First needle-free treatment for life-threatening allergic reactions will be made available in the UK as a nasal spray
The medicines regulator has approved the drug EURneffy for emergency use in a move welcomed by allergy campaigners.
They say it provides an 'easier and more accessible' alternative to injectable epipens, which are currently used to treat severe reactions, known as anaphylaxis.
Companies are required by law to clearly tell customers if their food contains any of 14 specified allergens, which have the potential to kill.
These include nuts, crustaceans, eggs, fish, milk, mustard and sesame. Some people also suffer fatal reactions to insect stings and medicines.
Tanya Ednan-Laperouse, whose daughter Natasha died in 2016 after eating a Pret baguette containing sesame, said: 'The number of people experiencing anaphylaxis triggered by food has increased dramatically over the last 20 years.
'But we know that some people are reluctant to use the current adrenaline auto-injectors in the event of anaphylaxis due to a fear of needles and hurting someone.
'This can delay administering adrenaline, and in a food allergy emergency every second counts.
'The nasal spray will be an easier and more accessible way of administering this life-saving medication, and is great news for people living with food allergies.'
Mrs Ednan-Laperouse, who founded food allergy charity the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation in her daughter's name, added: 'Spare supplies of these nasal adrenaline devices should now be another option available to schools.'
The Food Standards Agency says up to 2 per cent of adults and 8 per cent of children in the UK live with a food allergy.
Anaphylaxis is a sudden and life-threatening allergic reaction that can cause a drop in blood pressure and breathing difficulties.
More than 7,000 birth certificates a year in the mention anaphylactic shock, according to the Office for National Statistics.
EURneffy, which contains adrenaline, is intended for use in adults and children who weigh 30kg (66lb) or more, and can be used even if people have colds or blocked noses.
It is a single dose nasal spray that delivers its entire contents (2mg) upon activation.
People are reminded the plunger should not be pressed before inserting the product into the nostril, otherwise the single dose will be lost.
Julian Beach, from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, said: 'Patient safety is our top priority, which is why we're pleased to approve the first needle-free nasal spray formulation of adrenaline for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis in the UK.
'Until now, adrenaline for self-administration has only been available via auto-injectors.
'While this represents an important new option, adrenaline auto-injectors remain a vital and potentially life-saving treatment, giving people experiencing anaphylaxis valuable time before emergency help arrives.
'We continue to encourage everyone at risk of severe allergic reactions, and those around them, to familiarise themselves with how to respond in an emergency.
'Resources and guidance are available on the MHRA website to help people be prepared.'
The MHRA said patients should always carry two nasal sprays with them in case a second dose is needed, and tell family and friends where it is.
A spokeswoman for the drug firm behind the spray, ALK, said: 'The market launch in the UK is expected within the coming months once market access negotiations are completed.'
ALK is having ongoing discussions to agree a price with the Department of Health and Social Care.
Once an NHS list price has been agreed and the product is available, doctors will be able to prescribe the nasal spray.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Retired banker hits halfway mark in bid to run 200 marathons around coast
A retired banker who is striving to become the first man over the age of 60 to run the entire coastline of mainland Britain completed his 100th consecutive day of running. Steve James, 65, has reached the halfway point of his goal to run 200 marathons in 200 days, while researchers at the University of Exeter monitor the impact on his body. Mr James set off from Topsham, Devon on April 16 and will end his feat there after running anticlockwise around the coast for seven months. He currently runs for around six hours each day, occasionally staying with his wife in their camper van, or in various accommodation. 'Reaching the halfway stage is a milestone I could only have dreamed of when I set off 100 days ago,' he said as he marked the milestone by running from Oban to Craobh Haven . 'There have been points where I didn't know if I'd make it, but I've proved to myself I'm capable of pushing beyond my limits, both physical and mental. 'It's overwhelming looking back on what I've achieved. 'I feel so proud of myself and hope I can inspire others over 60, that you are never too old to attempt the impossible no matter how ridiculous it seems.' Mr James, a father of five, has already faced his share of hardships on his journey, running through harsh weather conditions, closed footpaths, severely blistered feet, and a gout flare-up resulting in a trip to hospital. The Exeter research team assessed him before his departure and continue to monitor him throughout this challenge. They are studying his calorie intake, blood, oxygen and muscle measurements to examine the effect of such an extreme sport on the body. 'By the end of this challenge, the scientists will have more insight into how far a 65-year-old person can push their body,' Mr James, who lives and trains on Dartmoor, said. 'Of all the challenges I've done, this is the most extreme and the biggest stretch.' At this stage the team has seen no adverse effects of this high-endurance challenge in the blood samples which are being used to measure hormone fluctuations, inflammation and overall health. Mr James has lost weight although this was a likely result the researchers anticipated because of his extreme calorie output. Dr Freyja Haigh, nutritional physiology researcher at the University of Exeter, said: 'Having reached this point would be an incredible achievement for anyone, but doing it in your 60s is a whole different ballgame. 'What Steve is doing really challenges the stereotypes of ageing and redefines what's possible later in life. 'It's also fascinating in terms of the science; Steve gives us a real insight into how this type of endurance affects the body of an older person. 'It's been such a privilege to work with him so far and I can't wait to see how he gets on in this next stage. 'We're currently tracking Steve's energy intake and expenditure in order to assess any changes in body mass, which is to be expected with this very physical challenge. 'We're unsure at the moment if Steve's weight loss is from fat or muscle mass. I'm hoping to visit him in the near future to take muscle thickness measurements at multiple points on the body to compare with those we took before he left.' Throughout his life, Mr James has loved physical challenges, from taking part in Ten Tors hiking challenge while at school, to cycling around the world in 220 days in 2019. The record for running the British coastline is held by Nick Butter, who completed the feat in 128 days at the age of 31. But Mr James is the first person over 60 to attempt the feat.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Shop-bought health testing kits 'inaccurate and unsuitable', study says
