Some of your members don’t live in the US and live in countries that haven’t bungled the handling of all this. Why should we listen to what the CDC say?
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 Stores Will Continue to Require Masks for Now
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some of your members don’t live in the US and live in countries that haven’t bungled the handling of all this. Why should we listen to what the CDC say?
Apple is so woke, I think they should get into the business of selling caffeine pills. $99/bottle with automatic monthly subscription and delivery.
I don't know what risk is? I do come from a war zone, so stop judging people you don't even know. I have only been only 11 years old when I have first seen a decapitated person and danger is something I have grown up with so I can imagine it may come as a surprise to you that you and your team are not the only people in this world who have been exposed to danger unfortunately. On the facemask subject, I do not like the idea of being forced to wear stuff, I believe it is inhuman and ridiculous and it should never have happened. I have no problem if people choose to wear one, for what I care they can go around wearing a gas mask all day long. But don't you even dare asking me to wear one. I wear one only if I choose and not being forced to do it.
Last edited:
That's what the dictionary may say. however the real meaning of it for most people out there comes with the word pretentious attached, meaning fake.
I’d be inclined to agree with you if masks actually worked, vaccines were 100% effective, and Covid was even remotely close to being as deadly as once projected. But they’re not.
And the vast majority of Americans already agree, the amount of risk they take is their choice. Every time someone leaves their home to go shopping, eat out, take public transportation, visit friends, etc. they risk getting Covid. Heck, people take risks every time they get behind the wheel or opt not to get the latest flu vaccine. Life is full of risks.
So the rules should be made for the majority, not the small minority, who are deathly afraid of Covid… again, based on actual science, not politics or virtue signaling. Otherwise, we might as well have mask mandates and lockdowns for another 50-100 years until Covid is completely wiped out.
I’m not concerned with ignorance among members here. The CDC knows more than Apple when it comes to this virus. Period.
If you want to live in fear and wear a mask the rest of your life go ahead. I’m not doing that and people who are vaccinated shouldn’t be forced to live in fear to accommodate the ignorant.
it’s literally a conspiracy theory website that in this case has taken a small number of studies and done little write ups about them that misrepresent either their findings, their import, or both
Last edited:
And if people choose to reduce their risk by requiring customers to wear masks or get vaccinated, what’s the problem? It won’t affect the majority, just the small minority of Karens too selfish to wear a mask or too scared to get a vaccine. They can stay home.
For those who don't get vaccinated or wear masks they just be well aware by now of the potential consequences of their decisions. I'm fully vaccinated but still will be cautious (i.e. will probably still avoid indoor dining etc for another couple of months) until I see how this shakes out statistically.
That’s absolutely, positively, wrong. https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/06/social-distancing-and-immune-system
It's a symbol of lazy entitlement "masked" as freedom and god-given rights which is why most of the complaints come from Americans. I'm American so I know this and can verify this statement.
No, **this** is absolutely wrong. Vaccination significantly reduces infection. Period.
Additionally, there have been zero confirmed cases of a vaccinated person transmitting the virus...worldwide. Zero. Not saying it can't happen but it's obvious that you are fear-mongering.
You may be right but I've also seen this exact statement (minus the Oprah part) before each new wave of COVID too. Let's not underestimate the power of selfishness again.
BTW, what's wrong with a little theater? I know people that are scared to congregate inside or outside if others around them aren't wearing masks. I don't relish the idea of wearing masks for months or years especially if they're not medically useful, but if I can help someone feel more comfortable and socially adjusted, I am willing to wear a mask even if I believe it is useless. It's simply another form of social manners that we already perform. The mental toll that pandemics take on the population aren't too dissimilar from mass PTSD and deserve some understanding from all of us.
it depends on what you are being vaccinated against how your body produces antibodies and then how they work. For example, with some diseases you get zero symptoms as the antibodies recognise the invader and isolate and remove it. With other vaccines against viruses the immune response can be felt by the host, e.g. you get a temperature or a cough or the sniffles as your body combats the infection. Coronavirus comes under the latter. The range of effectiveness of the vaccines will come into play here too, but either way your body will have at least some immune response to it so symptoms should be less than if you were not vaccinated. it’s highly unlikely that you would be able to pass on the virus. Maybe licking eyeballs or spitting in their mouths
but I doubt it.i do think that people should be forced to wear masks when they have the cold though. I have worked throughout lockdown and been on-site daily with others and I haven’t had a sniffle let alone a cold in over a year. Let’s face it, people are manky filthy gits coughing and spluttering all over the place 🤣normally.
Last edited:
In what way will this make Face ID go away? It works with a mask now.
I’m not arguing either way on most of this stuff here, but those three things (training, licensing, and insurance) are considered risk mitigation factors. You won’t be risk-free with them, but there is evidence that having all three (or even each individually) reduces your risk of driving in some way.
