Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / January 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Beta-Agonists may cause thousands of asthma-related deaths each year

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Roman Bystrianyk - 02 Jan 2007 03:27 GMT
http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_news.php?event=org_news_print_list_item&id=116
Roman Bystrianyk, "Beta-Agonists may cause thousands of asthma-related
deaths each year", Health Sentinel, January 2, 2007,

Long-acting beta-agonists are part of a group of medications call
bronchodilators which act to open up constricted airways. Long-acting
beta-agonists, such as salmeterol (Serevent) and formoterol (Foradil)
are used to control moderate to severe asthma and prevent nighttime
symptoms. Salmeterol is one of the most widely prescribed medications
in the world, with an estimated 3.5 million adults treated in the
United States in 2004.

Advair is the brand name drug combining fluticasone (a steroid) and
salmeterol to prevent wheezing, shortness of breath, and breathing
difficulties caused by asthma. Made by GlaxoSmithKline Advair contains
salmeterol that is found alone in Serevent. In 2004, Advair's U.S.
sales reached $2.4 billion, and its worldwide sales of more than $4.5
billion made it the third best selling drug in the world.

But just how safe are these products in treating asthma?

In May 2005, the FDA requested manufacturers of these medications
(Advair Diskus, Foradil Aerolizer, and Serevent Diskus) to update their
product warning labels that these products "increase the chance of
severe asthma episodes, and death when those episodes occur."

However, controversy has surrounded the use of beta-agonists in asthma
patients ever since their introduction over 50 years ago. Numerous
studies over many years have shown regular use of beta-agonists are
associated with tolerance to the drug's effects and worsening of
disease control. Observational studies have consistently shown that the
risk of life threatening and fatal asthma attacks increase with the use
of these medications.

After receiving post marketing reports of several asthma-related deaths
associated with Salmeterol a Multi-center Asthma Research Trial (SMART)
was undertaken. The study followed more than 26,000 participants for 6
months and found a 4-fold increased risk for asthma-related deaths.

Beta-agonists are also widely used to treat Chronic Obstructive
Pulmonary Disease, or COPD. A recent meta-analysis pooled the results
of 22 randomized trials, which followed more that 15,000 participants
with COPD. The study found that beta-agonists increased respiratory
deaths by more than 2-fold.

In November 2004, whistleblower Dr. David Graham indicated that
salmeterol (Serevent, A&H) was one of the drugs currently on the market
that may be endangering patients. The other drugs Dr. Graham named were
the weight loss drug sibutramine (sold as Reductil in Britain and
Meridia in the United States), the lipid lowering drug rosuvastatin
(Crestor; made by AstraZeneca), and the acne drug isotretinoin
(Roaccutane; Roche).

A recent study published in Annals of Internal Medicine, performed a
meta-analysis to determine the effect of long-acting beta-agonists on
severe asthma exacerbations requiring hospitalization, life-threatening
asthma attacks, and asthma-related deaths. They analyzed salmeterol and
formoterol in children and adults examining all randomized,
double-blind, placebo-controlled trials on long-acting beta-agonist use
in patients with asthma that were published between 1966 and December
2005. The authors were able to pool the results of 19 trials with
33,826 participants.

The authors found that "long-acting beta-agonists increased the risk
for hospitalization for an asthma exacerbation, life-threatening asthma
attacks, and asthma-related deaths compared with placebo.
Hospitalizations increased among adults and children with salmeterol
and formoterol."

Regular use of beta-agonists has been shown to increase bronchial
hyperactivity regardless of some degree of bronchodilation. This effect
along with the reduction in response to later rescue beta-agonist use
"may worsen asthma control without giving any warning of increased
symptoms."

The authors determined that because these medications are so widely
used throughout the United States and the world that "salmeterol may
be responsible for approximately 4,000 of the 5,000 asthma-related
deaths that occur in the United States each year."

