EPA Bans CFC-Based Asthma Inhalers 394
bonch writes "The EPA has banned over-the-counter asthma inhalers as part of an agreement with other nations to avoid using chlorofluorocarbons, a substance once used in aerosol sprays. Alternative albuterol inhalers cost almost three times as much as the $20 epinephrine inhalers sold by online retailers."
government idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:government idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporations, what a bunch of idiots. Here we have an ozone depleting product, that will affect BILLIONS of people each day, and now thanks to the government, it will save those people MORE by keeping intact the ozone layer. Once of the scariest things ever said was... "I'm from the corporation, and I'm here to SAVE the planet".
Re:government idiots (Score:5, Interesting)
The amount of CFCs pumped into the atmosphere by asthma inhalers is negligible at best. Even if every person on the planet used one, which they don't.
Quantitative? I'll take a shot at it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Quantitative proof or GTFO.
Well, I'll take a shot at it. Please excuse me if I miss a decimal point somewhere, corrections are welcome.
About 14g of material in a Primatene Mist Inhaler. Non-propellant mass is ascorbic acid, dehydrated alcohol (34%), hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, purified water (actual mass of drug is negligible). Don't know the breakdown, but guesstimating about 4g of CFC-12 and CFC-114 propellant per inhaler, since alcohol is ~1/3 mass, and ascorbic acid is listed before the alcohol (ingredients should be listed in order of descending weight, so at least 1/3 ascorbic acid).
In one of the recent news interviews about this, FDA spokesman estimated 1-2 million [time.com] Primatene Mist users out there. Let's say 12 vials per year * 2mil users (I don't really know how many vials an asthmatic goes through), and call it 20 million vials. That would be 24,000kg of CFCs per year, or 24 metric tons.
For reference, reported peak production of CFC-12 was reached in 1988, at 421,002 metric tons [afeas.org] (1000kg in a metric ton), and 8,938 metric tons in 2004 (last reported year). So total usage is not tiny, but still a small fraction of the overall CFC usage.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do inhalers have to use ANY propellant? Or do they include the propellant so that they can minimize the amount of the active ingredient so that the consumer needs to buy lots and lots of inhalers?
No you asshole. They use propellant because when you're having a fucking asthma attack, you can't generate enough negative pressure with your lungs to properly atomize the medicine!
LK
Re:Quantitative? I'll take a shot at it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Quantitative? I'll take a shot at it. (Score:4, Informative)
I have used those along with several forms of liquid and several forms in pill. One day I mentioned to my specialist that the compressed air version of my medication worked better than the same chemical in powered form (also inhaled) and he replied that I was correct: the most effective way to get something into the blood stream is through the lungs and the most effective way to do that with with the compressed air versions.
Any doctor pushing a bronchodilator for anything other than the rare emergency use is simply incompetent . Lifestyle changes don't work in all cases although they do help depending on what the triggers are and I have found that relaxation techniques are a great way to avoid a panic attack and passing out but aren't entirely effective. In my case the magic treatment that finally got me off daily Ventolin, along with making sure my house is clean and avoiding smokers (even when they aren't smoking), was Alvesco and that is compressed air inhaled.
As an aside, I really worry about the US when I find out that an Albuterol inhaler there costs $20. My CFC free version of Ventolin cost me $12 in Canada and in Spain I pay less than 10 Euros. The Americans are getting ripped off.
Re: (Score:3)
Getting ripped off is one of our most beloved and enduring institutions. That, and war-for-profit.
Re:Quantitative? I'll take a shot at it. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Do you seriously not see the irony in inhaler companies using ozone-depleting greenhouse gasses in their products? It's almost as bad as GE (PCB polluter extraordinaire) selling water purification systems.
That's not irony. That's a self-sustaining business model.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Corporations, what a bunch of idiots. Here we have an ozone depleting product, that will affect BILLIONS of people each day, and now thanks to the government, it will save those people MORE by keeping intact the ozone layer. Once of the scariest things ever said was... "I'm from the corporation, and I'm here to SAVE the planet".
