It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Administration to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta
Do you care about the truth of your arguments?


It's crystal clear to me that the answer is NO.
The truth of matter is that this rule was made in 2008, and the cut off date for manufacturers is Dec. of this year.



A Rule by the Food and Drug Administration on 11/19/2008

Summary

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is amending FDA’s regulation on the use of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in self-pressurized containers to remove the essential-use designation for epinephrine used in oral pressurized metered-dose inhalers (MDIs). The Clean Air Act requires FDA, in consultation with the EPA, to determine whether an FDA-regulated product that releases an ODS is an essential use of the ODS. FDA has concluded that there are no substantial technical barriers to formulating epinephrine as a product that does not release ODSs, and therefore epinephrine would no longer be an essential use of ODSs as of December 31, 2011. Epinephrine MDIs containing an ODS cannot be marketed after this date.


Debunked

I actually agree with it. I guess Bush did do something right after all!




posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


You agree with the decision ...

Somehow that hardly sounds "benevolent". Maybe because you don't have to deal with the problem and costs for yourself or a loved one? Maybe you have enough money that you don't care if the cost of the medication doubles or even triples?

Care to provide evidence from a reputable source that asthmatics using inhalers have any measurable effect on the atmosphere?

The fact remains that obama could have done something to exempt medications from this EPA ruling and failed. Failed to decide that the people he wants to vote for him are more important than a BS rule. Failed like he has with so many other decisions ...



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Source


Originally posted by centurion1211
You agree with the decision ...

Somehow that hardly sounds "benevolent".


Personal dig noted.
Yes, I agree with phasing out a substance that depletes the ozone layer AND following our international treaties. The Montreal Protocol Especially when there are other propellents to be used. My benevolence toward mankind is my motivation. Whether YOU think I'm benevolent is so not a concern for me.



Care to provide evidence from a reputable source that asthmatics using inhalers have any measurable effect on the atmosphere?


CFC's have a measurable effect on the atmosphere. If you want the details, look it up yourself. Everyone knows that we have been phasing out CFCs for some time now...



The shift to CFC-free MDIs is part of a larger transition that has affected many consumer and industrial products and sectors over the last several decades. In 1996, the United States prohibited the production and import of CFCs except for certain essential uses. In fact, MDIs used for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are among the last uses to switch to ozone-safe alternatives.


Source



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

...Obama could have stopped this from going into effect, but didn't.



And then we'd be seeing a thread something like "OBAMA USES TOTALITARIAN TACTICS TO HALT ENVIRONMENTAL SAVING MEASURE!"

Get real, and Deny Ignorance.

This is the sort of knee-jerk thread I expect from the more "green" right wing trolls here on ATS


(and i say this AS an asthmatic)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I heard weekly standard was "fair and balanced".



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by StarPeace
 


I actually heard that on FOX "News".


What's interesting is that this inhaler has a big WARNING stamped on it that says it's being phased out and will not be available after the end of this year. See Warning

The faux outrage over some manufactured concern for asthmatics is pretty funny... All in an effort to make another baseless attack against Obama... :shk:

Here's a news story from 2006 talking about the banning of this product. CNN



Some asthmatics may lose their inhalers
But experts say ban on Primatine Mist, other OTC inhalers could move patients to better drugs.


The Rx drugs are better.
edit on 9/25/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
What I find hilarious about this thread is the simple fact that everyone is overlooking the obvious elephant in the room...

Why are there so many asthmatics today to the point that their inhaler usage is supposedly effecting the atmosphere ?

Anyone ?
Bueller ?
Bueller ?

This is a prime example of what our medical industry has become: An entity that does absolutely nothing but treat the symptoms rather than getting to the root of the cause... and it doesn't even dawn on anyone that that's exactly what's going on !




The boiling frog story is a widespread anecdote describing a frog slowly being boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually.[1] According to contemporary biologists the premise of the story is not literally true; a frog submerged and gradually heated will jump out.[2][3] However, some 19th century research experiments suggested that the underlying premise is true, provided the heating is gradual enough.
The boiling frog anecdote



Millions of children (and adults) suffering from asthma and allergies (the two usually go hand and hand)... Unheard of 60 years ago.

Things that, apparently, don't make anyone go "Hmmm".

We really have become pathetic with our apathy and normalcy bias.

No wonder TPTB are laughing all the way to the banks.







... and now back to your regularly scheduled program of arguing mindless politico and semantics...



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 

I'm sorry, this has been going on for far longer than just this year. The phasing out cfc (chloroflourocarbon) inhalers two years ago for hfa inhalers with the prescription inhalers, and now they are hitting the over-the-counter inhalers. They tried to do it a year before that but the pharmaceutical companies had not yet ramped up production of the new inhalers, and they stopped making the old ones, so many e.r.'s and pharmacies did not have any medication on hand. People died. Woops I guess, and they waited over a year to actually implement to switch. The legislation to begin this (intentional or not) torture and "soft-killing' of asthmatics began before the obama administration however.