Asthma deaths increased worldwide in the 1960s when beta-agonists were
introduced onto the market. In New Zealand asthma related deaths
increased when the beta-agonist drug fenoterol was introduced. Asthma
related deaths rapidly decreased when use of the drug was severely cut
back. "If long-acting beta-agonists were removed from the market in
the United States, we might witness a reduction in asthma mortality
rates here."

The authors conclude, "long-acting beta-agonists use increases the
risk for hospitalizations due to asthma, life-threatening asthma
exacerbations, and asthma-related deaths. Similar risks are found with
salmeterol and formoterol and in children and adults. Concomitant
inhaled corticosteroids do not adequately protect against the adverse
effects."

"The use of long-acting beta-agonists could be associated with a
clinically significant number of unnecessary hospitalizations,
intensive care unit admissions, and deaths each year. Black box
warnings on the labeling for these agents clearly outline the increased
risk for asthma-related deaths associated with their use, but these
warnings have not changed prescribing practices of physicians. This
information could be used to reassess whether these agents should be
withdrawn from the market."

SOURCE: Annals of Internal Medicine, June 2006
Richard Friedel - 11 Jan 2007 07:42 GMT
on LABAS.
.......

But see:
See
http://mdredux.blogspot.com/2006/08/more-on-laba-controversy-thoughtful.html
"Retired doctor's thoughts"
More on the LABA controversy-a thoughtful analysis from an allergist's
perspective

Dr. Stuart Henochowicz, an allergist-internist blogger, recently posted
some cogent comments about the use of LABAs in asthma including
comments regarding the combo inhalers ( steroids and a LABA).

Asthma patients are often treated by allergists or pulmonary docs or
sometimes both and as a pulmonary physician I welcome his thoughts
regarding the recent flare up of the concern about the safety of the
long acting beta-agonists (LABAs). This exacerbation of concern was
triggered mainly by the publication of the poorly done SMART trial and
what I believe to be a flawed and overblown meta-analysis in the Annals
of Internal Medicine by Salpeter.

Some of his key points are:
LABAs should not be used in asthma without inhaled steroid coverage.
The combo inhalers are very helpful in asthma treatment.
There are data supporting the value of those combination products.

I believe his comments reflect what I sense to be a consensus among
physicians who treat asthma on a regular basis, allergists and
pulmonary docs. I continue to have concerns that the annals'
meta-analysis might cause asthma patients to discontinue their long
acting beta agonist-steroid combination inhalers with resultant
exacerbation of their asthma.In fact, some medical bloggers have
commented that has already happened.
toto - 11 Jan 2007 11:13 GMT
try looking at the airpollution and direct correlations between worsening
asthma . I think if one is able to draw conclusions, ,  people  qgi are
systematically made to  breathe moderate particulates and ozone over and
over again ( see my air filter for example) would show that!, almost more
then anything affects the continued ill health of millions of people around
the world. What people do to stop it is like putting a band aid on a
volcano.
> http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_news.php?event=org_news_print_list_item&id=116
> Roman Bystrianyk, "Beta-Agonists may cause thousands of asthma-related
[quoted text clipped - 101 lines]
>
> SOURCE: Annals of Internal Medicine, June 2006
Roman Bystrianyk - 11 Jan 2007 17:04 GMT
> try looking at the airpollution and direct correlations between worsening
> asthma . I think if one is able to draw conclusions, ,  people  qgi are
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> the world. What people do to stop it is like putting a band aid on a
> volcano.

Very true ... this article may be of interest to you.

Roman

Charles Piller in San Francisco and Edmund Sanders in Nigeria, "The
Gates cash that keeps people healthy but makes them sick", Sydney
Morning Herald, Australia, January 8, 2007,
Link:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/the-gates-cash-that-keeps-people-healthy-but-ma
kes-them-sick/2007/01/07/1168104868098.html


JUSTICE ETA, 14 months old, held out his tiny thumb. An ink spot
certified that he had been immunised against polio and measles, thanks
to a vaccination drive in Ebocha, Nigeria, supported by the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation.