Yeah, fuck those asthma sufferers. Even though there are more pollutants pumped into the atmosphere from running your car for less than a second, those people deserve to have the medicine they depend on to breath cost more. If their combined medicinal use affects the lungs of even an ANT in a million years, I want them strung up and caned.
Now watch me light up this joint.
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Informative)
Ozone + Cl ---UV Light---> Oxygen + Cl
So a little CFC can break down thousands of times it's own mass of ozone before the Cl radicals eventually find something else to react with.
CFCs also make very potent greenhouse gas.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:government idiots (Score:4)
Ozone regenerates but only accumulates when CFCs aren't destroying it. CFCs in inhalers are just one part of the CFC pollution that we backed away from over several decades. Most of the sources individually are a very small amount, but combined they deplete the ozone layer. Which causes increases in cancer, not just among humans but among other animals around the world. Each small source has its claim to exemption, and some worked those claims for many years while alternatives were developed. This single last brand using CFCs is cheaper because it's generating pollution its competitors don't, which simply externalizes its costs from asthma people to cancer people affected by the ozone depletion.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Common sense? You think asthma inhalers are depleting the ozone? They're completely negligible; volcanoes deplete more ozone.
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Informative)
The pharmaceutical companies probably welcomed this move. The existing CFC laden medication is available over the counter, which means that it's cheaper. By banning it, they get to sell more of their prescription-only substitutes, which cost 1.5 - 3x more.
Although I have to say, you're being screwed anyway. We don't have an over-the-counter equivalent in the UK. The drug in question is an epinephrine inhaler, which is a poor choice as a bronchodilator because it has too many side effects like elevated heart rate. The prescription replacement, albuterol (we call is salbutamol) is a selective beta-2 adrenoceptor agonist - it stimulates the epinephrine receptors in the air passages, but not the ones in your heart, so fewer side effects like dry mouth and palpitations.
You're paying $20 over the internet for a "cheap" epinephrine inhaler (which as we explain, is an inferior medicine for the purpose).
You'll pay a minimum of $30 for a prescribed albuterol inhaler.
Our list price (for our national health service) for a 200 dose albuterol inhaler is £1.50 ( about $2.30 )
Who's screwing you? Ah yes, the evil corporations, the ones who manufacture the fucking medicine.... the HMOs..... etc, etc, etc.
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not the OP, but.... yes. It's just chemistry.
The two compounds in Primatente Mist are CFC-12 and CFC-114, or dichlorodifluoromethane and 1,2-dichlorotetrafluoroethane respectively. These are well studied in stratospheric ozone chemistry and are responsible for the catalytic loss cycle by breaking down in the presence of UV light and giving halogen radicals that attack ozone. The atomic chlorine (it usually appears as a chlorine radical) catalytically destroys ozone:
O3 + Cl. > ClO. + O2
O + ClO. > Cl. + O2
The mono-atomic oxygen there is a simplification of other processes that form it, but it's a good simplification of what happens overall - the chlorine is long-lived in the stratosphere, so very small amounts destroy a large amount of ozone.
It's not the only loss cycle of course - there are natural and man-made processes going on up there, but it is one of the ones that has had such a huge effect.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
If the asthma is aggravated by the atmosphere, and the supposed relief mechanism just puts more crap in the atmosphere, then that relief mechanism is doing it bass-ackwards.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The amount of "crap in the the atmosphere" from all inhalers ever made, combined, is trivial. These are the only OTC rescue inhalers on the market. People will die from this bullshit.
Re: (Score:3)
That's usually what it takes to get bureaucrats to take notice. It doesn't matter how predictable the problems are. Once somebody dies, suddenly they see something as a problem.
I am ignorant about the inner workings of these inhalers. So I am curious, what's the reason they cannot simply use compressed air to provide the aerosol? Why must it be a CFC or albuterol?