The difference is in the propellant not the medicine itself. However, when they tested the hfa propellant inhalers they only tested them on people with healthy lungs. Many asthmatics (like myself) have adverse reactions to the new inhalers, and find they are not nearly as effective. I now must us a nebulizer when I never needed one before, and have become newly dependent upon steroids to control my asthma as well. My illness escalated immediately after the switch. Also, the previous cfc inhalers would cost me five dollars, and the new ones cost me fifty. Nice.

There is also noise about patents expiring, and speculation that the entire snafu is a ploy by Big-Pharma to ensure they can make as much money as possible by turning out these "new inhalers'. It is a tangled mess to sort out the truth of that however.

The environmental concern is about the ozone layer. The science regarding cfc's potentially being damaging is correct, however, the amount of cfc's put into the atmosphere by asthmatics is negligible to say the least.

Many people in the medical community acknowledge that there seems to be a negative effect on many asthmatics with this switch, and that at the very least more research needs to be done; but to deaf ears. Either way, this switch has been killing me for the last two years; "slowly drowning" as my physician put it, and there are those worse off than I. Make no mistake, people are dying from this. It is very sad.

edit on 25-9-2011 by redhorse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhorse
reply to post by centurion1211
 

The difference is in the propellant not the medicine itself. However, when they tested the hfa propellant inhalers they only tested them on people with healthy lungs. Many asthmatics (like myself) have adverse reactions to the new inhalers, and find they are not nearly as effective. I now must us a nebulizer when I never needed one before, and have become newly dependent upon steroids to control my asthma as well. My illness escalated immediately after the switch. Also, the previous cfc inhalers would cost me five dollars, and the new ones cost me fifty. Nice.


Thanks so much for helping make my point. No matter how long it's been going on, The "now" of it is under obama's watch. And so where are the replacements that cost about the same?


The environmental concern is about the ozone layer. The science regarding cfc's potentially being damaging is correct, however, the amount of cfc's put into the atmosphere by asthmatics is negligible to say the least.


Again, my point exactly.

While BH wants to "save mankind" when asthmatics aren't even the problem, I'm more concerned with saving people with real names and real families than the rather nebulous "mankind".

Anyone want to bet that billions of chinese and indians burning coal are a much bigger threat to the atmosphere than a relatively few U.S. asthmatics? Oh, and don't the chinese and indian governments keep getting pollution exemptions for their people? Again, if only our government cared as much about us as individuals ...



Many people in the medical community acknowledge that there seems to be a negative effect on many asthmatics with this switch, and that at the very least more research needs to be done; but to deaf ears. Either way, this switch has been killing me for the last two years; "slowly drowning" as my physician put it, and there are those worse off than I. Make no mistake, people are dying from this. It is very sad.

edit on 25-9-2011 by redhorse because: (no reason given)


Pay close attention to this last paragraph from a real human living in the U.S. Only an "enviro-nazi" would not care about the real human costs.

edit on 9/25/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


At least there will be no fat americans because when/ if they are banned all the fat people running to mcdonalds will have an Asthma attack.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 



reply to post by WhoDat09


You don't get it they're so inept they tell me I don't have asthma, all my life I have had it and not ONE single doctor is competent enough to see that's what the F%^% I have!
ETA: No they will prescribe one time then I got to keep going back every time I run out to get another with the diagnosis of asthma this wouldn't be mandatory for me.


What a bunch of crap. To make you suffer -- yes, suffer -- because they refuse to diagnose you with a result that would make your life more comfortable borders on medical malpractice, imo. What skin is it off of their nose to prescribe it correctly?



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by wlasikiewicz
reply to post by centurion1211
 


At least there will be no fat americans because when/ if they are banned all the fat people running to mcdonalds will have an Asthma attack.


Your attempt to slur Americans is kind of off topic, but to provide you some facts in answer ...

NHS source


Key facts
■In 2009, almost a quarter of adults (22 per cent of men and 24 per cent of women aged 16 or over) in England were classified as obese (BMI 30kg/m2 or over).
■A greater proportion of men than women (44 per cent compared with 33 per cent) in England were classified as overweight in 2009 (BMI 25 to less than 30kg/m2).
■In 2009/10, almost a quarter of adults (24.3 per cent of respondents) in England reported that they had taken part in sport on 11 to 28 days within a four week period.
■People are eating less saturated fat, trans fat and added sugar than they were 10 years ago.
■In 2008, among adults aged 16 and over, overweight or obese men and women were more likely to have high blood pressure than those in the normal weight group; high blood pressure was recorded in 48 per cent of men and 46 per cent of women in the obese group, compared with 32 per cent of overweight men and women and 17 per cent of men and women in the normal weight group.


Stop back by once you've got all the UK's problems sorted out.


edit on 9/25/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


well said, and I wonder if it's related to so many food allergies in kids. I don't remember food being deadly in the 70's when I was growing up



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic



Care to provide evidence from a reputable source that asthmatics using inhalers have any measurable effect on the atmosphere?


