5 ms·

I heard this piece on NPR, the entire time all I could think about is it seems tailor made for the pharm industry. They never mention a specific instance of im

I heard this piece on NPR, the entire time all I could think about is it seems tailor made for the pharm industry. They never mention a specific instance of impurities found, just a vague "they're made over in India/China!" thing. No details here other than people drinking tap water in India.

yazboo 7y ago
You may be interested in an article by the person being interviewed in the OP, which has a few more details and at least one specific instance of impurities: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/11/opinion/sunday/generic-drugs-safety.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/11/opinion/sunday/generic-dr...
Spooky23 7y ago
I agree that it’s a bad article, but problems with generics aren’t new or shocking. If you’re on generic hypertension meds and monitor your BP, you’ll find that your pressure will vary when manufacturers change. Usually it’s minor, but I’ve seen cases where there is significant variance.
- axlee 7y ago
  I have personally noticed large differences in side-effects between various generic brands of SSRIs. That's anecdotal, but now I always pick the same generic brand out of the ~5 I have tried for the same compound.
  - throwaway18558 7y ago
    Same here. I always believed that generics were identical until one time the pharmacy gave me a generic for an SSRI. I was suddenly enveloped in physical pain in my chest and neck, so I called my doctor. She told me it happens, generics can cause different side effects and reactions, so she gave me a new prescription specifying the brand and the pain went away...until much later when there was a shortage of the brand name and I had no choice to go to the generic. And the pain came right back.
- matwood 7y ago
  Do you have a link to a double blind study where this was tested?
  - Spooky23 7y ago
    I don’t. My cardiologist pulled out a sheet with instructions on how to complain to the FDA, so I’m pretty sure it was common for that drug.
- taurath 7y ago
  I believe there's probably some differences - especially in packaging. Some medications are different between generics or between generics and name brand in bioavailability. The title of the article isn't backed up by the content though in this case.
- kwhitefoot 7y ago
  Why do you change manufacturers? I always get the same generic when I get my hypertension pills.
  - rconti 7y ago
    The fact that this is even a consideration is scary, and frankly, what the book was apparently about. I always believed generics were identical.
    - larrywright 7y ago
      What I’ve heard anecdotally: The “generic” part of a generic drug is the active ingredient - that should be essentially the same between manufacturers. What differs, however, is the delivery mechanism. So for something that is extended release, the mechanism for releasing over time can vary between manufacturer. I’m not entirely sure that this is the full story though, I haven’t researched the problem enough.
  - dillonmckay 7y ago
    The pharmacy will change drug distributors, which will change the manufacturer supplying their inventory.
  - Spooky23 7y ago
    I don’t. I get a different manufacturer every few months.
protomyth 7y ago
I guess one of the problems that seems to be cropping up in pro sports that do testing is that traces of other drugs appear in unrelated drugs do to the equipment not be thoroughly cleaned between batches. Seems like an inspector / cheapening of production issue more than a location issue.
marricks 7y ago
Growing up I though of NPR as a bastion of the left but the older I get the more cynical I become. Your take reminds me of the most infuriating story I heard on NPR about Amazon Seasonal workers. They spotlighted a retiree couple would supplements their income with it in the winter and drives south to gamble in the summer and it just sounded like a profile of a charmed life, somehow I imagine that isn’t the case for most people who work there... They have monthly fundraising drives where they ask listeners to pay up for fearless journalism but a lot of it sounds like it was written by and for entrenched industries. https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/21/business/holiday-season-fills-rv-campground-amazon-workers/ https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/21/business/holiday-seas...
- java-man 7y ago
  I hear more ads on NPR than before. Has their funding mechanism changed?
  - colordrops 7y ago
    They only get 16% of their funds from public sources.
  - plussed_reader 7y ago
    No, it is still funded from listeners and corporate interests.
  - asark 7y ago
    I also get the sense it's increased over the years. If you count all fund-raising time (drives plus the at least tens of minutes on ordinary days they push donations or giving them cars), promoting their own podcasts, and the now-seemingly-much-longer sponsorship messages (straight-up ads) I'm not sure it's any better than commercial radio.
- Loughla 7y ago
  I hate to pull politics into this, but their coverage of the 2016 Presidential really opened my eyes to their biases. Bernie Sanders was not treated as a serious candidate through then entire race, but they absolutely fawned over Hillary Clinton. The same is happening now for all 230 candidates v Joe Biden. Any story they air treats most candidates as fringe, but Biden as the only serious contender. Honestly, I love NPR, but. . .
everdrive 7y ago
I feel like NPR has gotten worse in the last 10 years. Completely ignoring the topic of bias, (because it's a fruitless minefield) it seems difficult to encounter a story on NPR that isn't primarily about emotions. NPR seems to believe that a story is only accessible if there's a single person (or small group of people) who can directly emote about the wrongness of a situation. A caricature of an NPR story might go something like this "As violent insurgency breaks out in [some country], we bring you no details about the local politics, tribes, or history, but instead 15 minutes of an individual mother telling you just how miserable her life is. And here she is along with some ambient sounds so you can really feel like you're there." I'm aware that there's a group of folks who believe that personal stories are relatable, while statistics are easily ignored. At best, I feel like this view is shortsighted: not everyone works this way, and sympathy shouldn't be limited to cases with emotional proximity. (ie, rational ethics are possible) At worst, NPR is deciding how you should feel about the story by inserting an emotion-based testimonial.
- colordrops 7y ago
  NPR is as much of a mouthpiece for the elite as any other mainstream media source. Their two top contributors are Lockhead Martin and Walmart, yet you don't hear many ads for them over the air, so how is NPR paying them back for their contributions? That would be maintaining the Overton window and publishing stories that support the military industrial complex and neo-liberal agendas.
  - everdrive 7y ago
    My attempts to discuss NPR's shortcomings in an apolitical way are off to a terrible start.
    - colordrops 7y ago
      I don't really take my comment to be that political. More about corporate control of the power structures. Is there something incorrect about my comment? Shouldn't root cause be discussed when talking about shortcomings? I do believe their emotional story telling is an intentional weakening to avoid hard hitting true journalism that challenges power structures. Edit: ironic that the original comment was about NPR being too emotional and yet a discussion about factual details is emotionally down voted as "political".
kurthr 7y ago
Bad article, but probably related to the series of contamination issues that various generics have had (eg NDMA contamination in Sartan). https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/01/04/the-sartan-contamination-story https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/01/04/th...
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  Remember when Excedrin was unavailable for over a year because of contamination during manufacture circa 2012?
rconti 7y ago
Well, it was an interview of a book author; it sounds like the book has a lot of detail in it. And the fact that generics are not actually identical, but reverse-engineered best efforts was a bit scary. I was a kid in the "generics are identical but cost less" generation. I agree this felt like a piece funded by big pharma, but I also can't help but feel I was probably really naive about what a generic really is.
xeromal 7y ago
Be wary of only doubting things when you personally disagree with them. It's good to be careful, but you'll soon surround yourself with like opinions if you're not careful
snap12789 7y ago
Exactly; there was a oped w/ similar voice in NYT about a week ago. US Pharm companies are losing the ability to fix prices on their preferred generics, so they're switching to fear PR to promote their 'premium generics.'