Training (drivers-ed) provides initial overview of how a car operates and instruction on how to actually do it, with a test to make sure you understand what you were taught during training.
licensing provides further mitigation through periodic check-ins (eg appropriate eye-sight and/or corrections in place) and further testing to make sure you understand the basic “rules of the road”.
insurance is a different type of mitigation that provides financial security in cases where accidents may occur (nothing to do with prevention of accidents themselves).
These are similar to the purpose of some preventions against covid today (masks, vaccines, probable boosters, social distancing). None of those will prevent the virus from affecting you, but they can help limit you and your loved ones, and mine, from getting sick and/or dying.
As for some of your arguments (ok, I will argue some), guess what. The government has people on standby to go after you if you go ill-prepared (or even highly prepared) into remote locations (see Search and Rescue/rangers). Going outside during a thunderstorm? At least in the US there are specific warnings and watches provided by the government for those, too (thunderstorm watch/warning, tornado watch/warning, flood watch, warning, you get the idea). So no, the government isn’t going to require you to live risk free, but they will provide methods, guidelines, and warnings for when you should consider not doing something or provide assistance when you may need it. That’s the whole purpose behind masks and vaccines. Risk mitigation. Or would you prefer 16 year olds just be handed the keys to cars and told “go figure it out”.
The funny part about all this is it’s all not just to protect yourselves, but your neighbors. I don’t get why people are being so darn selfish.
I do not want to wear a mask forever, but we need more people to get vaccinated before we have herd immunity. Meanwhile, I am still forced to wear a mask if I want to be serious about my health and the health of others.
That is why you get several masks. And I have not eaten in a public place since lockdown started. I just get carryout and eat at home.
To keep you from dying, or suffering irreversible brain damage, heart damage, lung damage, kidney damage...
if you imagine that wearing a mask is the worst thing that can happen to you in this life, you haven’t been paying attention.
“If you have seatbelts, you shouldn’t need brakes anymore.”
If you treated auto mechanics the way you treat medicine, there would probably be a cross by the side of the highway with your name on it.
"FDA’s analysis of the available efficacy data from 36,523 participants 12 years of age and older without evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to 7 days after dose 2 confirmed the vaccine was 95% effective (95% credible interval 90.3, 97.6) in preventing COVID-19 occurring at least 7 days after the second dose (with 8 COVID-19 cases in the vaccine group compared to 162 COVID-19 cases in the placebo group)."
Sorry, not buying it. People who’ve been to a war zone don’t think that wearing a cloth mask is a big, hot, hairy deal.
Why do people have it in their heads that, in a language with antonyms, you can't prove a negative? If I say "I'm right", that's a provable statement, but if I say "I'm not wrong" it somehow no longer requires proof?
And does no one find irony in the fact that "You can't prove a negative" is itself stated as a negative and thus unprovable under its own logic?
- You made a statement of fact that should be supported by a citation.
- "It has been shown in absolutely ZERO instances that you can pass it to others." is not a negative statement.
- "It has been shown in literally zero instances. Literally. The word literal being applied in its true form." is not a negative statement.
- You can easily link to support a negative statement
- "No Olympic athlete has completed the 100m dash in less than 9 seconds."
- Likewise, "It has been shown in absolutely ZERO instances that an Olympic athlete can complete the 100m dash in less than 9 seconds."
- It is not my responsibility to prove or disprove your statement of fact, it is yours.
That was some careful cherry picking. You must be assuming that the people you're talking to haven't already and aren't capable of reading an article. You managed to only quote the statements that the rest of the article is saying were being walked back by the agency.
Can Vaccinated People Spread the Virus? We Don’t Know, Scientists Say. (Published 2021)
Researchers pushed back after the C.D.C. director asserted that vaccinated people “do not carry the virus.”www.nytimes.com
From your article:
“Dr. Walensky spoke broadly during this interview,” an agency spokesman told The Times. “It’s possible that some people who are fully vaccinated could get Covid-19. The evidence isn’t clear whether they can spread the virus to others. We are continuing to evaluate the evidence.”
It also specifically makes the point that 77 people out of 3950 vaccinated subjects became infected with the disease which refutes your statement that you can't transmit it because you can't be infected with it.
So, contrary to the fallacy of "you can't prove a negative", it turns out to be true that "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In this case, it simply hasn't been looked at and studied. This is why we are continuing to research the subject.
People can become infected with the disease even after vaccination. Infected people can transmit the disease. There is also the possibility that non-infected people can transmit the disease which I haven't seen disproven. This is why we are continuing to research the subject.
Her statements are based on the research the CDC released in this article:
Interim Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA
mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infectionwww.cdc.gov
There is no transmission data anywhere in this article. All this says is that fully vaccinated people are less likely but still able to become infected because the vaccine is only 90% effective.
There are a lot of things that weren't shown in that article, that doesn't make it ok to start claiming they are all facts.
You have shown nothing to support your statement of fact that "it has been shown in literally zero instances" that vaccinated people can transmit the disease. You clearly don't have that information, so please correct your claims that you do.
Last edited: