Nonsense. The “new” inhalers still deliver the exact same dosage of Salbutamol (100 mcg) as the old ones. The only difference is the propellant, which has no medicinal value. And they still cost the same.
Another bronchodialator called Advair, (the expensive one which costs around $150 for 120 metered doses) and also contains a corticosteroid, also delivers the exact same 250 mcg of medicine. The propellant has no medicinal value whatsoever.
And to claim that theirs something ‘wrong’ with the ethanol based propellant, that you wife is playing ‘russian roulette’ is ridiculous.
I guess your wife plays russian roulette every time she has a beer, a glass of wine, or a shot of whiskey and a host of all sorts of other medicines, and products containing ethanol.
Does the new propellant get that dose to the lungs or is a larger amount wasted in the mouth and throat because it doesn't get dispersed well enough?
Nathan, you have no idea what you are talking about. As another poster pointed out, you are fortunate that HFA MDIs work well for you. Why don’t you leave it at that and shut the hell up? Do you think that because it works for you it must work for everyone? Are you that big a fool?
HFA-134a propellant has NEVER been tested on asthmatic and other pulmonary patients and may well be a problem for some patients.
Real world, large scale, rigorous postmarketing studies were never done on HFA MDIs- 40 million patients are undergoing forced real world postmarketing studies NOW- and NOW these programs are being uncovered.
Ethanol is a Class Three Residual Solvent and a PROVEN BRONCHOCONSTRICTOR when it’s ingested OR inhaled in MDIs for SOME asthma patients whether you like it or not- we have the medical papers on this linked to our site AS WELL AS a research paper explaining how this works in an animal model (don’t even try reading it, Nathan- it’s WAY above your pay grade).
The corn residue in the ethanol may be a problem for corn-allergic patients according to Sepracor (Xopenex HFA) and Schering-Plough (Proventil HFA) technical staff.
The extractables and leachables and OTHER impurities and inactive ingredients are all new in HFA MDIs and are undoubtedly part of the problem for some patients.
You are ignorant of the facts, Nathan.
Many, perhaps most patients CAN handle HFA MDIs. But we have physicians, surgeons, PhDs in pharmacology, RNs, Respiratory Therapists who are patients who know how to use MDIs who KNOW that HFA MDIs ARE NOT SAFE AND EFFECTIVE FOR ALL PATIENTS. Capisce, Nathan?
Question to all bloggers: WHY would a satisfied HFA MDI user ARGUE WITH AND ATTACK OTHERS WHO ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH HFA MDIs? What kind of fool would do that?
ANSWER: The drug companies hire internet trolls like “Nathan” to do exactly what “Nathan” is doing as part of their PR DEFENSE. This tactic is well documented.
So “Nathan” is either a fool who has not done his homework who is arguing about something he knows nothing about- or he is a paid internet troll. A liar. Take your pick.
To get the FACTS and read the DATA and SUPPORTIVE LINKS that back up all I’ve said and much more- and to join our campaign to legalize CFC MDIs, go here:
www.saveCFCinhalers.org
Arthur Abramson
The National Campaign to Save CFC Asthma Inhalers