Re: (Score:3)
Speaking as an asthmatic (Score:3, Interesting)
Furthermore, epinephrine inhalers are less effective than salabuterol inhalers, with more side effects (epinephrine can be very unpleasant). That's the real reason they're going away-- reformulating them for a new propellant is not worth the cost.
Re: (Score:3)
Or you guys could fix your pricing issue. The same salbutamol inhaler in the UK is about $3 for 200 doses.
Ah, the power of a single payer healthcare system.
Re:government idiots (Score:5, Interesting)
HFA is a weaker propellant, and has a pretty nasty taste & odor to boot.
Primatene's problem is complicated, because the ban isn't entirely motivated by love for Mother Earth(tm). The DEA wants Primatene off the market, because it's basically aerosolized ephedrine ready for meth production.
* If Primatene is reformulated with HFA, it has to be re-approved by the FDA
* Re-approval would be expensive, and the resulting drug would have only limited patent protection due to massive amounts of prior art.
* The DEA wants reformulated Primatene to include additional ingredients that (supposedly) won't affect asthmatic users, but will taint the ephedrine so it can't be used for meth production.
* A new version reformulated to DEA standards WOULD be profitably patentable, but the FDA isn't thrilled about adding chemicals of no benefit to users to a product used by extremely vulnerable people whose breathing is pretty fragile to begin with. They know that somewhere out there are at least a few dozen people likely to die if they use the new formula, and have made it clear that they're going to hold approval of the new version to the highest possible standards and nix it at the *slightest* hint of trouble.
* Primatene's maker is happy about patentability, but worried about lawsuits. Catch-22.
It's more complicated than what I wrote above, but that pretty much sums it up. It's the perfect storm of stupid symbolic environmentalism, corporate greed, and the war on drugs. Made worse by the fact that the majority of longterm Primatene users are poor and lack proper health care (people with health insurance use albuterol, unless they have very mild asthma and accidentally go somewhere without their inhaler, at which point they run to Walgreen's and buy Primatene to keep around "just in case"). That's also the main theory of why Advair (combination of a steroid and long-but-slow-acting alpha agonist) has a signficantly higher death rate among poor and minority users with seemingly moderate & controlled asthma -- they get prescriptions for Advair and albuterol, buy the Advair, but skip the albuterol because the new formulation is expensive & they don't need it very often. The problem is, when they DO have an acute attack, all they have on hand is Advair, which isn't suitable as a rescue inhaler, and a small percentage of them end up dying under circumstances where albuterol would have saved them. It's a hard theory to ethically test, but one that explains a bothersome side effect (death) of Advair whose victims are overwhelmingly poor Americans.
Re: (Score:3)
* The DEA wants reformulated Primatene to include additional ingredients that (supposedly) won't affect asthmatic users, but will taint the ephedrine so it can't be used for meth production.
Primatene Mist contains Epinephrine, not Ephedrine (Primatene tablets contain Ephedrine).
Re: (Score:2)
These are the only OTC rescue inhalers on the market. People will die from this bullshit.
In the US, maybe. In the UK, I've never even seen an epinephrine inhaler, salbutamol (albuterol) is the standard.
Re: (Score:2)
In maybe. In Canada, I didn't even realize there was such a thing as an epinephrine inhaler. Yeah, nope, the Canadian Lung Association doesn't list any such thing.
Slashdot, is this some kind of made up or trivial story to drive up hits or something?
Re: (Score:3)
In maybe. In Canada, I didn't even realize there was such a thing as an epinephrine inhaler. Yeah, nope, the Canadian Lung Association doesn't list any such thing.
Slashdot, is this some kind of made up or trivial story to drive up hits or something?
