Yesterday I picked up my son's first HFA inhaler. Here's how it went...
Pharmacist: Here's the new "environmental friendly" inhaler.
Me: Oh, you mean the one that doesn't work as well?
Pharmacist: That's the one.
Then comes the sticker shock. The old CFC type inhaler with the same exact "medicine" cost $5.00 the new and improved, save the ozone, inhaler cost $38.00. That's the co pay amount with insurance. The word on the street is that the old inhalers were 1/3 of the cost.
My question is how many CFC's were in the old inhalers? Rescue inhalers are for emergencies. Does a small amount of CFC's really matter if it is saving a trip to the ER and a life?
The problem with the HFA inhalers are that they clog and the propellant is not forceful enough to deliver the medicine effectively. So when your son is at soccer game and suddenly has an asthma attack and needs his inhaler.....you go to use it and it clogs. Delivering no medicine. Now you have two choices. 1-Get some warm water and soak the inhaler to unclog it or 2-go to the ER or call 911.
Well, it looks like the drug companies will be stuffing more green in their pockets and the hospitals will receive more clients all because we now have "green" inhalers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Here's a great site http://www.savecfcinhalers.org/
ReplyDeleteYou can sign the petition to save CFC asthma inhalers
Please pass this info along to all of your friends and family.
ReplyDeleteOzone-friendly inhalers could face early demise
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20090330/BIZ/303309942/1031/BIZ
Benefits vague, problems clear in inhaler ban
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20090330/BIZ/303309941
Asthma Patients Outraged at Indifference to Problems with New Inhalers:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/02/asthma_hfa02.html
Olympian Jackie Joyner-Kersee: FDA "Insensitive" to Asthma Patients' Problems:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/03/asthma_hfa04.html
The number of patient complaints is skyrocketing:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/health/hfa_inhalers.html
Read the thousands of complaints at this petition:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/saveCFCinhalers/signatures.html
Patients at askapatient.com are reporting HFA inhalers as "useless" with a rating of 1.2 on
a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the best and 1 being the worst:
http://www.askapatient.com/viewrating.asp?drug=20503&name=PROVENTIL-HFA
You can only wonder if the FDA is trying to kill asthmatics:
http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=11627
Also worth mentioning from the FDA website is the fact that a manufacturer of one of the HFA
inhalers admits in it's own new drug application to the FDA that it's HFA based albuterol is less
safe and effective than it's CFC based albuterol:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/nda/2001/20-983_Ventolin-HFA_medr_P1.pdf
These quotes taken directly from the new drug application for Ventolin HFA.
"In the multiple dose adolescent and adult studies, albuterol HFA showed a numerically smaller
improvement in FEV1 than was seen with albuterol CFC"
"There was other evidence that the HFA formulation delivers a lower/less effective dose on a per
acutation basis than the CFC product. In the single dose, dose ranging study in adults, and in
the single dose methacholine challenge study in adults one and two acutations of albuterol CFC were
statistically indistinguishable in terms of effect, whereas significant differences were seen
between one and two acutations of albuterol HFA. Finally, the combined adolescent/adult studies
showed that the HFA formulation had a longer median time to onset of effect(4.2-9.6 minutes
versus 3.6-4.2 minutes), had a shorter duration of effect(1.55-3.30 hours versus 2.29 - 3.69
hours), and was associated with more albuterol 'back up' use than the CFC formulation."
"We note that in the two 12 week clinical trials in adolescents and adults, Ventolin HFA
Inhalation Aerosol consistently showed a smaller effect size than Ventolin CFC Inhalation
Aerosol"
"Because it is expected that many physicians will prescribe Ventolin HFA Inhalation Aerosol for
patients who have previously used the CFC formulation, it would be appropriate to include some
description of the relative effectiveness of these two formulations in the product label."
"Unfavorable changes in physical examinations were observed in the ears, nose, and throat category
as follows: 8% placebo HFA; 13% albuterol HFA; and 5% albuterol CFC."