ObjectivesMetered-dose inhalers (MDIs) contain propellants which are potent greenhouse gases. Many agencies propose a switch to alternative, low global warming potential (GWP) inhalers, such as dry powder inhalers (DPIs). We aimed to analyse the impact on greenhouse gas emissions and drug costs of making this switch.SettingWe studied National Health Service prescription data from England in 2017 and collated carbon footprint data on inhalers commonly used in England.DesignInhalers were separated into different categories according to their mechanisms of action (eg, short-acting beta-agonist). Within each category we identified low and high GWP inhalers and calculated the cost and carbon impact of changing to low GWP inhalers. We modelled scenarios for swapping proportionally according to the current market share of each equivalent DPI (model 1) and switching to the lowest cost pharmaceutically equivalent DPI (model 2). We also reviewed available data on the carbon footprint of inhalers from scientific publications, independently certified reports and patents to provide more accurate carbon footprint information on different types of inhalers.ResultsIf MDIs using HFA propellant are replaced with the cheapest equivalent DPI, then for every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, drug costs decrease by £8.2M annually. However if the brands of DPIs stay the same as 2017 prescribing patterns, for every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, drug costs increase by £12.7M annually. Most potential savings are due to less expensive long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) inhalers. Some reliever inhalers (eg, Ventolin) have a carbon footprint over 25 kg CO2e per inhaler, while others use far less 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFA134a) (eg, Salamol) with a carbon footprint of <10 kg CO2e per inhaler. 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-Heptafluoropropane (HFA227ea) LABA/ICS inhalers (eg, Flutiform) have a carbon footprint over 36 kg CO2e, compared with an equivalent HFA134a combination inhaler (eg, Fostair) at <20 kg CO2e. For every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, 58 kt CO2e could be saved annually in England.ConclusionsSwitching to DPIs would result in large carbon savings and can be achieved alongside reduced drug costs by using less expensive brands. Substantial carbon savings can be made by using small volume HFA134a MDIs, in preference to large volume HFA134a MDIs, or those containing HFA227ea as a propellant.

In the rapidly progressing field of telemedicine, there is a multitude of evidence assessing the effectiveness and financial costs of telemedicine projects; however, there is very little assessing the environmental impact despite the increasing threat of the climate emergency. This report provides a systematic review of the evidence on the carbon footprint of telemedicine. The identified papers unanimously report that telemedicine does reduce the carbon footprint of healthcare, primarily by reduction in transport-associated emissions. The carbon footprint savings range between 0.70-372 kg CO 2 e per consultation. However, these values are highly context specific. The carbon emissions produced from the use of the telemedicine systems themselves were found to be very low in comparison to emissions saved from travel reductions. This could have wide implications in reducing the carbon footprint of healthcare services globally. In order for telemedicine services to be successfully implemented, further research is necessary to determine context-specific considerations and potential rebound effects.

ObjectivesConsumption of red and processed meat (RPM) is a leading contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and high intakes of these foods increase the risks of several leading chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to use newly derived estimates of habitual meat intakes in UK adults to assess potential co-benefits to health and the environment from reduced RPM consumption.DesignModelling study using dietary intake data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey of British Adults.SettingBritish general population.MethodsRespondents were divided into fifths by energy-adjusted RPM intakes, with vegetarians constituting a sixth stratum. GHG emitted in supplying the diets of each stratum was estimated using data from life-cycle analyses. A feasible counterfactual UK population was specified, in which the proportion of vegetarians measured in the survey population doubled, and the remainder adopted the dietary pattern of the lowest fifth of RPM consumers.Outcome measuresReductions in risks of coronary heart disease, diabetes and colorectal cancer, and GHG emissions, under the counterfactual.ResultsHabitual RPM intakes were 2.5 times higher in the top compared with the bottom fifth of consumers. Under the counterfactual, statistically significant reductions in population aggregate risks ranged from 3.2% (95% CI 1.9 to 4.7) for diabetes in women to 12.2% (6.4 to 18.0) for colorectal cancer in men, with those moving from the highest to lowest consumption levels gaining about twice these averages. The expected reduction in GHG emissions was 0.45 tonnes CO2 equivalent/person/year, about 3% of the current total, giving a reduction across the UK population of 27.8 million tonnes/year.ConclusionsReduced consumption of RPM would bring multiple benefits to health and environment.

Mean intakes of red, processed and white meat were of similar magnitude. Habitual intakes of RPM showed wide dispersion with one-quarter of males < 55 g day(-1) and one-quarter of females < 27 g day(-1) . Lowering overall RPM consumption could be achieved by seeking greater reductions among current high consumers.