Home health tests bought by people seeking answers about their conditions could give inaccurate and misleading results and require much greater regulation to ensure they are safe, reliable, and effective, researchers have bowel cancer to the menopause, shop-bought health kits now test for a wide range of conditions and are readily available on high streets and in supermarkets across the two new studies, published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), say many of the kits lack crucial information, such as who should use them, how to interpret the results, and what steps to take response, the regulator which oversees medical devices in the UK, MHRA, says it is "overhauling" safety standards. Researchers at the University of Birmingham collected and analysed 30 self-test kits, costing between £1.89 and £39.99, in 2023. These included tests for conditions such as bowel cancer, vitamin deficiencies, thyroid issues, HIV, and the researchers concluded that only 14 of the kits they looked at included any statement about accuracy, and fewer than a quarter gave clear guidance on next steps after receiving a also found that nearly half advised users to consult a healthcare professional regardless of the result, something experts warn could place additional pressure on NHS Jon Deeks, who led the research, said current regulations do not go far enough to protect consumers. "Self-tests have a clear potential to improve public health. However, for them to be beneficial and not harmful, they must be proven to be accurate, easy to use, and supported by clear instructions," he said. Self-testing has been around in the UK for more than 50 years in the form of pregnancy tests, first introduced in 1971. During the Covid lockdown, lateral flow tests for Covid became common. Neither was included in the University of Birmingham research, published by the BMJ. "When integrated appropriately into clinical pathways, self-tests have been shown to increase uptake of testing in underserved groups," say the the BMJ warns that offering self-testing based on the ability to pay, rather than clinical need, risks "widening inequalities and the exploitation of vulnerable population groups". Bernie Croal, President of the Royal College of Pathologists, told the BMJ poor-quality testing could lead to both "false reassurance" and "unnecessary consequences" for the UK self-test market is expected to grow significantly, with revenues forecast to reach £660m by 2030."Direct-to-consumer tests may be appealing to the public, as they can provide diagnostic results quickly, offering privacy, confidentiality, and autonomy over healthcare decisions," says the authors classified 60% of the tests they looked at as "high risk".While most kits carried claims of high accuracy, some above 98%, the researchers say supporting evidence was often not made publicly available. Although manufacturers are not currently required by law to publish clinical performance data, the BMJ calls for greater transparency. The Royal College of General Practitioners has also called for more openness in the Burt, Head of Diagnostics and General Medical Devices at MHRA, said it is examining the research, "We're exploring new transparency measures such as requiring published summaries of clinical evidence."In the meantime, we strongly encourage anyone using a self-test to check for a CE or UKCA mark, read the instructions carefully, and seek medical advice if they're unsure about their result".
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Walking 7,000 steps a day is enough to boost health
Walking 7,000 steps a day may be enough to protect against a number of diseases, a new study suggests. While many people have the goal to get 10,000 steps in their daily routine, some find this target difficult to achieve. But new research suggests 'sizeable' health benefits – including a reduced risk of dementia, heart disease and premature death – can still be seen from fewer daily steps. Even modest step counts of 4,000 steps a day can reap benefits over very low levels of activity, experts found. But experts noted that '10,000 steps per day will still be better than 7,000 steps' – with the higher step count leading to more health benefits. The new study, led by academics from the University of Sydney in Australia, saw researchers examine data from dozens of studies from around the world, including in the UK, on tens of thousands of adults. People who walked 7,000 steps each day appeared to have a protective effect against a number of diseases including: a 25% lower risk of heart disease; a 14% reduced risk of type 2 diabetes; a 38% lower risk of dementia and 22% reduced risk of depression. The researchers also found that when people walked 7,000 daily steps, compared to walking 2,000 steps, they were 47% less likely to die during the follow-up periods of the studies analysed. And while the number of steps walked did not sway whether or not a person got cancer, people who walked more steps were significantly less likely to die from cancer – with 37% lower odds of cancer death compared to people who walked fewer steps. 'Although 10 000 steps per day can still be a viable target for those who are more active, 7,000 steps per day is associated with clinically meaningful improvements in health outcomes and might be a more realistic and achievable target for some,' the authors wrote in the journal Lancet Public Health. They added: 'Even modest daily step counts were associated with health benefits. '7,000 steps per day was associated with sizeable risk reductions across most outcomes, compared with the reference of 2,000 steps per day.' Commenting on the study, Dr Daniel Bailey, Reader – Sedentary Behaviour and Health, Brunel University of London, said: 'The finding that doing 5000-7000 steps per day is an important addition to the literature which helps to debunk the myth that 10,000 steps per day should be the target for optimal health. 'This study suggested that 5000-7000 steps per day can significantly reduce the risk of many health outcomes, but that does not mean you cannot get benefits if you don't meet this target. 'The study also found that health risks were reduced with each 1000 extra steps per day, up to a maximum of 12,000 steps per day. So just adding more steps from your starting point can have important benefits for health.' Dr Andrew Scott, senior Lecturer in clinical exercise physiology at the University of Portsmouth, added: 'In most cases the 10,000 steps per day will still be better than 7,000 steps, just by decreasing margins of health benefit return. 'More important than the exact number of steps, it demonstrates that overall, more is always better and people should not focus too much on the numbers, particularly on days where activity is limited. 'The steps per day is useful when people's exercise is weight-bearing, however cycling, swimming and rowing are not well-represented by the steps per day model.'
