
Larry Page "providing free flu shots to all San Francisco bay area kids" - ck2
https://plus.google.com/+LarryPage/posts/32xY3Z1zckL
======
aarondf
I'm kind of amazed that a story like this can _still_ elicit negative
responses here. Maybe the gov't should provide this, maybe not. Either way: it
doesn't right now, but Larry Page just did. I think that is pretty cool.
Bravo.

~~~
mikeash
It's pretty crazy. This is a mildly interesting story about an act of charity
by a person who got wealthy in tech, that's it.

~~~
vectorbunny
I applaud the practical impact of this act, however I do not view it as
charity. Acts of charity are anonymous. Charitable donations made in a highly
public manner are publicity.

~~~
cafard
1\. Some authorities recommend anonymity (I think Maimonides spoke well of it)
or at least discretion, as in the various New Testament injunctions. However,
some acts of charity cannot be accomplished anonymously (cf. the parable of
the Good Samaritan). 2\. Larry Ellison needs more publicity about as much as
Kevin Durant needs elevator shoes. If he wishes to spend the money on
providing flu shots rather than on yacht or spouse upgrades, I'm not going to
blame him.

~~~
kylemaxwell
Um, this is Larry Page not Ellison. Very different men in many ways.

~~~
cafard
My bad.

------
nsxwolf
Note to self: If I ever become rich and decide to donate something to a bunch
of kids... don't let HN find out...

~~~
tonecluster
New rule: don't hire anyone who's posted abject idiocy in a comment thread on
HN :/

~~~
unalone
Oh, don't say that. Better for people to say stupid things and be debated over
them and evolve their opinions than for people to politely say nothing at all
and remain fools forever.

Hacker News was a wonderful place for college-age unalone to work out his
thoughts and stances with people who like telling each other how wrong they
are about everything. I've said some very dumb things under this account name,
and I don't regret saying any of them.

~~~
tonecluster
OK, very fair point. Thank you.

------
tokenadult
The previous submission of Larry Page's Google+ post

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4874293>

led me to his post, where I commented, and where I was APPALLED to see how
many people were making blatantly unscientific statements about vaccines, with
one even saying, "Just google it" (without providing any links) to introduce
flat-wrong statements. A follow-up comment of mine was,

"+Larry Page I'm wondering if your head hurts as much as mine does when people
say 'Just Google it' to recommend websites full of incorrect information not
based on science or rational thought. More work still needs to be done in
developing the public's research skills so that most people can distinguish
reliable sources from unreliable sources that happen to turn up in an online
search. "

Ouch. I guess the co-founder of Google is seeing an example in the comments to
his Google+ post of how ignorant people stay ignorant even when they use the
world's best search engine. I wonder what the search quality team at Google
can do about issues like this.

~~~
yuhong
Sometimes it is as simple as confusing different kinds, such as H1N1 vs normal
flu vaccines.

------
mcmatterson
The nobility / motivation for this act aside, I can't believe this is still
even a thing.

Honestly, I find it incredible that there's even debate about this. Nobody
thinks twice about things like transportation infrastructure or monetary
policy being publicly administered, but the second health care is involved,
all sense seems to go out the window. How someone can think that health is
less of an inalienable right than access to roads or free markets is beyond
me.

~~~
hermannj314
Imagine if everyone were required to sign up for a food/water plan to make
sure they and their children would be covered for all of their food related
needs. Employers would be required to pay a percentage of food plans premiums
for all full-time employees. And if you don't buy a food plan you will be
fined $700 annually by the Federal government.

The benefit is that you could never be denied basic access to food/water for
the rest of your life. Of course, the government would decide what sort of
food each food plan offers and how much grocers can charge for food.

I mean, food is just as much an inalienable right as health, right? So all
sense would go out the window if you don't agree with this?

~~~
mahyarm
The main difference in this case, you can get other people sick with your
contagious illness.

~~~
hermannj314
I'm not against vaccinations, I agree. A vaccinated public is something
everyone benefits from. I was responding to healthcare in general, sorry for
the confusion.

------
bcx
I think this makes a ton of business sense. 1) Children are near the top
disease spreaders 2) Less sick children means less sick employees 3) Less sick
children means less employees spending time with their sick kids 4) Everyone
wins!

~~~
zem
he's doing it _personally_. out of his own money. out of a desire to do his
bit not to have flu spread around. why would you even be speculating on
whether this makes "business sense"?

~~~
derleth
> why would you even be speculating on whether this makes "business sense"?

Why not?

