连花清瘟有三种剂型 该如何选择?******
连花清瘟自2005年获批上市以来,由于其广谱抗病毒、抑菌抗炎、退热止咳化痰以及调节免疫、提高抗病康复力的特点,一直在临床上广泛用于感冒、流感等病毒性呼吸道感染性疾病的防治。基于连花清瘟的确切疗效,2020年4月连花清瘟被国家药品监督管理局批准用于“新型冠状病毒肺炎轻型、普通型”的治疗。
如今“连花清瘟”这个名字几乎家喻户晓,但当消费者去药店购买连花清瘟时,很多人却常常被一个问题问住——要什么剂型的?
很多人知道连花清瘟,也有不少人家中常备连花清瘟,但知道连花清瘟有三种剂型的人似乎不多。2020版《中国药典》收录了连花清瘟胶囊、连花清瘟颗粒和连花清瘟片,这也正是市面上在售的连花清瘟的三种剂型。这三种剂型有何差别?需要之际该如何选择最适合自己或家人的剂型?
组方功效相同,剂型各有优势
实际上,连花清瘟胶囊、颗粒剂、片剂都是常用于治疗呼吸道感染病的中成药,三种剂型组方、功效及主治都一样,且三者均为口服用药,即全部为经胃肠道给药剂型。
连花清瘟的主要成分是金银花、连翘、炙麻黄、炒苦杏仁、石膏、板蓝根、绵马贯众、鱼腥草、广藿香、大黄、红景天、薄荷脑、甘草,具有清瘟解毒、宣肺泄热的作用,适用于感冒、流感症见发热或高热、恶寒、肌肉酸痛、咽干咽痛、身体乏力、舌红苔黄或黄腻等症状者。
那么,目前市面在售的连花清瘟胶囊、颗粒剂、片剂,三者在制作工艺上有什么区别?
胶囊剂是将药物有效成分填装在空心硬质胶囊中或密封于弹性软质胶囊中而制成的固体制剂。胶囊剂型不仅可以掩盖药物不良气味,更是隔绝了药物与外界水分、空气、光线的接触,从而提高了药物稳定性。因有了胶囊来隔绝外界,可更方便地控制胶囊在胃肠道中分散、分解、溶出和吸收起效的时间,使药物剂型做到了延缓释放和定位释放的目的。
颗粒剂作为一种常用中药口服固体剂型,是指使用原料药和适宜的辅料混合制成的呈现为干燥颗粒状的制剂,在使用时加温开水溶解,搅拌均匀后温度适宜即可口服。颗粒剂的工艺延续了传统中药汤剂的特点,所谓“汤者,荡也”,对病邪有扫荡之势,可知其来势勇猛、见效快捷。中药颗粒剂在保持了汤剂吸收快、显效迅速等优点的同时,又克服了汤药服前需临时煎煮、耗时费力、久存易变质等不足。
片剂是将药物原料与辅料等进行粉碎,造粒,干燥,再用压片机制成片状,最后在外层形成一层膜衣;也有不需要造粒和干燥,直接压成片剂者。连花清瘟片剂属于薄膜衣片类,使用了一种高分子物料作为片剂的衣膜,该方法应用广泛。这样做的原因,一是使药物理化性质更加稳定,在遇到空气、光线和水分时不易分解、变质,以此来保证药物质量与药效;二是可以掩盖部分中药的苦味或刺激性气味;三是有些药物遇胃酸易被破坏,需包肠溶衣。片剂覆盖一层膜之后,加入固定的食用色素包上颜色衣,则便于识别,可以防止误服。
如何选择连花清瘟剂型
如果单纯以起效速度而言,颗粒剂具有吸收快、显效迅速的特点。此外,一些吞咽功能不好或服药依从性差的人群,如儿童、老年人以及有吞咽功能障碍的人群等,出于服药时的安全性考虑,建议选用颗粒剂。但是颗粒剂在使用前需要用温开水调匀冲服,如果达不到这个条件,则只能选择其他剂型。另外颗粒剂在保存上不如胶囊和片剂方便,当有出差或旅游出行需求时,建议选择胶囊剂或片剂,使用时更为方便。
在知悉上述剂型各自优势以及患者自身状况的情况下,连花清瘟三种剂型的选择也应结合患者的用药顺应性而定,“怎么舒服怎么来”,以用药后症状得以缓解且没有其余不适为度,没有绝对的标准,不必拘泥。
在服用连花清瘟期间,应忌吸烟、饮酒,避免进食烧烤、火锅、麻辣烫、巧克力等辛辣、滋腻的食物,也不要贪凉饮冷,以免损伤中焦脾胃之阳气。为避免邪气留于体内,不宜在服用连花清瘟的同时,再服用人参、鹿茸、枸杞等滋补类中药或中成药。
连花清瘟虽是家中常备治疗感冒、流感的成药,但有严重的肝病、糖尿病、肾病等慢性病患者或正在使用其他药品,使用前可以咨询医师或药师,避免药物联用出现问题。需要强调的是,在新冠肺炎疫情的特殊背景下,疫情防控人人有责,当出现发热等不适时,应及时去医院就诊或上报社区,在医师指导下对症用药。(李妍)
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******
中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。
2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。
日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。
日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。
事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。
因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。
日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。
《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。
德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。
日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。
国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。
太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。
Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.
Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.
The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.
The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.
In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.
Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.
The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.
The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.
The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.
According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.
As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.
However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.
Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.
The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.
If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
(文图:赵筱尘 巫邓炎) [责编:天天中] 阅读剩余全文() ![]() 彩票驿站地图 |