Is it true that vaccinated people are counted as non vaccinated for 14 days?

[okie]

Someone told me that people are not counted as being vaccinated until 14 days after their second dose, with the implication that a lot of the people who are being counted as non vaccinated deaths may in fact be vaccinated after all. The biggest statistic being used to support the vaccine is the alleged 90+% of covid deaths being among the non vaccinated.

I've also been told by some people who are against the vaccine that they run more cycles when performing the PCR test on patients who are counted as non vaccinated, which I guess would include people who had taken the vaccine but weren't "fully vaccinated" according to that strict definition. The implication there is that not only are some of these deaths in fact vaccinated people, but that they might not have even had covid at all, and may have died of the ordinary flu, for example.

Not saying any of this is true, but rather looking for verification if anyone has any factual information that's not just hearsay. For example if you're a nurse or doctor or know someone who is and know what the internal policy is in your/their institution in particular, I would be interested in hearing that. I'm kind of thinking these policies might be dependent on state and maybe even individual healthcare providers.

[mRad]

It takes 14 days to develop the antibodies at a level which it is said to be effective. Per the manufacturers as well as what lab testing shows.

I don’t see how it could vary by policy, unless the policy is to ignore the research and recommendations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DG23]

Someone told me that people are not counted as being vaccinated until 14 days after their second dose, with the implication that a lot of the people who are being counted as non vaccinated deaths may in fact be vaccinated after all. The biggest statistic being used to support the vaccine is the alleged 90+% of covid deaths being among the non vaccinated.

Could be that they mean 'not fully protected' instead of 'not vaccinated'.

With dogs (think puppy shots here), Only a fool would think their puppy is 'protected' one day after the first round of shots. They are not as it takes time for the dogs body to build the immunity after the shots. Generally speaking, Your puppy is not considered 'safe' or 'fully protected' until a few weeks after the last round of shots. In some cases with particular breeds that are more susceptible to particular diseases often times Vets / Breeders with add one additional round of whatever particular vaccine to better insure that immunity is achieved. (Parvo is a good example here)

None of these Covid vaccines were tested anywhere near as thoroughly as the Vaccines that our dogs get...

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Who picks up whom's poop....

They even say in reports "Fully vaccinated 14 days after your second shot" in all the reports. Look at the rate of vacinations now, it isn't that high. The number of people in the month between the first shot and two past their second isn't that great. If anything, they would help the survival rates of the 'unvaxxed' since even one shot is helpful, though not as good as two shots + a paycheck.

[markm]

the implication that a lot of the people who are being counted as non vaccinated deaths may in fact be vaccinated after all. The biggest statistic being used to support the vaccine is the alleged 90+% of covid deaths being among the non vaccinated.

None of the stats/number should be trusted under any circumstances. It doesn't matter. They're made up to fit the agenda of getting people to get a vaccine that DOES NOT WORK, and could have God knows what type of long term damage to the body/brain.

[davidjinks]

Hey! You better watch out or the “getyourvaccineandsavetheworld” nazis are gonna track you down and give you a what for mister!

None of the stats/number should be trusted under any circumstances. It doesn't matter. They're made up to fit the agenda of getting people to get a vaccine that DOES NOT WORK, and could have God knows what type of long term damage to the body/brain.

[okie]

None of the stats/number should be trusted under any circumstances. It doesn't matter. They're made up to fit the agenda of getting people to get a vaccine that DOES NOT WORK, and could have God knows what type of long term damage to the body/brain.

I don't think the stats are made up. But I think there's a disconnect between how the data is collected and used by healthcare providers, vs. how it's reported by the politicians and bureaucrats.

The healthcare providers don't give a rat's ass about accurately saying who's positive and who's not. What they care about is risk assessment, and to that end they're adopting policies that would far rather produce false positives than false negatives. If they put a bunch of people in isolation who don't actually have covid, that's no big deal, as long as they have the beds and staff to do it. Whereas if they put a bunch of people who do have it in the general population, that's a huge liability for them. So what they're going to do is adjust their policies to be as cautious as they can afford to be. I.e. if they have plenty of beds, they'll run as many PCR cycles as they can as policy, knowing full well it's producing lots of false positives, and not caring.

But then the media takes that data and spins it as absolute truth, when in reality it's a set of statistical probabilities that are heavily weighted towards false positives.

[okie]

It takes 14 days to develop the antibodies at a level which it is said to be effective. Per the manufacturers as well as what lab testing shows.

I don’t see how it could vary by policy, unless the policy is to ignore the research and recommendations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No I'm talking about how each hospital collects and records the data, as well as how that data is compiled into the stats we see on the news. Like I don't know, maybe some hospitals have a category for vaxxed but not protected, whereas maybe others just have the unvaxxed category, and maybe when the news tells us that 90% of people with covid in hospitals are unvaxxed, you know, maybe at least some of them are vaxxed but only have one or aren't two weeks out from the second one.

So I would like to know, out of those people who are considered unvaxxed, how many of them have one or both shots. If it's like 40% or less then you could surmise that it's nothing to do with the vaccine. But if the majority of those who are considered to be unvaxxed have in fact taken one or both, then you have to consider the possibility that the vaccine is causing antibody dependent enhancement. Or worse. If it's true that they're running 45 cycles on them, you would even have to consider the possibility that they don't even have covid period, and that it's the spike proteins themselves killing them. That's not far fetched, because the mechanism by which the vaccine injures people (the spike protein) is the same mechanism by which the virus injures them, so the deaths would look very similar. And with the revelation that the vaccine's spike proteins don't stay in the arm, but are in fact systemic, we have to at least consider that possibility going forward, especially before giving it to young children.

[mRad]

No I'm talking about how each hospital collects and records the data, as well as how that data is compiled into the stats we see on the news. Like I don't know, maybe some hospitals have a category for vaxxed but not protected, whereas maybe others just have the unvaxxed category, and maybe when the news tells us that 90% of people with covid in hospitals are unvaxxed, you know, maybe at least some of them are vaxxed but only have one or aren't two weeks out from the second one.

So I would like to know, out of those people who are considered unvaxxed, how many of them have one or both shots. If it's like 40% or less then you could surmise that it's nothing to do with the vaccine. But if the majority of those who are considered to be unvaxxed have in fact taken one or both, then you have to consider the possibility that the vaccine is causing antibody dependent enhancement. Or worse. If it's true that they're running 45 cycles on them, you would even have to consider the possibility that they don't even have covid period, and that it's the spike proteins themselves killing them. That's not far fetched, because the mechanism by which the vaccine injures people (the spike protein) is the same mechanism by which the virus injures them, so the deaths would look very similar. And with the revelation that the vaccine's spike proteins don't stay in the arm, but are in fact systemic, we have to at least consider that possibility going forward, especially before giving it to young children.

You’re reading too much into it. There are no lists or data collections. But that’s how long it takes the antibodies to build.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Averageman]

None of the stats/number should be trusted under any circumstances. It doesn't matter. They're made up to fit the agenda of getting people to get a vaccine that DOES NOT WORK, and could have God knows what type of long term damage to the body/brain.

This is pretty much my observation.