Also, it might make it more likely to happen next year if it makes good
business sense this year.

------
zoowar
While this is admirable, public health should be funded by the public through
taxes and not the whims of the 1%.

~~~
throwit1979
So...

Coerced charity is better than actual charity? If I do good deed X at the
point of a gun, I am a better person than someone who does it of their own
accord? Really?

~~~
Cushman
Any contractual obligation, any transaction, is implicitly backed by the
threat of violence. If you believe free enterprise can be more effective than
government assistance, _you_ believe "coerced charity" is better.

You got anything better than platitudes?

~~~
stevesearer
The problem with that is that "coerced charity" through taxation is not a
contractual obligation one willingly enters into. Did you sign something
saying you would pay taxes for government assisted programs? I know I didn't.

Non-coerced charitable donations are more effective because individuals are
putting their own dollars to causes they care about, and therefore have an
actual interest in seeing their dollars be spent wisely.

~~~
Cushman
By being born in the United States, and as a child of citizens of the United
States, I became a citizen of the United States. This entitles me to rights,
like the ability to travel anywhere I like across the continent without
impediment, as well as to obligations, like paying taxes on my income or
military service in the event of war.

The obvious implication of this arrangement is that I rely on the United
States every moment of my life, I wouldn't exist in the first place without
the United States, and I owe something back to the United States for putting
that whole thing together for me. _But_ , if that's just a bridge too far, the
United States is reluctantly willing to wash its hands of the whole thing and
walk away if I am-- all I have to do is _live somewhere else_.

I've never understood what makes this concept difficult or complex.

~~~
stevesearer
I don't think that is a difficult concept to understand, but the implication
of it is that you don't actually have a right to own property. If you own a
home, you are merely using your country's land temporarily. If you perform a
job and receive wages, those wages are not yours - but instead they belong to
the country.

What I believe is that people innately have rights, regardless of what
government regime happens to preside over them. The best governments are ones
that are set up to protect those innate rights. To protect rights by taking
rights away is a concept that doesn't make sense to me.

~~~
unalone
I'd modify your "people innately have rights" to "there are freedoms which
benefit both individuals and the communities they're a part of, which should
be treated as innate rights." A bit wordier, but useful in defining what,
specifically, entitles us to any particular right.

Personally, I think our right to health is more precious than our right to
property or wealth. I'm not opposed to wealth by any means, and
entrepreneurialism is a wonderfully fun enterprise, but they are lesser
concerns than whether or not people are dying for preventable reasons.
Ideally, a government encourages both health and entrepreneurialism by finding
ways to pay people searching for more effective healthcare, then by rewarding
the people who find it, but that's not what we're debating here.

The answer to "Should the government take my money to pay for somebody else's
flu shot, if they cannot afford it?" is a near-unequivocal yes, for me, with
the one condition being that I have enough money to afford that flu shot for
them. Some people can pay for many more flu shots than I can, and I do believe
that it's moral to request that they do so.

------
Apocryphon
Unfortunately, all I can think about is how the conspiracy theorists will
respond. "Billionaire providing free VACCINES? Google?!? SAN FRANCISCO?!?!"

~~~
tcgv
If I recall correctly this has already been covered in an episode of The
Simpsons. Free vacines are just a means for the government (now Google) to
control our minds, Ned Flanders had it all figured out!

~~~
dEnigma
"Simpsons did it!" -General Disarray

------
bensw
I'm glad Larry has finally answered definitively how to end parentheticals
with smilies.

------
hermannj314
Buy a kid a $10 flu shot, vaccinate him for a year. Teach a kid to buy his own
$10 flu shot, vaccinate him for a lifetime.

~~~
tomkarlo
Yay, child labor.

------
k-mcgrady
The amount of negativity and even in anger in the HN comments here is amazing.
A successful entrepreneur uses some of his money to provide children with
vaccines - how can people respond badly to that?

------
mvleming
I think this is a nice gesture by a public figure. I don't think this is
something to take seriously as an approach to a long-term goal, but instead as
something to be inspired by. Thanks Larry Page. :)

------
ck2
Let's see, maybe 900k kids, even if it was discounted in bulk to $10, that's
$9 million.

If half the kids take advantage of it and it's really $20 in bulk, same $9
million.

~~~
GICodeWarrior
cdc.gov has price lists for the vaccine. Apparently individual doses are
around $1 each. You still need someone to administer it, but Target may be
providing that.