Only in America. Primatine Mist is pure epinephrine. It does have smooth muscle relaxation properties that are useful in Asthma but has the potential for significant cardiac side effects (remember that a number of asthmatics have concomitant heart disease and that uncontrolled epinephrine use isn't such a good idea). Albuterol and other prescription drugs are SAFER than Primatine Mist. But that drug has been available for decades and has been grandfathered in as an OTC drug.
Makes sense? No. American?
Re: (Score:3)
why does an asthma inhaler cost $60
It doesn't. The UK BNF [bnf.org] [1] list price (the amount it costs the National Health Service) for a 200-dose albuterol inhaler is £1.50 (about $2.30)
The manufacturer is still making a profit at that price - it's not some socialist hippy factory churning out inhalers for the state. It's just what happens when you apply the bargaining power of a whole country.
[1] Registration required, but an invaluable resource for all manner of purposes to do with drugs.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm in Canada, and several in my family have asthma... I've seen two types of inhalers: the salbutamol inhalers, and the steroid inhalers (beclometasone). I have seen epinephrine in the form of an auto-injector pen, but it strikes me as though an inhaler for anaphylaxis wouldn't be that useful....
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Current standard ER procedure for acute asthma, in the US at least, is 125 mg intravenous Solu-Medrol (methylprednisolone, a POWERFUL corticosteroid anti-inflammatory drug), and albuterol and ipratropium bromide (Atrovent (tm)) nebulizer treatments. If the patient can't tolerate albuterol (about 1 in 16 asthmatics can't), the second choice is terbutaline.
Blood tests and chest X-rays are typically taken at the same time, since other conditions can masquerade as moderate or acute asthma.
Where I live, the amb
Re:government idiots (Score:5, Informative)
Not really. Right now inhalers are among the most significant remaining sources of CFCs.
The other remaining source is Halon fire suppression systems. Halon is no longer produced, but remaining stocks are still in use.
Re: (Score:3)
Not really. Right now inhalers are among the most significant remaining sources of CFCs.
The other remaining source is Halon fire suppression systems. Halon is no longer produced, but remaining stocks are still in use.
Of course they are, because every other source has been eliminated.
Re: (Score:2)
And that's good. Though the concentration of CFCs in the atmosphere has peaked, it still is significant to cause large ozone hole in the Antarctic region.
Banning remaining CFC sources will accelerate the healing of ozone layer. And it's not like there are no good replacements available.
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
Banning remaining CFC sources will accelerate the healing of ozone layer. And it's not like there are no good replacements available.
Do you have asthma? I do, and I find that the non-CFC HFA inhalers don't work for me. I have resorted to (illegally) ordering CFC inhalers from India and/or using a portable nebulizer, which is both less effective and less portable than the inhalers with propellants.
The problem with the HFA inhalers is that they don't propel the medicine strongly enough and the propellant itself may even be an irritant to some people. I have had times where it has at least seemed to make my asthma worse, not better.
OTOH, I'm not a big fan of primatene mist either. It is dangerous and actually causes pain in my chest. Although in an emergency it is often the only option available other than the ER for someone with asthma.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I have severe chronic asthma.
First, before you do ANYTHING else, confess your sins to your doctor and TELL HIM ABOUT THE CHEST PAIN from the Primatene Mist. This may be a warning sign of cardiac (heart) issues developing. Epinephrine WILL hit the heart, far harder than albuterol does.
The proper way to use Primatene Mist in an asthma emergency is to take the puffs and then head for the emergency room. Or call for an ambulance. Primatene Mist buys you about 15 minutes of transit time. That's all it
Re: (Score:3)
But yes, medical CFCs should not have been banned too soon.
The US first banned CFCs in conventional aerosols in 1978. That's 23 years ago. 23 years is an extremely long time in modern pharmaceuticals, and the pharmaceutical industry has moved on and developed suitable alternatives. The only thing is that these alternatives are under patent. The latest and greatest always is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:government idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
Primatene sucks, and barely works. It's cheap because its costs have been paid off for decades, and it's just a brand. But millions of people don't use it, even though it's cheap, because it sucks. The EPA isn't just protecting the health of the rest of us by protecting the Ozone Layer from CFCs - it's flushing this crap product out of the market. The asthma industry has had decades to switch away from CFCs, longer than practically all others. And even this final shutdown has been coming for 3 years, plenty of time to switch.