CFC's have a measurable effect on the atmosphere. If you want the details, look it up yourself. Everyone knows that we have been phasing out CFCs for some time now...



I remember when this was first introduced, back in 2008(?). My question back then is same as now: If these inhalers have a measurable effect on the atmosphere, what's been the effect on our lungs?

I go back and forth with this one. I've been an asthmatic my entire life. I remember my mother sitting with me in the steam-filled bathroom, hours at a time, waiting for an attack to come under control. Remember that, mom? (She's on this site too...lol)

My doctors have introduced, and included, most of the inhaled-powder delivery methods into my maintnance therapy, but they just aren't the same. For one thing, they DO NOT work when I need a rescue inhaler. As long as my asthma is under control, the powders are okay; but, I always carry a rescue inhaler on me.

I worry about not not having medical insurance (never know these days) and not having access to an RX. I know that I've purchased Primetine (sp?) Mist in the past, and have been comfortable knowing that my life did not depend on the controlled-monthly-limit that my doctor and insurance company allow. It's very difficult to stock up when limits have been placed on RX's.

I'm so uncomfortable with the increasing leverage and control our government has on our health and our own personal medical decisions. I suppose that is what I really need to learn to live with and get used to; as this issue (government control) is not going away and will only continue to become more and more suffocating (pun). Even our freedom to breath is becoming restricted!



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


I haven't overlooked that fact, in my post I even said my son got asthma after we were in a FEMA trailer for over a year, it was closer to 2 years, we were in it. Yes, I do think it is odd that he had been around cats before and had not had any issues, and suddenly he develops an "allergy" to cats, it doesn't make sense to me, but he now has asthma, and has to take an inhaler all the time.

For the record I do believe that he is allergic to cats, I was there for his allergy test, and cats came up positive, I just find it odd that is all. I think the FEMA trailer has something to do with his breathing problems today, how and why it did ..... I do not know.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


This has nothing to do with the environment. It has everything to do with pandering up the big pharma.

Logic, Obama style:

"My ratings are in the toilet? F# it, might as well just flush it then. I propose we remove a critically needed OTC medicine used by people to breath. Yeah, makes sense."

I didn't vote for him.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Did you even read any of this? This is from 2008. Not only is that before Obama was even president, it was long before he had any ratings at all, good or bad. I also still have my inhaler as they were not taken off the market. It made no difference to me which propellant BUSH wanted to use.

So please explain to me how Obama's ratings in 2011 made him so magical that he could do this before he was even elected. Then I need to know what a huge favor this was for big pharma anyway? Far be it for me to defend Bush but inhalers were not taken off the market.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

sorry, but I'd listen to the asthmatics on what is better before I'd listen to the bought out media....
and many (who are using both by the way, the perscription and the otc) say that if they need relief now, the otc is the way to go!!!
and I'm not jumping on the bandwagon here because I want to bash obama.....
like I said, if he had made an attempt to stop this, it would be a whole different thread we have here, and people would be complaining because all the drug manufacturers had to redesign their product for nothing!

and, I raised a son that had very bad asthma....
I have a nephew that still has very bad asthma!!!

my son when he was in school would come home complaining whenever he had the swimming lessons in school......it made him sick!!!!

my sister, well, the doctors put here through heck, had her cleaning her house from top to bottom twice a week to get rid of all the dust, didn't work ....then it was something else, it was the dirt, don't let him play in the dirt!!!....
well all through this, there was a nice pool in the back yard, that he was swimming in......

and yes....the chlorine in the pool will trigger asthma!!!

so much for doctors and such!!!

frequent indoor swimming, is just as dangerous as being around a smoker....but you ain't gonna hear of any big crusade to ban the pools are you???

same thing goes for the inhalers...
there's crap three times worse for the environment that will never, ever be addressed.....
since to address them would be just too darned costly to some businesses and society in general...

but, my concern for asthmatics is genuine!!!



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by FallenWun
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Did you even read any of this? This is from 2008. Not only is that before Obama was even president, it was long before he had any ratings at all, good or bad. I also still have my inhaler as they were not taken off the market. It made no difference to me which propellant BUSH wanted to use.

So please explain to me how Obama's ratings in 2011 made him so magical that he could do this before he was even elected. Then I need to know what a huge favor this was for big pharma anyway? Far be it for me to defend Bush but inhalers were not taken off the market.


I missed the date. Sorry it seemed to offend you so much.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

CFC's have a measurable effect on the atmosphere. If you want the details, look it up yourself. Everyone knows that we have been phasing out CFCs for some time now...



Nice attempted "side step".

What I asked you for was not the effect of CFC's in general, which we all pretty much know is bad. It was for data showing how much asthmatics using OTC inhalers contributed to the CFC problem. It's your contention that these inhalers are bad for the atmosphere, so you look it up.

And as I mentioned before, pretty stupid to go after the "little guys" (fair enough, since many are children) in the U.S., when the billions of chinese and indians are burning coal.
edit on 9/26/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join