Obama Administration to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns

[Luddly Neddite]

How do you people get so stupid? Is it SO important to hate everything the Obama government does that you're willing to look like complete morons to do it?

The medication isn't being banned, the PROPELLANT is. In fact, as you've heard, it was banned eighteen years ago. Do you actually think no one can put epinephrine into a container with a different propellant?

For christ's sake folks, put your thinking caps on.

I think they used freon because it was the most desirable propellant. It's undoubtedly the most chemically inert. When you're spraying stuff into your lungs, you want it to be inert unless it's medication. Any changes will mean a less desirable substance. I doubt the amounts of freon used for medical purposes are going to have any detectable affect on the environment, but the Kommisars at the EPA are too stupid to consider anything like reasonable exceptions to their Stalinist rules.

Or the really stupid ones will call you a Stalinist.

 

[Rozman]

Un friggin real....

 

[Moonglow]

Yeah, again for those on the short bus, that missed my post on the first page. The ban was approved an passed by a GOP controlled Congress and passed into law in 1996, by Clinton. Why is Oblama getting the blame for what the GOP approved of 18 years ago?

 

[Moonglow]

Is the right on this thread contaminated with geriatric profanity disease and Grand Pooh-Bah?

 

[Moonglow]

Were is the bitching when Nixon nixed the Supersonic jets in 1970???Why because calculations found that it would disrupt the chemical reactions of the ozone in the stratosphere. Now let's all hear the moaning and agony from the Oblama haters that this is his fault also....

 

[Moonglow]

How do you people get so stupid? Is it SO important to hate everything the Obama government does that you're willing to look like complete morons to do it?

The medication isn't being banned, the PROPELLANT is. In fact, as you've heard, it was banned eighteen years ago. Do you actually think no one can put epinephrine into a container with a different propellant?

For christ's sake folks, put your thinking caps on.

I think they used freon because it was the most desirable propellant. It's undoubtedly the most chemically inert. When you're spraying stuff into your lungs, you want it to be inert unless it's medication. Any changes will mean a less desirable substance. I doubt the amounts of freon used for medical purposes are going to have any detectable affect on the environment, but the Kommisars at the EPA are too stupid to consider anything like reasonable exceptions to their Stalinist rules.

Or the really stupid ones will call you a Stalinist.

Why never a Leninist???

 

[flacaltenn]

I just made one and you're right---it's too expensive to let people with breathing problems live.

Think of it as eugenics for the 21st century.

But no death panels!

So I see you would like to deplete the ozone for the future generations of humans?

How many asthma inhalers does it take to end the world?? What a fucking bunch of mental midgets. 2 spritzes a day is gonna kill future life on the planet? We have acheived complete Idiocracy.....

 

[RollingThunder]

So I see you would like to deplete the ozone for the future generations of humans?

How many asthma inhalers does it take to end the world?? What a fucking bunch of mental midgets. 2 spritzes a day is gonna kill future life on the planet? We have acheived complete Idiocracy.....

And there ol' fecalhead's idiotic inability to comprehend the situation again, same as always.

Asthma inhalers are sold all around the world. While they are kind of expensive in the US, they are fairly cheap in most of the rest of the world. Total annual worldwide sakes were calculated at about 7 billion dollars in 2009. Almost certainly higher now. So....tens of millions of fecalhead's "2 spritzes a day" (actually more than that for many asthmatics) happening every year. Individually, a source of like this releases a miniscule amount of gas every time it is used but collectively, all of the inhalers could release a very significant amount of a troublesome ozone destroying gas. Of course there are laws and international agreements to try to eliminate the manufacture and use of this dangerous chemical. So why not switch to a different propellant that isn't harmful to the environment? There are better delivery systems available and better propellants.

The real issue with the cost of inhalers is an entirely different one, but the rightwingnuts' corporate puppet-masters don't want them to look at this other issue involving drug company extortionist pricing, so they distract them with this idiotic, hyper-partisan attack-Obama/attack-EPA/attack the very idea of regulating industry and protecting the environment propaganda drivel.

The Soaring Cost of a Simple Breath

 

[Crick]

Has anyone posted this? Took all of five seconds to find.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED

Metered Dose Inhalers - Exemptions from the Class I Phaseout | Ozone Layer Protection - Regulatory Programs | US EPA

This entire action took place in December of 2008 and was a long-planned step in the execution of the Montreal Protocol.

At no point were albuterol inhalers made unavailable.

Another utterly pointless thread based on ignorance and prejudice, enabled by the ODS in the same people who think the EPA is going to turn the nation's lights off.

 

[bripat9643]

How do you people get so stupid? Is it SO important to hate everything the Obama government does that you're willing to look like complete morons to do it?

The medication isn't being banned, the PROPELLANT is. In fact, as you've heard, it was banned eighteen years ago. Do you actually think no one can put epinephrine into a container with a different propellant?