If you want to be angry at a government agency, be angry at the FDA which requires the non-CFC version, that actually works, to be a prescription. Which drives up its costs, and lets the doctor industry take their cut for peddling it. There's no reason the non-CFC version should cost 50-100% more than the OTC version. It's the doctor/drug cartel that keeps this stuff so profitable and expensive.
What's idiotic is the kneejerk attacks on government agencies that protect us, without knowing anything about what you're talking about. "The government" isn't some monolithic entity. The EPA controls damaging substances to protect us
Re: (Score:3)
I saw a great shirt that said "The ATF should be a convenience store not a Gov Bureau."
In a free country, it would be.
The regulation of things like alcohol, tobacco and guns should have never involved the feds in the first place. The states are more than capable of handling it. The whole federalism thing works when it's tried.
What is the impact of those inhalers? (Score:2)
It may be an outrage to you but is it justifiable if you look at the big picture? Sure some may die because of these decisions but how many more die indirectly from producing and releasing these gasses?
Re: (Score:3)
Very Old News (Score:5, Informative)
This is actually extremely old news. A treaty was signed over a decade ago to ban various uses of CFCs in phases. The OTC epinephrine inhalers were pulled off of the market by the manufacturer some time ago due to a different reason (which I forget), then they decided to not restart production on it because CFC inhalers would be banned as of 1/1/2010.
Anyone that has asthma will tell you that things dramatically changed for them in 2010 when their old albuterol (fast-acting, for emergencies) inhalers were reformulated to not include CFCs (dubbed HFA, aka Hydrofluoroalkane) . Most HFA-using patients state that they cannot "feel" the aerosol or that it doesn't work nearly as well as the CFC-based ones.*
Point being, CFC inhalers haven't been around for a couple of years and we knew they were going away over a decade ago!
(*From my professional experience.)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so that's what happened. I noticed that the inhaler I got about that time didn't seem to be doing anything. At least not during inhalation. I remember back during the 80s that it was a lot more obvious that I was getting medicine than it is these days.
I also noticed that the inhalers don't seem to last as long as they used to. Not sure if that's at all related, but I find lately that invariably when I need an inhaler it's gone bad because I haven't used it in a few months. Which was never a case when I
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps they can mix in a little Capsicum Annuum [wikipedia.org] to give it a little kick... :-)
CFC/HFC Inhaler differences (Score:3)
Anyone that has asthma will tell you that things dramatically changed for them in 2010 when their old albuterol (fast-acting, for emergencies) inhalers were reformulated to not include CFCs (dubbed HFA, aka Hydrofluoroalkane) . Most HFA-using patients state that they cannot "feel" the aerosol or that it doesn't work nearly as well as the CFC-based ones.*
There are a number of significant differences between CFC and HFC inhalers. One is that most drugs are less soluble in HFCs than CFCs; newer HFCs inhalers are generally formulated using a suspension of solid particles in propellant (this may have something to do with the clogging & self-depletion problems reported with HFC inhalers). There might also be issues given the density differences between CFCs and HFCs -- I would expect the heavier gas would do a better job carrying the medication deeper down
propellant versus drug (Score:3)
TFA doesn't explain why changing the propellant chemical means that the active medical ingredient has to change as well. Why can't epinephrine be delivered via a non-CFC propellant?
The cost is not the worst problem (Score:2)
Alternative albuterol inhalers cost almost three times as much as the $20 epinephrine inhalers sold by online retailers."
The worst part is that epinephrine you can get any time you want (like, say, in the middle of an asthma attack), but albuterol requires a prescription, which means schlepping to a doctor with all the associated costs and inconveniences.