But polio is not the only threat Justice faces; he has suffered from
respiratory ailments since birth. Many people blame this on the flames
and smoke that rise 100 metres over a nearby oil plant. The plant is
owned by the Italian petroleum giant Eni, whose investors include the
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The makeshift clinic where Justice Eta was vaccinated and the flares
spewing over Ebocha represent a head-on conflict for the Gates
Foundation. In a contradiction between its grants and its endowment
holdings, the foundation reaps vast financial gains every year from
investments that contravene its good works.

Elekwachi Okey, a local doctor, says hundreds of flares at oil plants
in the Niger Delta have caused an epidemic of bronchitis in adults, and
asthma and blurred vision in children. Many of the 250 toxic chemicals
in the fumes and soot have long been linked to respiratory disease and
cancer. "We're all smokers here," Dr Okey said, "but not with
cigarettes."

The Gates Foundation has poured $US218 million ($280 million) into
polio and measles immunisation and research worldwide, including in the
Niger Delta. At the same time it has invested $US423 million in Eni,
Royal Dutch Shell, Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Total of France - the
companies responsible for blanketing the delta with pollution, beyond
anything permitted in the US or Europe.

Local leaders blame oil development for fostering some of the very
afflictions the foundation combats. Oil bore holes fill with stagnant
water, a breeding ground for mosquitoes that spread malaria. Health
inspectors also cite an oil spill clogging rivers as a cause of
cholera. The gas flares contain toxic byproducts such as benzene,
mercury and chromium and lower immunity, said the area's health
commissioner, Dr Nonyenim Solomon Enyidah.

Like most philanthropies, the Gates Foundation gives away at least 5
per cent of its worth every year, thus avoiding paying most taxes. In
2005 it distributed nearly $US1.4 billion.

A policy officer at the foundation, Monica Harrington, said the
investment managers had one goal: returns "that will allow for the
continued funding of foundation programs and grant making".

An investigation has found that the foundation has holdings in many
firms that have failed tests of social responsibility because of
environmental lapses, employment discrimination, disregard for worker
rights, or unethical practices. The foundation has big holdings in
several companies ranked among the worst US polluters, including
ConocoPhillips, Dow Chemical and Tyco.

The investments also include pharmaceutical firms that price drugs
beyond the reach of AIDS patients the foundation is trying to treat.
Hundreds of Gates Foundation investments have been in companies that
countered the foundation's charitable goals.

This is "the dirty secret" of many large philanthropies, said Paul
Hawken, director of the Natural Capital Institute. "Foundations donate
to groups trying to heal the future, but with their investments they
steal from the future." Worse, said Douglas Bauer, of Rockefeller
Philanthropy Advisors, was investing for profit without attempting to
improve a company's way of operating.

By contrast, foundations that make social justice, corporate governance
and environmental stewardship key considerations in their investment
strategies include the $US11.6 billion Ford Foundation, America's
second-largest private philanthropy.

The Gates foundation did not respond to written questions about whether
it might change its investment policies.

Los Angeles Times
mcs - 14 Jan 2007 14:27 GMT
>> try looking at the airpollution and direct correlations between worsening
>> asthma . I think if one is able to draw conclusions, ,  people  qgi are
[quoted text clipped - 90 lines]
>
> Los Angeles Times

Good Article! how long do you think it will take for a reporter to ask Gates
about this?

