Quote from: LinksEtc on January 07, 2014, 11:17:39 AMQuote from: GST on January 07, 2014, 10:20:43 AM
Whereas both have the minute chance of not injecting when they are supposed to, the Auvi-Q has the additional risk of the voice part of it failing. Then you have a device that would work perfectly fine, but for the fact that the user does not know how to use it because they were relying on the voice to talk them through it. This is the reason that my daughter`s allergist and I both consider it less safe than the Epipen, more things that can go wrong, as I said in my earlier post.
I think this is a reasonable POV to consider ... it would probably not cause problems for active allergy folks like us, but I could see a newbie maybe getting flustered if voice failed. I don't have an opinion yet on which I prefer ... sometimes I like to sit things out for a while and hear about other people's experiences. I do think some competition is good and may lead to better designs and more company responsiveness to consumer needs/preferences.
Quote from: GST on January 07, 2014, 10:20:43 AM
Whereas both have the minute chance of not injecting when they are supposed to, the Auvi-Q has the additional risk of the voice part of it failing. Then you have a device that would work perfectly fine, but for the fact that the user does not know how to use it because they were relying on the voice to talk them through it. This is the reason that my daughter`s allergist and I both consider it less safe than the Epipen, more things that can go wrong, as I said in my earlier post.
Quote from: GST on January 07, 2014, 10:20:43 AM
Then you have a device that would work perfectly fine, but for the fact that the user does not know how to use it because they were relying on the voice to talk them through it.