a shift. Better safe than sorry! Its about risk reduction, not risk elimination.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Aug 12, 2019 20:37:08 GMT
This seems a little odd. Given that nurses are not permitted to wear crosses because of the risk of cross infection: if said nurse arrives in her 'normal' clothes, then changes into her (sorry, his or her) uniform, is there not the possibility of cross infection (regardless of religious belief) from the nurse's body, to which his or her 'normal' clothes were touching, to his or her uniform? This seems more likely to me, than an infection the nurse may be transporting being limited to their religious metal ware. Perhaps nurses should be required to bathe in disinfectant before starting a shift. Better safe than sorry! Its about risk reduction, not risk elimination. I will agree with that. However, Yup. Not adhering to the uniform policy is common place, as is turning a blind eye to it not being adhered to.[/quote] Seems to back up the discrimination point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 20:42:10 GMT
Its about risk reduction, not risk elimination. I will agree with that. However, Yup. Not adhering to the uniform policy is common place, as is turning a blind eye to it not being adhered to. Seems to back up the discrimination point.[/quote] It depends, I dont know the hospital in question or how strictly they enforced their uniform policy. Or how many times the nurse in question was spoken to before they went formal.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 12, 2019 20:43:20 GMT
More than half your body is not human.
Human cells make up only 43% of the body's total cell count. The rest are microscopic colonists.
Understanding this hidden half of ourselves - our microbiome - is rapidly transforming understanding of diseases from allergy to Parkinson's.
The field is even asking questions of what it means to be "human" and is leading to new innovative treatments as a result.
"They are essential to your health," says Prof Ruth Ley, the director of the department of microbiome science at the Max Planck Institute, "your body isn't just you".
No matter how well you wash, nearly every nook and cranny of your body is covered in microscopic creatures.
This includes bacteria, viruses, fungi and archaea (organisms originally misclassified as bacteria). The greatest concentration of this microscopic life is in the dark murky depths of our oxygen-deprived bowels.
"You're more microbe than you are human."
Originally it was thought our cells were outnumbered 10 to one.
"That's been refined much closer to one-to-one, so the current estimate is you're about 43% human if you're counting up all the cells," he says.
But genetically we're even more outgunned.
The human genome - the full set of genetic instructions for a human being - is made up of 20,000 instructions called genes.
But add all the genes in our microbiome together and the figure comes out between two and 20 million microbial genes.
Prof Sarkis Mazmanian, a microbiologist from Caltech, argues: "We don't have just one genome, the genes of our microbiome present essentially a second genome which augment the activity of our own.
"What makes us human is, in my opinion, the combination of our own DNA, plus the DNA of our gut microbes."
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Aug 12, 2019 20:47:49 GMT
More than half your body is not human. Human cells make up only 43% of the body's total cell count. The rest are microscopic colonists. Understanding this hidden half of ourselves - our microbiome - is rapidly transforming understanding of diseases from allergy to Parkinson's. The field is even asking questions of what it means to be "human" and is leading to new innovative treatments as a result. "They are essential to your health," says Prof Ruth Ley, the director of the department of microbiome science at the Max Planck Institute, "your body isn't just you". No matter how well you wash, nearly every nook and cranny of your body is covered in microscopic creatures. This includes bacteria, viruses, fungi and archaea (organisms originally misclassified as bacteria). The greatest concentration of this microscopic life is in the dark murky depths of our oxygen-deprived bowels. "You're more microbe than you are human." Originally it was thought our cells were outnumbered 10 to one. "That's been refined much closer to one-to-one, so the current estimate is you're about 43% human if you're counting up all the cells," he says. But genetically we're even more outgunned. The human genome - the full set of genetic instructions for a human being - is made up of 20,000 instructions called genes. But add all the genes in our microbiome together and the figure comes out between two and 20 million microbial genes. Prof Sarkis Mazmanian, a microbiologist from Caltech, argues: "We don't have just one genome, the genes of our microbiome present essentially a second genome which augment the activity of our own. "What makes us human is, in my opinion, the combination of our own DNA, plus the DNA of our gut microbes." This is exciting news. Armed with this knowledge the NHS can simply halve the weight of all the fat people on its books. Obesity problem: what obesity problem?
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Aug 12, 2019 21:33:06 GMT
Y daughter shares accommodation with another student who is doing a degree in midwifery. Part of her training is hands on and the instructions from her tutors is to launder her own uniform, there are no laundry services provided
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 12, 2019 21:37:24 GMT
Y daughter shares accommodation with another student who is doing a degree in midwifery. Part of her training is hands on and the instructions from her tutors is to launder her own uniform, there are no laundry services provided Perhaps it depends on the area of nursing. People having babies aren’t actually ill! Whereas someone having chemo for a bone marrow transplant has a trashed immune system and thus is very vulnerable to infection.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 21:38:25 GMT
Y daughter shares accommodation with another student who is doing a degree in midwifery. Part of her training is hands on and the instructions from her tutors is to launder her own uniform, there are no laundry services provided That would be unusual. There is no gurantee as to how the uniform is washed regards temperature or product used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 21:43:22 GMT
Y daughter shares accommodation with another student who is doing a degree in midwifery. Part of her training is hands on and the instructions from her tutors is to launder her own uniform, there are no laundry services provided Perhaps it depends on the area of nursing. People having babies aren’t actually ill! Whereas someone having chemo for a bone marrow transplant has a trashed immune system and thus is very vulnerable to infection. Plenty of potential for the uniform to become contaminated with blood, urine, faeces, amniotic and vaginal fluid though. Of course they will be wearing a disposable apron which perhaps the hospital concerned feels is sufficient.?
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Aug 12, 2019 21:50:53 GMT
Perhaps it depends on the area of nursing. People having babies aren’t actually ill! Whereas someone having chemo for a bone marrow transplant has a trashed immune system and thus is very vulnerable to infection. Plenty of potential for the uniform to become contaminated with blood, urine, faeces, amniotic and vaginal fluid though. Of course they will be wearing a disposable apron which perhaps the hospital concerned feels is sufficient.? Exactly. I worked in Pathology for 10 years and my lab coats were not allowed off the premises. I always thought that my working clothes were a hell of a lot cleaner that those staff on the frontline actually touching patients
|
|
|
Post by patty on Aug 13, 2019 7:07:19 GMT
Three points from the many posts Ive read...
I know I'm going back a few years but this is my understanding of some issues raised
1) We were not permitted to wear any jewellery apart from a wedding ring..reason given that agitated patients could grasp at necklaces/ear rings and rip them off..that was enough for me to comply plus the rather messy nature of my area of work I would not want anything personal to be at risk 2) Unfortunately all the changing areas/showers for staff removed at out hospital to put in 'offices' for those 'super nurses' who migrated from the wards to become useless pen pushers dictating policy 3) Laundry of uniforms..never offered at any hospital except the one I trained in when we lived in Nursing Homes...
Therefor through no choice of our own circumstances dictated we travel to work in uniform..return home and launder our own. I would change in our outhouse and put straight in the machine as very often I wore aspects of my job...unavoidable due to the nature of it.
|
|