My contention is rather conspiracy laden and its probably too late for me
and I really don't or didn't have power to back up my own presumptions by
protecting myself . But there are some people who think the biggest cause of
illness and death today is air pollution, refineries, coal plant, and too
much car exhauset concentrated in too small areas. Now you can tell me what
am I going to do about it or what have i done about it, as an argument of
you can just accept the premise that where you live and how much pollution
is in your area might be the most important decisions in your lives instead.
. I am not sure by telling people to correlate the importance of air
pollution, or and global warming then makes it my responsibility to do
something about it but thats basically the only argument people give me
 I think now that Yahoo discussion pages has ended, the only places left to
complain are on newsgroups and by telling each other of this dilemma.
 Do other places in other countries have it as bad or worse? Sure
Again the heart attack or cancer one might have may also because of that
accumulation of toxins in the air and  doesn't just have to have a bad
respiratory system to prove its ill effects , and it might not besomething
that is genetically misplaced. When that little girl is dying from cancer,
or that middle age guy at age 58 has had a heart attack  the important thing
to figure out is how many people like that there are where they live, to
figure out why they got sick to begin with. I personally think this is by
far the biggest killer and reason get sick in many areas and can be proven.
Show me anyone where studies were done correlated to amounts of pollution
( all pollution ) people absorbed by showing the risk factors of all illness
corresponded to a persons daily exposure to pollution andhow much. whether
on the job or where they lived. You tell me by now experienced lawyers and
doctors and staticians can't compare say people living on a heavy congested
street in heavy polluted city and compared that guy to someone who lives on
a farm in Oklahoma ( clean air state). I think there is nothing more
compelling than the accumulated air and pollution and gases that rendeer
people sick and senile faster then most any cause except maybe cholesterol
laden foods or smoking.
Will any lawyer or any person ever get compensated for getting sick by not
being protected ? I doubt it. This is the biggest reason of people getting
sick and dying and getting ill in life today or one of the biggest reasons.
I can come up with ten other studies at least to prove the same.
Roman Bystrianyk - 14 Jan 2007 15:58 GMT
> Show me anyone where studies were done correlated to amounts of pollution
> ( all pollution ) people absorbed by showing the risk factors of all illness
> corresponded to a persons daily exposure to pollution andhow much. whether
> on the job or where they lived.

Here is one news story that may be of interest - there are many more
showing the relationship to pollution and health problems.

Enjoy your day.
Roman

Roman Bystrianyk, "Outdoor Air Pollution Increases Deaths from Stroke",
Health Sentinel, February 24, 2005,

Stroke is the third leading cause of death, ranking just behind heart
disease and cancer. A study in the journal Stroke examines the
relationship between outdoor air pollution and stroke.

The study authors examined the air pollution in the city of Sheffield
England. Using air pollution data they mapped particulate matter
(PM10), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) throughout the
area. They created five pollution categories. The highest category had
pollution values of NOx at 61.9 ?g/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter),
PM10at 23.3 ?g/m3, and CO at 482 ?g/m3. The lowest category had
pollution values of NOx at 47.6 ?g/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter),
PM10at 16.0 ?g/m3, and CO at 360 ?g/m3.

Over a 5-year period the authors analyzed 2,979 deaths and 5,122
hospital admissions from stroke. The deaths and hospital admissions
were mapped according to the established pollution categories. After
adjusting for smoking, age, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation the
authors found pollution levels were significantly connected with
increasing deaths from stroke. In fact, the authors determined that if
there were no other unknown factors that 11% of stroke deaths were due
to outdoor air pollution.

The authors discuss how pollution could be related to increase in the
risk of stroke. They note that experimental evidence shows that
ultrafine pollution particles are able to enter the blood through the
lungs. Other studies have shown that pollution does play a part in
damage to the blood vessel walls, which is associated with the
progression of cardiovascular disease.

The authors conclude that, "if we assume causality and use NOx as an
indicator of outdoor air pollution, 11% of stroke deaths in Sheffield
would have been attributable to the adverse effects of outdoor air
pollution. Although this population attributable risk fraction is not
large, outdoor air pollution is important, because it is a potentially
modifiable risk factor for stroke. Our results suggest that targeting
policy interventions at high pollution areas may be a feasible option
for stroke prevention. Further studies are needed to confirm our
findings."

