Funny how the media outright lies to the public, to the point it’s causing death. What’s worse, is that people believe these articles and actively spread misinformation.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Asks All U.S. Employees to Share Vaccination Status, Still No Mandate
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can empathize with that. Long story short: I recently had arthroscopic knee surgery. The docs I first saw were going to kind of blow me off with "try PT to address it." "I need this fixed," I told them. "I lead a very active life, and this is putting a serious crimp in it." So they referred me to their arthroscopic surgeon, he identified the problem, and fixed it.
There's no question it's been mis-handled, both here and elsewhere. I suspect we may disagree on the nature of said mishandling, though
As have my wife and I. Thing is: Where I'm generally quite resistant to whatever's going around, she tends to be quite susceptible.
Early-on, before the pandemic was in full bloom, so to say, my wife and three of her friends went shopping at an Ikea. Have you even seen an Ikea that wasn't packed? Some time after that excursion they all fell ill to one degree or another. Shortly after my wife got sick, but after she'd recovered, I felt I was getting sick. With me it lasted less than twenty-four hours and was gone. Just like that.
Taken together (one of the women had become very ill), the symptoms across the five of us strongly resembled the behavior of Covid-19. Was it? Don't know and, according to my last GP, there's no way for me to find out.
Since... about this time last year (?), I've eased-off the precautions. E.g.: I've been back to my gym. They have no mask requirement and I'd say maybe 1% of the members wear one. We are all mostly pretty aggressive about post-equipment-use disinfection, though not all are. I asked the owner if she knew of any member that had come down with Covid-19. Nope.
I can vouch for that. I was recently hospitalized for a stroke risk evaluation. Spent twenty hours in the hospital. Talked at some length with my nurses and nurse PAs. I found a disturbing degree of job dissatisfaction.
Thing is: Not all of them are burned-out as a direct result of Covid-19. It turns out many nurses and other medical professionals are as leery of the vaccinations as I. The hospitals are beginning to demand they get vaccinated. Some are resigning, rather than submit. (We personally know one nurse that did just that.) This is increasing the load on the remaining staff.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Like I said: I got a lot of odd looks when I was the first one I saw regularly wearing a mask. I found it amusing
I really don't care what others do or do not do. You live your life. I'll live mine. [*]Personally, I've found refusing to go along with or react to the madness to be fairly effective as a means by which to be left out of it
[*] I do find certain religious garb disquieting. But that's a cultural thing. Westerners grow up inured to the belief that people who purposely disguise or hide their features are up to no good. It's an automatic visceral reaction I can consciously suppress, but it will probably never go away.
Anybody who continues to believe anything the dominant "news" media promulgates, with the number of times it's lied by omission or just outright made stuff up, well...
E.g.: The other night one of the local "news" segments did a thing on Apple's CSAM scanning thing. They got every last detail of what Apple planned to do and how they were going to do it wrong. And not just a little wrong. Entirely wrong. Never mind entirely failing to even mention there were objections to Apple's plan. Mainly it was a nice little puff piece on what a wonderful thing it was Apple was doing
Years and years ago I was a news junkie. At any point in time was subscribed to 2-3 news magazines (Time, USN&WR, etc.) and 2-3 local newspapers. Then, one day, I was reading a news story in one of my news magazines on a subject with which I was intimately familiar. Imagine my surprise to find they had gotten every last fact and detail entirely wrong, and were not-so-subtly suggesting political action to fix problems they'd entirely mis-identified.
After that I started reading, watching, and listening to "news" stories with more jaundiced eyes and ears. As the years have gone by I've watched "news" become less news more badly-scripted entertainment and propaganda. To the point where, now, I regard it as best avoided entirely. Better nothing at all than a constant stream of lies and misdirection.
My last girlfriend before the woman to whom I'm now married had a degree in journalism. Graduated Summa Cum Laude. She left the field of "journalism" in complete disgust sometime prior to the early 1980s. One time told me "I'm embarrassed to even admit I have a degree in journalism or that I worked as a journalist."
(It was from that girlfriend I learned how to write well. She was utterly merciless with a red pen
Last edited:
I don't even get a flu shot, so why would i be ok with this ? Hope this doesn't come to WA, Australia, we don't need it as there is nothing here....
Keep it in NSW/VIC where it matters most. When it does get in, then you can do it. but it doesn't make sense to force people to show proof of vaccinated in a state when there are no cases in the community.
States have their own rules anyway regarding lockdown's/and how effective it is etc... why should this one be any different?
Keep it in NSW/VIC where it matters most. When it does get in, then you can do it. but it doesn't make sense to force people to show proof of vaccinated in a state when there are no cases in the community.