[http://198.246.98.21/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-...](http://198.246.98.21/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-
management/price-list/index.html) (cdc.gov isn't resolving at the moment)

~~~
danielweber
Yes, the challenge is not the physical products. It's the labor of getting it
to people and administering it.

(I still haven't gotten my free flu shot at CVS because there is always a long
line there.)

~~~
parsnips
Free healthcare, long lines? Say it ain't so.

~~~
lostlogin
As a counter to that view, my daughter needed an eye operation 3 weeks ago,
squint correction, 2 muscles on each eye. Saw the specialist, operation 8 days
later. If I'd had a choice of date it would have been further away. New
Zealand, tax payer funded (so not free as such), socialised cost. Successful
operation. Edit: auto correct issues

------
afterburner
Flu shots aren't free in the US? I suppose I should have guessed.

------
dfxm12
One can provide free flu shots, or one can pay for flu shots. Obviously, Larry
did one or the other. Otherwise, it would be quite a publicity stunt to claim
to be paying for something that was free. :)

~~~
ck2
Point taken, slight title edit. Will probably be changed by mod or automated
reversion anyway.

------
kyllo
Are the kids required to present proof of Google+ activity first?

~~~
joey_muller
Haha. Exactly what I was thinking. I am sure there's a "Vaccinated by Larry
Group on Google+" group coming soon.

------
iterationx
"if we do a really great job on new vaccines... we could lower [world
population] by 10 or 15 percent" - Bill Gates

~~~
DanBC
"First we've got population. Now, the world today has 6.8 billion people.
That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great on new
vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by,
perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3."

------
stevewilhelm
Glad to see him following the Gates' lead.

------
microkernel
Interesting Meta-Analysis of the Cochrane Collaboration:
[http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004879/vaccines-for-
preventi...](http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004879/vaccines-for-preventing-
influenza-in-healthy-children)

------
photorized
As someone said here, best charity is anonymous. Meanwhile, Brin is in the
news for scooping up properties and renting them out "to the needy". I
remember the press Page and Brin were getting 5 or 6 years ago for helping out
a filmmaker... to the tune of 200 or 250k. Many people I know do more, and
more often, without any kind of public praise.

This kind of publicity should really cost more. And if you truly care about
helping people, make an anonymous donation, instead of milking it for all its
worth.

------
nicholassmith
Well done to Larry Page, doesn't matter if its a PR (which I doubt) situation,
he's directly improving the quality of life for a large group. Kudos to him.
Flu seems trivial but often ends up distinctly not in kids.

------
thechangster
Larry Page, major germaphobe, disinfects entire Bay Area.

------
dhlabs
time for tim cook to step up

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Free $9 lattes to everyone with a Macbook Pro and in the $250,000 or more tax
bracket!

No, just kidding, they'll horde it for lawsuits.

~~~
calebhc
I was getting my hopes up... :p

------
knowaveragejoe
Ladies and gentlemen, start your conspiracy engines.

------
dude3
Props and this is a great thing. But it shouldn't erase all the morally bad
things Google is actively doing. It's like a Dictator giving candy to the kids
for the cameras while still actively oppressing people behind the scenes.
There does happen to be a huge FTC case (that will be probably dropped) and a
possible DOJ case against Google right now.

------
gsibble
Free for children? Shame that Apple's factory workers don't live in San
Francisco. ZING!

------
kyro
This is ridiculous. Why doesn't he spend more of his time and money building
Google's customer service? Has everyone suddenly forgotten the Google Apps
story from yesterday? They presumably stopped giving out free accounts to
maximize profits, and yet this imbecile is going around burning his cash on
preventing the spread of influenza and other diseases.

Your self-driving vehicles are the future, Larry. Why would you invest in
helping more people survive when we'll actually end up leading _less_ of them
because of all the driver/cab jobs you'll be eliminating?

~~~
kyro
This is a joke.

~~~
jrockway
I found it amusing.

------
fuzzieozzie
If this an experiment? Is it the 1% being magnanimous? Is this that he doesn't
want his employees to get the flu?

Nevertheless a nice gesture - though there may be more effective ways to spend
the $$$ on the public good.

~~~
CodeCube
It would be nice if he's just being magnanimous, but I actually hope it's an
experiment ... will there be a notable difference in flu rates in the area as
a result of this? will there be any other statistical blips that can be
correlated to fewer infections? I'm hoping they're tracking the heck out of
this effort :P

~~~
ck2
I vaguely remember Google had a flu tracker last year.

Ah here it is <http://www.google.org/flutrends/>

You are right, it will be interesting to see if this makes a difference
statistically.

Unfortunately their tracker doesn't go down to metro areas, only state.

Oh wait, there are a few cities, here is SF
<http://www.google.org/flutrends/us/#1014221>

~~~
danielweber
It probably won't even show up. There have been some unintentional experiments
with the flu vaccine, such as the year production got botched or that the
people in charge of predicting which strains to include guessed wrong. There
were no noticeable increases in sickness or morbidity in those years.