Albuterol works a lot better, sure, but sometimes - when you need an inhaler and you need it NOW - its nice to know the good old Primatine Mist is availabl
Make up your damn minds! (Score:2, Troll)
From TFA:
So now that global warming has been exposed as a fraud we're supposed to be scared of the Sun as well? Leave it to tree huggers to care more about ozone, which is poisonous, than human life.
I don't know about you but I'm perfectly capable of purchasing sunscreen. For the amount of money I'd
Re: (Score:2)
"So now that global warming has been exposed as a fraud we're supposed to be scared of the Sun as well? Leave it to tree huggers to care more about ozone, which is poisonous, than human life."
I have a wonderful UV lamp that I use to disinfect stuff. Would you care to sit a few days under it?
Re: (Score:2)
I... I... I don't know. Earth-shattering irony? Ignorance on an epic scale? Someone help me out here.
Re: (Score:2)
The ignorance displayed in your post is stunning. Harmful UV rays harm a lot more than just human beings. It impacts plant life and other animals as well, and in a very negative way.
primatiene mist if having an attack (Score:2)
Oh great.
I used to be able to count on getting to any 24hr pharmacy (and most local 24hr supermarkets) and purchasing Primatene Mist (or an equivalent) if suffering an asthma attack.
So now I have to stock up on the works-less-well-for-me albuterol from a doctor's prescription? And if I am out have to run to the ER to get the now-only-available-by-prescription medicines? (Yes, yes: In a perfect world I would never run out, and always have a Rx solution on hand, but sh*t happens.)
Not. Happy.
I would rather the
Re:primatiene mist if having an attack (Score:4, Informative)
Or you could just see your doctor, maybe manage your asthma better. Maybe have a prescription available in your wallet if you really need it. If you're running to the 24 hour pharmacy in the middle of the night chances are you're doing it wrong.
Get a peak flow meter, learn how to use it. Works great for most people and gives them a 12-24 hour window of alert time before you really get symptomatic.
Re: (Score:3)
So wait... your management of your asthma is to drive to a 24 hour store to buy an inhaler if you have an attack?
I assume the way you manage fires in your kitchen is to drive to a 24 hour store to buy a fire extinguisher if a fire breaks out.
If you have a condition serious enough to require intervention, you need to keep a prescription on you or near you at all times. I note you say you do "in a perfect world" but come on. This has been coming for many years but it was only a matter of time - salbutamol is
Cost falls with mass production, life improves (Score:3)
Re:Cost falls with mass production, life improves (Score:4, Informative)
That can't be right. That would be what, about a third of a kilogram of lead in the average person's body?
The average adult has about 5 pints of blood in their body. A pint is a little more than half a liter. So that's approximately 2.5 liters * 10 * 15.5, which works out to about 387 grams of lead. I think that's enough to kill a blue whale.
From reading the Wikipedia article on lead poisoning, I assume you meant micrograms.
My costs went up substantially, and less effective (Score:5, Informative)
Less pressure, not as effective in getting the meds to my lungs.
I now order them from mexico, same old good stuff that works.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Aren't you happy that you are able to sacrifice your health, though, for the good of the planet?
Comrade Captain Planet demands we much all offer our lives for him.
Re: (Score:3)
Athsmatic here in Australia - and AGREED! They did this to us nearly 10 years ago and the difference is noticable.
A friend brought one back from Greece still with CFC in it 5 years ago and I still remember getting a hit from it, it's SO MUCH BETTER. The non CFC variant is simply not as good - no it's not a placebo, it's been 10 damn years.
OK that article is a canned article (Score:5, Informative)
being propagated through the media. Probably written by some anti regulation type; or it's plain shoddy 'reporting'.
a) There is a non- CFC primatine mist coming out.
http://www.empr.com/update-on-primatene-mist-discontinuation/article/208381/ [empr.com]
b) this has been a phased roll out since 2008
c) albuterol was the first to be regulated to be CFC free.
d) The corporation the make CFC products stalled in making a replacement in order to maximize there profits, and probably to make regulation seem bad.
e) the only impact CFC inhalers, not over the cuonter inhalers. So you will see OTC inhalers, probably soon.