yazboo 7y ago

You may be interested in an article by the person being interviewed in the OP, which has a few more details and at least one specific instance of impurities: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/11/opinion/sunday/generic-drugs-safety.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/11/opinion/sunday/generic-dr...

Spooky23 7y ago

I agree that it’s a bad article, but problems with generics aren’t new or shocking. If you’re on generic hypertension meds and monitor your BP, you’ll find that your pressure will vary when manufacturers change. Usually it’s minor, but I’ve seen cases where there is significant variance.

axlee 7y ago
I have personally noticed large differences in side-effects between various generic brands of SSRIs. That's anecdotal, but now I always pick the same generic brand out of the ~5 I have tried for the same compound.
- throwaway18558 7y ago
  Same here. I always believed that generics were identical until one time the pharmacy gave me a generic for an SSRI. I was suddenly enveloped in physical pain in my chest and neck, so I called my doctor. She told me it happens, generics can cause different side effects and reactions, so she gave me a new prescription specifying the brand and the pain went away...until much later when there was a shortage of the brand name and I had no choice to go to the generic. And the pain came right back.
matwood 7y ago
Do you have a link to a double blind study where this was tested?
- Spooky23 7y ago
  I don’t. My cardiologist pulled out a sheet with instructions on how to complain to the FDA, so I’m pretty sure it was common for that drug.
taurath 7y ago
I believe there's probably some differences - especially in packaging. Some medications are different between generics or between generics and name brand in bioavailability. The title of the article isn't backed up by the content though in this case.
kwhitefoot 7y ago
Why do you change manufacturers? I always get the same generic when I get my hypertension pills.
- rconti 7y ago
  The fact that this is even a consideration is scary, and frankly, what the book was apparently about. I always believed generics were identical.
  - larrywright 7y ago
    What I’ve heard anecdotally: The “generic” part of a generic drug is the active ingredient - that should be essentially the same between manufacturers. What differs, however, is the delivery mechanism. So for something that is extended release, the mechanism for releasing over time can vary between manufacturer. I’m not entirely sure that this is the full story though, I haven’t researched the problem enough.
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  The pharmacy will change drug distributors, which will change the manufacturer supplying their inventory.
- Spooky23 7y ago
  I don’t. I get a different manufacturer every few months.