States have their own rules anyway regarding lockdown's/and how effective it is etc... why should this one be any different?
Last edited:
For now.
I'm an oddity here, because of my time spent in Australia. I'm a huge AFL fan, and have been for the past 27 years. So I've followed every season for a long while, especially the past two, where they created the hubs for all of the teams to sit in to stay COVID free. There were some outbreaks in Perth both during and offseason of last year, and while they have been able to keep it minimal, there were were at least 1,000 cases in WA on the whole. So while that is minimal compared to VIC, NSW or QLD (they've registered less in Cairns), it's definitely there.
It would be better the other way around. If you get vaccinated before it gets to you, you'd have less severe cases leading to death, let alone major cases at all. being proactive on this is better than being reactive.
The differences in the lockdowns each state have could be the factor in how the virus gets in to begin with. VIC was locked down, and NSW closed its borders to VIC to prevent COVID from getting in, yet it still got in, even though QLD and SA didn't have any cases. Vice versa happened with NSW. VIC closed its borders to NSW when VIC had it under control, and VIC still got it.
If they standardized on protocols for lockdowns then every state would unilaterally have the same chances of stopping the outbreaks, let alone preventing any new outbreaks from occurring.
BL.
Because when states are setting new records for infected people, and deaths, this should say something about what's going through their population.
So after seeing Shang-Chi (pretty good, not my favorite though)… I actually wore my mask the entire time. The guy sitting next to me didn’t, ask he was eating popcorn and drinking soda the entire movie. Huh. Yea…
Still irrelevant legal theory, arm chair legal expert.
im still unvaccinated doing whatever I want. How does this apply to me again?
Because as an non vaccinated individual you are exempted from certain venues. You may be required to get a vaccination as a condition of employment. You’re rights are already constrained…because you don’t care is irrelevant.
You still don't get it. It isn't a theory. It is a ruling handed down by SCOTUS, whether anyone likes it or not. But feel free to look it up for yourself; don't be upset at anyone else when you are proven wrong, though.
@I7guy explained it very succinctly for you. Your rights and your choice are already limited, whether you like it or not. They have been limited - as far as vaccinations go - for the past 116 years. If a place or venue posts a since that says "no vaccine, no entry", or demands proof that you have been vaccinated, or even requires you to get vaccinated then and there, they have the right and legal backing to enforce their demands, regardless of what you think your choices are.
Don't like it? Blame SCOTUS and naivety of what your rights are, but don't blame anyone else, especially when they have shown you the information that proves what is wrong.
BL.
Let’s see how I have been limited:
Job: Doesn’t care
Movie theaters: don’t care
Restaurants: don’t care
Gyms: don’t care
Shopping centers and stores: don’t care
Public transportation: doesn’t care
Metro system: doesn’t care
Airports: doesn’t care
not once have been asked to produce any proof of vaccination at any of these places. Or ever for that fact. Still not seeing how this effects me.
“But but broadway plays”
"Before closing this opinion we deem it appropriate, in order to prevent misapprehension as to our views, to observe—perhaps to repeat a thought already sufficiently expressed, namely—that the police power of a state, whether exercised directly by the legislature, or by a local body acting under its authority, may be exerted in such circumstances, or by regulations so arbitrary and oppressive in particular cases, as to justify the interference of the courts to prevent wrong and oppression. Extreme cases can be readily suggested. Ordinarily such cases are not safe guides in the administration of the law. It is easy, for instance, to suppose the case of an adult who is embraced by the mere words of the act, but yet to subject whom to vaccination in a particular condition of his health or body would be cruel and inhuman in the last degree. We are not to be understood as holding that the statute was intended to be applied to such a case, or, if it was so intended, that the judiciary would not be competent to interfere and protect the health and life of the individual concerned. 'All laws,' this court has said, 'should receive a sensible construction. General terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence. It will always, therefore, be presumed that the legislature intended exceptions to its language which would avoid results of this character. The reason of the law in such cases should prevail over its letter.' United States v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 482, 19 L. ed. 278; Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U. S. 47, 58, 36 L. ed. 340, 344, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 517. Until otherwise informed by the highest court of Massachusetts, we are not inclined to hold that the statute establishes the absolute rule that an adult must be vaccinated if it be apparent or can be shown with reasonable certainty that he is not at the time a fit subject of vaccination, or that vaccination, by reason of his then condition, would seriously impair his health, or probably cause his death. No such case is here presented. It is the cause of an adult who, for aught that appears, was himself in perfect health and a fit subject of vaccination, and yet, while remaining in the community, refused to obey the statute and the regulation adopted in execution of its provisions for the protection of the public health and the public safety, confessedly endangered by the presence of a dangerous disease."
Is a private venue a local body acting with the authority of the state legislature vis a vis police power?