SOURCE: Stroke, February 2005

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_news.php?id=028&title=Outdoor+Air+Pollution+In
creases+Deaths+from+Stroke&event=org_news_print_list_item

mcs - 14 Jan 2007 22:38 GMT
Roman
I know they exist, I know exactly of the consequences. I smoked for twelve
years , then running and eating good. The worse thing in my life has not
been  things I can control, its things I can't  controll and asthma and air
quality and everything gets worse in moderate particulate pollution days. I
then say how they would advertise for meds in bad air areas like mine but
never tell you why you needed them.Studies , if you look hard on the net
are there and starting to be published  and tens of more could show the same
ill effects AT LEAST , . So then the question is why is it allowed and why
have the polluters not been sued?  They had to know of their effects. The
price we pay are in the billions and if its the leading cause of illness
besides bad foods and bad habits like smoking, then what that say about why
food and bad habits are important to talk about and not pollution?  We do
have alternatives. its time to inform families they are quite possibly in
harms way and they better do something , instead of just talking about how
good a cars bumper is or if we have global warming.. anyway .. nothing will
ever change me about what I have seen with correlations of air pollution and
ill health . There is virtually nothing good about moderate particulates or
worse of pollution except to pretend it don't exist in the first place.

mcs wrote:

> Show me anyone where studies were done correlated to amounts of pollution
> ( all pollution ) people absorbed by showing the risk factors of all
> illness
> corresponded to a persons daily exposure to pollution andhow much. whether
> on the job or where they lived.

Here is one news story that may be of interest - there are many more
showing the relationship to pollution and health problems.

Enjoy your day.
Roman

Roman Bystrianyk, "Outdoor Air Pollution Increases Deaths from Stroke",
Health Sentinel, February 24, 2005,

Stroke is the third leading cause of death, ranking just behind heart
disease and cancer. A study in the journal Stroke examines the
relationship between outdoor air pollution and stroke.

The study authors examined the air pollution in the city of Sheffield
England. Using air pollution data they mapped particulate matter
(PM10), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) throughout the
area. They created five pollution categories. The highest category had
pollution values of NOx at 61.9 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter),
PM10at 23.3 µg/m3, and CO at 482 µg/m3. The lowest category had
pollution values of NOx at 47.6 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter),
PM10at 16.0 µg/m3, and CO at 360 µg/m3.

Over a 5-year period the authors analyzed 2,979 deaths and 5,122
hospital admissions from stroke. The deaths and hospital admissions
were mapped according to the established pollution categories. After
adjusting for smoking, age, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation the
authors found pollution levels were significantly connected with
increasing deaths from stroke. In fact, the authors determined that if
there were no other unknown factors that 11% of stroke deaths were due
to outdoor air pollution.

The authors discuss how pollution could be related to increase in the
risk of stroke. They note that experimental evidence shows that
ultrafine pollution particles are able to enter the blood through the
lungs. Other studies have shown that pollution does play a part in
damage to the blood vessel walls, which is associated with the
progression of cardiovascular disease.

The authors conclude that, "if we assume causality and use NOx as an
indicator of outdoor air pollution, 11% of stroke deaths in Sheffield
would have been attributable to the adverse effects of outdoor air
pollution. Although this population attributable risk fraction is not
large, outdoor air pollution is important, because it is a potentially
modifiable risk factor for stroke. Our results suggest that targeting
policy interventions at high pollution areas may be a feasible option
for stroke prevention. Further studies are needed to confirm our
findings."

SOURCE: Stroke, February 2005

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_news.php?id=028&title=Outdoor+Air+Pollution+In
creases+Deaths+from+Stroke&event=org_news_print_list_item

mcs - 14 Jan 2007 14:42 GMT
sorry my grammer and spelling

Good Article! how long do you think it will take for a reporter to ask Gates
> about this?
>
[quoted text clipped - 63 lines]
> has been my contentions for ten years..
> I can come up with ten other studies at least to prove the same.

----- Original Message -----
From: "mcs" <mcs@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.support.asthma
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: Beta-Agonists may cause thousands of asthma-related deaths each
year

>> toto wrote:
>>> try looking at the airpollution and direct correlations between
[quoted text clipped - 93 lines]
>>
>> Los Angeles Times

>> try looking at the airpollution and direct correlations between worsening
>> asthma . I think if one is able to draw conclusions, ,  people  qgi are
[quoted text clipped - 90 lines]
>
> Los Angeles Times
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.