Don't take this too far; the data is _very_ noisy and maybe it was there and
we just didn't see it. Flu vaccines do seem to work in labs and in small
community experiments.

------
livestyle
If you think flu shots are good then this is good but if you know the truth
about flu shots it's quite scary.

~~~
cloudwalking
If you think vaccines are bad you need to get a better education.

~~~
maratd
Actually, you should educate yourself. The overwhelming majority of vaccines
_are_ solid and probably one of the most important discoveries mankind has
ever made.

The flu "vaccine" however, is at best 50% effective and is frequently 0%
effective. Notice how you have to vaccinate every year for it? But not for
anything else? Yeah, it's because it's constantly mutating and it's a moving
target.

We still haven't figured out how to nail that target. What's worse, you need
to go to a doctor to get vaccinated ... guess where the majority of infections
occur? The place where many people congregate. Especially sick people.

I'm all for vaccinations, but not if they have to be done on an annual basis
and are best-case-scenario 50% effective.

~~~
jfb
This is flat out idiotic.

1\. The influenza vaccine _is_ a vaccine. Putting "vaccine" in scare quotes is
either ignorant or utterly disingenuous. Or, more likely, both.

2\. Even 50% efficacy is sufficient to dramatically reduce both the incidence
and mortality of the disease.

3\. The number of people who develop influenza because they got sneezed on in
line waiting to get their vaccination is _insignificant_ compared to the
number of people who _won't get sick_ because people get vaccinated.

~~~
maratd
> This is flat out idiotic.

So nothing I said is factually incorrect, but what I wrote is idiotic? Good
job.

> The influenza vaccine is a vaccine. Putting "vaccine" in scare quotes is
> either ignorant or utterly disingenuous. Or, more likely, both.

Perfectly justified considering it's much less effective than other vaccines.
So it is a "vaccine".

> Even 50% efficacy is sufficient to dramatically reduce both the incidence
> and mortality of the disease.

That's the best case scenario. What exactly is the benefit if it's 5%? What if
it's 0%? Those are real percentages from years over the last decade.

Last year was very good. This year? Who knows.

> The number of people who develop influenza because they got sneezed on in
> line waiting to get their vaccination is insignificant compared to the
> number of people who won't get sick because people get vaccinated.

You realize you can get something _else_ there too, right? And you'll get it
by touching the door or the doctor not washing their hands ... not by somebody
sneezing at you.

~~~
jfb
Are you _really_ saying that risk of nosocomial infection is sufficient to
offset the value of influenza vaccination? _Really_?

~~~
maratd
Influenza is a horrible virus. I want it eradicated as much as anyone. What I
don't want is for us to pretend we have a solution, when we clearly do not.

 _That removes the incentive for us to find a real answer._

I took my infant daughter to get her second flu shot last week (babies get
two). She contracted a stomach virus at the doctors' office. She was puking
for hours, repeatedly, even when she had nothing to throw up. We took her to
the emergency room. A day later, fever and diarrhea for me. Same for my wife.
Fun, right?

If my baby doesn't get the flu, this will count as a success story. Part of
the "50%" that worked. I don't even want to think about the years they don't
get up to that 50% ...

And I'm supposed to do this every year?

> Are you really saying that risk of nosocomial infection is sufficient to
> offset the value of influenza vaccination? Really?

Yes. If you think I'm off, I want to see _math_ , not hysterics and italics.

At best, twice as many people die from nosocomial infection as influenza in
the US. At worst, twenty times as many. That's all from the CDC.

[1] [http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-
related_deaths.h...](http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-
related_deaths.htm)

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosocomial_infection>

~~~
jfb
Zeroth, that's terrible to hear about your daughter. I sincerely hope that
she's better. First, there is no answer to a zoonotic infection as mutable as
influenza. There are only degrees of remediation. Finding a cure for flu is
almost certainly impossible.

Second, nobody disputes the seriousness of nosocomial infection; but to baldly
state that you face the same risk in an outpatient vaccination clinic as in
e.g. the ICU or the ER is just flat out bonkers.

Finally, I was intemperate in my original language. I apologize.