Whoever wrote that article should be slapped up side the head for sowing discontent in the populace with factual lies.
Re: (Score:3)
a) There is a non- CFC primatine mist coming out.
http://www.empr.com/update-on-primatene-mist-discontinuation/article/208381/ [empr.com] [empr.com]
That article says, 'pending FDA approval'. Last article I read said the FDA was going to require an [expensive] clinical trial before approving it, and the manufacturer didn't have the revenue stream to support that. But, good for them for making it FDA's problem. If the FDA has backed down, good for them.
e) the only impact CFC inhalers, not over the cuonter inhalers. So
More patent nonsense. (Score:2)
2005 (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What "ozone layer" is this you speak of?
Re: (Score:2)
What about those people who cannot afford the $60 inhalers? They're just SOL because Pharma convinced the FDA to ban a trivial source of CFCs?
Re: (Score:2)
s/E/F/;
Re: (Score:2)
One wonders if the price on the newer inhalers will come down, since there will be volume efficiencies when more of them are made.
Re: (Score:2)
One wonders if the price on the newer inhalers will come down, since there will be volume efficiencies when more of them are made.
Short answer is "No." CFC inhalers for prescription inhalers has been banned in the US for several years, the price has not gone down. There is no reason to expect over the counter inhalers will go down. When the prescription ones dropped CFC as the propellant, they received new patents now they are protected. This was nothing more than the pharmaceutical companies getting the OTC banned from competing with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively you could switch to a prescription inhaler, that is if you have insurance.
Re:wrong calculation (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Walgreens as always given me excellent service.
I haven't used the for Asthma, but other thing. Certainly no worse then my 'local' pharmacy; which was more expensive so I don't go back.
Re: (Score:2)
It's okay. Babies don't have jobs and cars so they can't drive to drugstores to buy Ventolin. See, it's self-correcting!
Re: (Score:2)
This has NOTHING TO DO with Pharma. moron.
well then they will get them for 10 bucks at wal-mart.
Wasn't this done in 2008?
http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm048235.htm [fda.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Except that the summary is overtly lying - the albuterol inhalers cost as little as $30. It's even in the linked article.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
here's a novel idea - why are albuterol inhalers (I've had them for 20 years now) prescription at all? they want to do this? MAKE ALBUTEROL OVER THE COUNTER!
The answer is in the question.
The lifetime of pharma patents is 21 years + extra time for other things.
Patents on non-CFC albuterol inhalers started expiring in 2009.
More patents will expire over the next few years and non-CFC generics will show up within the next 5 years.
Until those patents run out, it won't be over the counter and it won't be generic.
Re: (Score:2)
How much CFC do you really think is in there?
I'm all for certain types of regulations, but this one is just stupid. Why doesnt the FDA encourage the use of a different propellent instead?
Re: (Score:2)
They do and have been, for years.
companies delayed in getting there non CFC OTC inhalers approved. They are in the process of approval. I f the corporation moved right away, the OTC non CFC inhalers would be on the shelves. But they didn't and now the blame the government and push this story out to every media. Just look, it's the same exact story in every media.
If the FDA delays, then I would bet the companies would delay there release of the OTC non CFC because the make more money from those.
1-2 million p
Re: (Score:3)
Well last I hear the ozone layer was clearing up, and considering the number of countries that have yet to ban CFC's, I think it is more important that people get the opportunity to breathe.
FDA should fast track the other inhalers, and the EPA should hold off on the ban until they are available. People WILL die without access to inhalers, Another year of cfc's is a drop in the bucket, and there is no evidence that it will kill anyone. Hell they have been warning us about the ozone layer for at least 15 ye
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's utter bullshit. The amount of compressed gas in asthma inhalers is minuscule. Even when you multiply that by thousands, the amount would be extremely modest. Besides, negative health outcomes by people who don't have inhalers they need (because they can't afford the 'green' ones) would far, far exceed any damage to the ozone layer.
