EPA to ban affordable inhalers?

American said:

The Montreal Protocol is not the issue, this is the EPA on their own.

Click to expand...

1Perry said:

Please tell me this is just hyperbole and not really the EPA's position.

Asthma patients who rely on over-the-counter inhalers will need to switch to prescription-only alternatives as part of the federal government's latest attempt to protect the Earth's atmosphere.
The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday patients who use the epinephrine inhalers to treat mild asthma will need to switch by Dec. 31 to other types that do not contain chlorofluorocarbons, an aerosol substance once found in a variety of spray products.
The action is part of an agreement signed by the U.S. and other nations to stop using substances that deplete the ozone layer, a region in the atmosphere that helps block harmful ultraviolet rays from the Sun.
But the switch to a greener inhaler will cost consumers more. Epinephrine inhalers are available via online retailers for around $20, whereas the alternatives, which contain the drug albuterol, range from $30 to $60.


We couldn't make this other type of inhalers available over the counter? I thought this administrations position was in making health care more affordable.

Obama Administration to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns | The Weekly Standard

Click to expand...

rathi said:

Important Facts.

1) The U.S. is bound by the Montreal treaty, signed in 1987, which has timetables for phasing our a ozone attacking gases called CFC. CFC is used to propel the drug in an inhaler.
2) The FDA mandated the end of most CFC inhalers back in 2008. This article is about a specific type of inhaler for that dispenses epinephrine that is being taken off the market by 2012.
3) The CFC propellant has largely been replaced by another type of gases called HFA in most inhalers.
4) There is no HFA version that dispenses the epinephrine drug. Users will have to switch to an entirely different drug called albuterol.
5) The Pharma industry made a deliberate choice not to develop an HFA epinephrine inhaler back in 2007, even though the FDA pointed out there were no technical barriers.

Its easier to force consumers to buy a new more expensive prescription drug than create an actual replacement. Yet another example of the American public being bent over by the drug industry.

Click to expand...

Samhain said:

As an Asthma sufferer, I can tell you right now, the CFC propellant is needed. The new inhalers, sans CFC propellant, suck.

My normal lung intake is equivalent to a non-Asthmatic breathing through a straw. When you have an attack, that quickly changes from breathing through a straw to a a stir stick. When you can barely draw in any air, the extra propellant is a Godsend.

Click to expand...

Manc Skipper said:

This is one manufacturer making a financial decision with six years notice, being blown into a "blame the president!" moral panic. Again. If you want a President to blame, it was number 40.

Click to expand...

AdamT said:

Yeah, they're just doing it to be mean. :lol:

Click to expand...