3 ms·

the stuff in here about 'minor differences in coating could make a difference but shouldn't' is surprisingly badly researched both teva + shire manufacture a b

the stuff in here about 'minor differences in coating could make a difference but shouldn't' is surprisingly badly researched both teva + shire manufacture a branded and a generic -- just ask them what the difference is between the two, right? and if they hang up you can write, 'both teva and shire refused to say if their generic works' I'm fairly sure this is Shire's original patent for XR beads https://patents.google.com/patent/US6322819B1/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US6322819B1/ they have a subsequent patent for a more continuous delivery system https://patents.google.com/patent/US6913768B2/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US6913768B2/ (from plasma concentration, the double-pulsed one looks as smooth as continuous delivery, but I'm guessing the brain + blood half lives are different) but the bead material is probably FDA scrutinized, and any chemical difference between the branded + generic version is in theory public knowledge; shocking nyt didn't like, call a chem lab or something before hitting send on this one the author speculating that someone is complaining about switching from an immediate release to an XR also feels bogus -- presumably I would say in my tiktok that it's a capsule instead of a tablet?

hooverd 4y ago
That's like baby's first chemistry lab lesson, inactive ingredients can make a big difference sometimes.
- aksss 4y ago
  “Inactive ingredient” is a term with similar provenance as “junk dna”, “oldest human tool-making”, and “oldest humans in North America”. These terms represent a state of current understanding more than absolute truth.
jws 4y ago
I suppose things might have changed in ~half a century, the FDA used to care about everything. Back in the late '80s the VAX-11/750 that was part of the Siemens MRI scanners was shipped in the old blue trim color long after DEC had switched to the very chic "brown on tan" color scheme. The FDA approval for the scanner would not let them change the color of the paint because of some bleedover of medication regulation language into the equipment approval regulations.
- thfuran 4y ago
  There are whole classes of products designed to be eaten for various purported benefits but which are evidently neither sufficiently foodlike not sufficiently druglike to warrant FDA attention. Herbal supplements are apparently just edible magic.
Terretta 4y ago
It's amazing what isn't researched. For example: it's colloquially known among RNs that intravenous drips work differently based on the maker and source of the tubing for the drip. This is not officially discussed.

hooverd 4y ago

That's like baby's first chemistry lab lesson, inactive ingredients can make a big difference sometimes.

aksss 4y ago
“Inactive ingredient” is a term with similar provenance as “junk dna”, “oldest human tool-making”, and “oldest humans in North America”. These terms represent a state of current understanding more than absolute truth.

jws 4y ago

I suppose things might have changed in ~half a century, the FDA used to care about everything. Back in the late '80s the VAX-11/750 that was part of the Siemens MRI scanners was shipped in the old blue trim color long after DEC had switched to the very chic "brown on tan" color scheme. The FDA approval for the scanner would not let them change the color of the paint because of some bleedover of medication regulation language into the equipment approval regulations.

thfuran 4y ago
There are whole classes of products designed to be eaten for various purported benefits but which are evidently neither sufficiently foodlike not sufficiently druglike to warrant FDA attention. Herbal supplements are apparently just edible magic.

Terretta 4y ago

It's amazing what isn't researched. For example: it's colloquially known among RNs that intravenous drips work differently based on the maker and source of the tubing for the drip. This is not officially discussed.