God damn hippies.
Re: (Score:2)
dear AC, you're wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion [wikipedia.org]
A single chlorine atom would keep on destroying ozone (thus a catalyst) for up to two years (the time scale for transport back down to the troposphere) were it not for reactions that remove them from this cycle by forming reservoir species such as hydrogen chloride (HCl) and chlorine nitrate (ClONO2). On a per atom basis, bromine is even more efficient than chlorine at destroying ozone, but there is much less bromine in the atmosphere at pres
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This contradicts my instincts about the chemistry of our atmosphere. Just who performed these "laboratory studies"? If they were funded by government money in any way then they are probably part of the vast left-wing conspiracy to debunk my gut feelings.
Re: (Score:3)
This contradicts my instincts about the chemistry of our atmosphere. Just who performed these "laboratory studies"? If they were funded by government money in any way then they are probably part of the vast left-wing conspiracy to debunk my gut feelings.
Alright, comrades, the jig's up. BitHive caught us red (of course) handed. Now everyone will know about our scheme:
(1) Threaten everyone with gut debunking.
(2) They start hollerin' for single payer.
(3) ???
(4) Redistribute wealth!
Re: (Score:2)
Can we have something other than a Wikipedia article as a source? It seems to me that just because a single chlorine atom CAN react with 100,000 ozone molecules doesn't mean it will or that it does on average.
What's the actual damage to the ozone layer from these devices?
Is the cost of that damage more or less than the cost of banning these devices?
Re: (Score:3)
If the US had a decent health care system this would NOT be an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so, since the money will be saved by banning the $20 inhalers, how about the government pays the difference between whatever the new inhaler costs and the $20 that the old one did?
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because asthma is so trendy that we've all gone out and gotten it.
It's one thing to charge people for the side effects of their own decisions and quite another to charge people for something they were born with. Ultimately, I'd be more than happy to subsidize these for other people, because I wouldn't need it myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
-1, Irrelevant
No one is surprised that other CFC devices are banned. We're talking about devices that save people's lives, not hair spray.
Re:Reducing competition through regulation (Score:4, Informative)
Since this has been the plan for YEARS NOW, I don't think you're correct.
The lobbying was in delaying the change.
But hey, don't let facts and common sense stop you from using a pop culture fad belief as an excuse to rant.
Re: (Score:2)
Abuse [emedtv.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Abuse [emedtv.com]
Yes. We all know that requiring a prescription has prevented the abuse of other drugs such as oxycodone (Oxycontin). When that was made prescription-only, all the drug abusers and recreational users just gave up and admitted defeat.
Re: (Score:2)
Albuterol inhalers have been around for over twenty years. The patents are lapsed. Does anyone know why albuterol inhalers are prescription only?
Because in the "land of the free" we really hate the idea that adult people might decide for themselves what goes into their own bodies. That's what it boils down to.
If it were my decision to make, you could get just about anything over-the-counter that you like with no questions asked. The reason you'd still go to a doctor is because it's a really good idea and you'd be a fool not to seek good professional advice about important medical issues, not because someone threatens you with jail for circumven
Re: (Score:2)
Patents have nothing to do with prescription. While albuterol is no longer patented, the HFA delivery mechanism is, and that is apparently enough to demand "brand name" prices. I used to pay $5 copay on something that cost $10 or so, now I'm paying $20 copay on something that costs $55 or so. I think it was just a convenient excuse by pharma to get another bite on the patent apple.
These patents appear to expire in 2014 - http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1 [uspto.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and that Clean Water Act. Awful. Lake Erie was quite beautiful aflame.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus now all the people there that used to have jobs are unemployed so they the time to enjoy the lake.