Perhaps more simply: how does this ruling relate to a venue that takes it upon itself to implement a vaccine requirement prior to entry? The ruling talks about statutes, and near the end seems to say it is only limited to this one statute without judicial notice of any reason why the pastor cannot be vaccinated.
Be curious to get the take of any legal beagles here.
Is a private venue a local body acting with the authority of the state legislature vis a vis police power?
Perhaps more simply: how does this ruling relate to a venue that takes it upon itself to implement a vaccine requirement prior to entry? The ruling talks about statutes, and near the end seems to say it is only limited to this one statute without judicial notice of any reason why the pastor cannot be vaccinated.
Be curious to get the take of any legal beagles here.
you are still completely missing the point
none of these places may care currently in your jurisdiction, but if any of them change their policies you will have no legal recourse.
where I live, for example, one will need to show proof of vaccination beginning 13 September for the following of your examples: movie theatre, restaurant, gyms. as well many employers here are requiring proof of vaccination.
now I am not in the United States to be clear, but the point as explained by @bradl still stands: in the United States, any of these venues can decide to require proof of vaccination at any time and you will have to provide it
“My jurisdiction”, is the capital of the United States of America. Washington DC. It’s also one of the most liberal major cities in the US.
Your jurisdiction can change their policies at any given point, and when they do and require you to be vaccinated to do anything, whether you like it or not, your rights are limited.
Right now, SCOTUS has given the legal backing that people can be required to be vaccinated - to the point of even being forced to be vaccinated - so your rights/your choice do not have any legal standing. Not even the religious aspect has any standing, according to Jacobson; in fact, the only standing that does is a medical reason, and the forcing of the vaccination could threaten the life of the patient, which results in an 8A violation.
Again, you still miss the point. You believe that the places you go "don't care". You fail to understand that the places you go have the ability to change their requirements at any time, and you don't have a bloody thing to say or do in recourse. That goes for any place: From Washington, DC, to Dutch Harbor, Alaska, to Guam. Location doesn't matter; SCOTUS and their ruling in Jacobson does, and is paramount.
BL.
Last edited:
That‘s hilarious. Vaccination cards can be printed off the internet. And if you’ve had Covid, no one will have any way of proving you didn’t get vaccinated, since you’ll test positive for antibodies.
And that has what to do with it being your "your body/your choice" to get vaccinated, when SCOTUS has ruled that you can be legally required - if not forced - to be vaccinated?
Ahh, yes.. that's right: nothing.
BL.
You claimed people “don't have a bloody thing to say or do in recourse,” which was silly nonsense. These mandates can be evaded with a decent copier or printer.
But even if that wasn’t the case, who’s going to “force” people to get vaccinated? A bunch of wimpy Covid dorks? Please.
Yet what you are advocating is breaking the law. Think about what you're saying.
The government will force them, just like they did Jacobson, when he refused the smallpox vaccine. He then was forced to be vaccinated. Wash/rinse/repeat with COVID.
Besides.. look back at your own shot records; did you have this same issue when you were vaccinated against pertussis? Chicken pox? Measles? Smallpox? If you didn't, then you're arguing with yourself, because you are railing against the very thing you were compliant in when you were vaccinated against those viruses.
BL.
I didn’t “advocate” anything.
The government is going to round up and forcibly vaccinate tens of millions of people?
Get a grip. You’re embarrassing yourself.
I was maybe 5 years old when I got those vaccinations, genius, and unlike with Covid, I didn’t have natural immunity from having had any of those diseases previously.
I thought you people were big on “the science”?
Really? Your own words:
You are implying that one can easily circumvent any mandate by forging their own vaccination records. My point stands.
They did in 1905. You may want to read up on that case and events after the case.
How about reading up on the history of our country. The lack of is grounds for even more embarrassment, let alone naivety and ignorance of the laws of our country.
BL.
I didn’t “imply” anything. I explicitly stated a basic fact, which isn’t the same thing as “advocating” said fact.
Joe Biden is going to have tens of millions of Americans rounded up and forcibly vaccinated? That’s hilarious. You seem to be suffering from fever dreams. Perhaps a Covid test is in order. I’ve heard that new Mu variant is a real doozy. Or maybe the Lambda variant? Who can keep up?
Roosevelt did, and it got the smallpox vaccine out to millions of people in this country 115 years ago.
I happen to know the history of the laws in this country, where others apparently do not; various posts in this thread show that, including the past 2-5.
I'm fully vaccinated, thank you very much, per mandate for working at Intel as well as our state's Department of Public Health. And while the sentiment is appreciated, the naivety shown in deference to "my body/my choice" is makes your suggestion neither desired nor required.
BL.