protomyth 7y ago

I guess one of the problems that seems to be cropping up in pro sports that do testing is that traces of other drugs appear in unrelated drugs do to the equipment not be thoroughly cleaned between batches. Seems like an inspector / cheapening of production issue more than a location issue.

marricks 7y ago

Growing up I though of NPR as a bastion of the left but the older I get the more cynical I become. Your take reminds me of the most infuriating story I heard on NPR about Amazon Seasonal workers. They spotlighted a retiree couple would supplements their income with it in the winter and drives south to gamble in the summer and it just sounded like a profile of a charmed life, somehow I imagine that isn’t the case for most people who work there... They have monthly fundraising drives where they ask listeners to pay up for fearless journalism but a lot of it sounds like it was written by and for entrenched industries. https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/21/business/holiday-season-fills-rv-campground-amazon-workers/ https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/21/business/holiday-seas...

java-man 7y ago
I hear more ads on NPR than before. Has their funding mechanism changed?
- colordrops 7y ago
  They only get 16% of their funds from public sources.
- plussed_reader 7y ago
  No, it is still funded from listeners and corporate interests.
- asark 7y ago
  I also get the sense it's increased over the years. If you count all fund-raising time (drives plus the at least tens of minutes on ordinary days they push donations or giving them cars), promoting their own podcasts, and the now-seemingly-much-longer sponsorship messages (straight-up ads) I'm not sure it's any better than commercial radio.
Loughla 7y ago
I hate to pull politics into this, but their coverage of the 2016 Presidential really opened my eyes to their biases. Bernie Sanders was not treated as a serious candidate through then entire race, but they absolutely fawned over Hillary Clinton. The same is happening now for all 230 candidates v Joe Biden. Any story they air treats most candidates as fringe, but Biden as the only serious contender. Honestly, I love NPR, but. . .

everdrive 7y ago

I feel like NPR has gotten worse in the last 10 years. Completely ignoring the topic of bias, (because it's a fruitless minefield) it seems difficult to encounter a story on NPR that isn't primarily about emotions. NPR seems to believe that a story is only accessible if there's a single person (or small group of people) who can directly emote about the wrongness of a situation. A caricature of an NPR story might go something like this "As violent insurgency breaks out in [some country], we bring you no details about the local politics, tribes, or history, but instead 15 minutes of an individual mother telling you just how miserable her life is. And here she is along with some ambient sounds so you can really feel like you're there." I'm aware that there's a group of folks who believe that personal stories are relatable, while statistics are easily ignored. At best, I feel like this view is shortsighted: not everyone works this way, and sympathy shouldn't be limited to cases with emotional proximity. (ie, rational ethics are possible) At worst, NPR is deciding how you should feel about the story by inserting an emotion-based testimonial.

colordrops 7y ago
NPR is as much of a mouthpiece for the elite as any other mainstream media source. Their two top contributors are Lockhead Martin and Walmart, yet you don't hear many ads for them over the air, so how is NPR paying them back for their contributions? That would be maintaining the Overton window and publishing stories that support the military industrial complex and neo-liberal agendas.
- everdrive 7y ago
  My attempts to discuss NPR's shortcomings in an apolitical way are off to a terrible start.
  - colordrops 7y ago
    I don't really take my comment to be that political. More about corporate control of the power structures. Is there something incorrect about my comment? Shouldn't root cause be discussed when talking about shortcomings? I do believe their emotional story telling is an intentional weakening to avoid hard hitting true journalism that challenges power structures. Edit: ironic that the original comment was about NPR being too emotional and yet a discussion about factual details is emotionally down voted as "political".

kurthr 7y ago

Bad article, but probably related to the series of contamination issues that various generics have had (eg NDMA contamination in Sartan). https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/01/04/the-sartan-contamination-story https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/01/04/th...

dillonmckay 7y ago
Remember when Excedrin was unavailable for over a year because of contamination during manufacture circa 2012?

rconti 7y ago

Well, it was an interview of a book author; it sounds like the book has a lot of detail in it. And the fact that generics are not actually identical, but reverse-engineered best efforts was a bit scary. I was a kid in the "generics are identical but cost less" generation. I agree this felt like a piece funded by big pharma, but I also can't help but feel I was probably really naive about what a generic really is.

xeromal 7y ago

Be wary of only doubting things when you personally disagree with them. It's good to be careful, but you'll soon surround yourself with like opinions if you're not careful

snap12789 7y ago

Exactly; there was a oped w/ similar voice in NYT about a week ago. US Pharm companies are losing the ability to fix prices on their preferred generics, so they're switching to fear PR to promote their 'premium generics.'