For christ's sake folks, put your thinking caps on.

I think they used freon because it was the most desirable propellant. It's undoubtedly the most chemically inert. When you're spraying stuff into your lungs, you want it to be inert unless it's medication. Any changes will mean a less desirable substance. I doubt the amounts of freon used for medical purposes are going to have any detectable affect on the environment, but the Kommisars at the EPA are too stupid to consider anything like reasonable exceptions to their Stalinist rules.

Or the really stupid ones will call you a Stalinist.

No, the really stupid ones loved Stalin.

 

[Crick]

Paddy!

Got the facts now?

Calmed down now?

Ready to let this one go now?

Prepared to do a little more thinking before jumping into the next one?

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets face it.....what we are dealing with here are human racists. Every so called "environmentalist" on here is nothing more than a human racist. These people are prejudiced of the human race >>>




That’s right: believing it’s a bad thing that human activity impacts climate change is akin to “human racism.”

CPAC panelist accuses climate activists of ?human racism? - Salon.com



And one wonders why they are referred to as the AGW k00ks??




Put another way? To a person, these meatheads would throw grandma under the bus if she didn't concur with all things global arming alarmism. You don't agree with us? "FUCK YOU..........you deserve to die!!"



This is the level of mental case we are dealing with here.



Fortunately.......they are losing big >>>>>> http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/313851-more-proof-the-skeptics-are-winning.html ( over 100 links in this thread to prove it too!!!.....a scientific Jonestown for these nuts )

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[eagle1462010]

Who stands to gain financially from this?

It's about the money, not the dang environment. Now anyone who needs it gets to pay at least double for inhalers..................

Perhaps the real reason is who will get the political campaign funds for pushing this issue..........................

How many political Whores get the pay off for this ban.

 

[eagle1462010]

Perhaps Whores isn't the proper word to use. Whores give themselves away, Prostitute's SELL IT.

So perhaps I should use the term Prostitutes from now own.

 

[Crick]

Sorry, but, no, it had nothing to do with money. No one is going to get campaign funds for this. No one is pushing this. It is simply one of the last stages in our fullfillment of an agreement the US signed and ratified in 1989.

If you want to blame someone for this, try George Bush Senior.
****************************************************
Has anyone posted this? Took all of five seconds to find.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED

Metered Dose Inhalers - Exemptions from the Class I Phaseout | Ozone Layer Protection - Regulatory Programs | US EPA

This entire action took place in December of 2008 and was a long-planned step in the execution of the Montreal Protocol of 1987.

At no point were albuterol inhalers made unavailable.

Another utterly pointless thread based on ignorance and prejudice, enabled by the ODS in the same people who think the EPA is going to turn the nation's lights off.

 

[Crick]

Anyone else want to demonstrate their blinding ignorance?

 

[Sarah G]

chlorofluorocarbons which were banned when?

Chlorofluorocarbons have been banned since 1996 because they destroy the ozone layer. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are a group of manufactured chemical compounds that contain chlorine, fluorine, and carbon. This group includes CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CFC-114, CFC-115, and many forms of Freon.

toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/.../chem..
So let us destroy the ozone because it's all Oblama fault for not letting us do it. But which would you like to have, an ozone or chlorofluorocarbons ?

They'd rather have whatever it is Obama doesn't want...

Idiots. It isn't as if they're taking away breathing.

 

[skookerasbil]

human racists are gay

 

[Crick]

chlorofluorocarbons which were banned when?

Chlorofluorocarbons have been banned since 1996 because they destroy the ozone layer. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are a group of manufactured chemical compounds that contain chlorine, fluorine, and carbon. This group includes CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CFC-114, CFC-115, and many forms of Freon.

toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/.../chem..
So let us destroy the ozone because it's all Oblama fault for not letting us do it. But which would you like to have, an ozone or chlorofluorocarbons ?

They'd rather have whatever it is Obama doesn't want...

Idiots. It isn't as if they're taking away breathing.

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (a protocol to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer) is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances that are responsible for ozone depletion. The treaty was opened for signature on September 16th, 1987, and entered into force on January 1st, 1989, followed by a first meeting in Helsinki, May 1989. Since then, it has undergone seven revisions, in 1990 (London), 1991 (Nairobi), 1992 (Copenhagen), 1993 (Bangkok), 1995 (Vienna), 1997 (Montreal), and 1999 (Beijing). If the international agreement is adhered to, the ozone layer is expected to recover by 2050.[1] Due to its widespread adoption and implementation it has been hailed as an example of exceptional international co-operation, with Kofi Annan quoted as saying that "perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date has been the Montreal Protocol".[2] The two ozone treaties have been ratified by 197 parties, which includes 196 states and the European Union,[3] making them the first universally ratified treaties in United Nations history.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol

I'm afraid you guys are on the wrong side of history - in multiple ways.