Michael Burgess

If there is a danger to inhaled epinephrine, then why the hell has the FDA not prevented it?

I mean that is kind of what we are saying here, isn't it?

So we know people can die from over-the-counter products.

I mean this really makes no sense.

Yes, we should have the EPA here. They should be answering the question why are there two prescription products that are continuing to use CFCs still sold, not affected under the ban?

Well, Mr. Chairman, I would just reiterate the observation that we are here today having this hearing.

I asked the cabdriver, would you stop at a pharmacy and let me pick up a rescue inhaler so I am not sitting here in the backseat of your cab suffocating.

CFC is a much better propellant than HFA. HFA is for wimps. CFC delivers the right dose at the right time.

Can you understand why there is such frustration with this?

It is just preposterous that we are having this argument around CFC, around the propellant under the Montreal Protocol.

I am speaking to you not just as a Member of Congress. I am also a physician. I am also an asthma patient.

We should not be abandoning patients with serious medical conditions like asthma to self-diagnosis and self-medication with less-effective drugs that have known side effects.

I thank the gentleman for his testimony.

How come you know better than I do about what is best to treat my asthma?

Now, asthma sufferers who find themselves awakened at 2:00 a.m. with an unexpected attack and who don't have other medicines in the home don't have immediate access to an inhaler.

A replacement inhaler has been before the Food and Drug Administration's approval board for some time, but the FDA has taken no action to allow for another over-the-counter inhaler to be available for consumers.

You know, this past January 1, a common over-the-counter emergency asthma inhaler was taken off the pharmacy shelves due to an international treaty agreement known as the Montreal Protocol.

But now if you got someone looking over your shoulder saying look, you are a high utilizer for this type of testing and these indications are very soft, who is going to help us with the liability side of that question?

But honestly, we have got to allow for the rich panoply of practices that are out there to continue to thrive.

Moving to a model where fee-for-service no longer exists is, in some ways, problematic because it is the world that many of us--I practiced medicine for 25 years.

Together, the public and private sectors can and should work together to get the health care system on a better path to sustainability.

Local markets have different needs, and while one payment model may work in New Jersey, it doesn't necessarily work in Montana.

Any new payment system should rely on improved outcomes, quality, safety, and efficiency.

I think that the health care system is in crisis, and the other providers have the same problems.

I certainly will not support, and I think it is useless politically, to try to take the money away from the Affordable Care Act.