5 ms·

> It's depressing that they can still sell them You may feel better about this if you take some Tylenol ;-) I don't see how there's anything wrong with sellin

> It's depressing that they can still sell them You may feel better about this if you take some Tylenol ;-) I don't see how there's anything wrong with selling brand-name drugs next to generics. In fact people that believe brand name drugs are more effective will have a better response to the more expensive drug because of the placebo effect. If anything, they're getting a better response to the same dose of the same drug than the rest of us plebs that know better than to pay a multiple of the cost of the generic.

TheLegace 14y ago
In some very extreme/rare cases it does matter. Something like ADHD medication can make a difference. One of the most difficult months I've had has been a month where I tried the generic and the side effects were way worse than the brand name at same dosage.
- logn 14y ago
  In generics they can change the inactive ingredients and obviously they don't always use the same equipment or facilities to produce it. Some people have allergies to inactive ingredients which may explain the different side effects. But in my mind the generics are just as good as name brand, albeit sometimes different. I guess I'd be just as likely to react poorly to the inactive ingredients in the name brand and might find a generic better in some cases.
  - haldujai 14y ago
    Actually that's not true. Generics (at least in Canada but probably true elsewhere as well) only have to give between 85%-120% of the dose of the brand name drug, this is despite having the same official dosage as printed on the label. The difference comes from preparation, pill coatings, and inactive ingredients.
    - kvb 14y ago
      That's right. The impact that this has on the quality of the medication is dependent on the dose-response curve. I wouldn't expect this to be a big deal for painkillers, for instance, but it could easily cause noticeable differences elsewhere.
    - shubb 14y ago
      Also, my friend who works at a pharma factory says brand names have much tighter quality control - more batches are tested with far less tolerance. In addition, some of the details of the chemicals (such as I guess the angles of the molecules) may be different, because the generic manufacturer imperfectly reverse engineers the process used to make the drug. Clinical trials to validate the generic are less strict.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  I once took a medication through a skin patch. The same issue: the generic did not deliver the medication consistently at all. The patch was supposed to be replaced every three days, so I'd get a huge rush of medication the first day and next to nothing the last day. What was worse was that there were two generics. One was as described, the other actually was fine. The moral, for me, is to be very cautious with generics. I believe most of them are fine (I would never pay full price for Tylenol :), but the more critical the medication is to me, the more research I will do on the generic.
  - npsimons 14y ago
    I'm no expert on this, but just guessing here: have pills been around longer than patches? Perhaps manufacturing pills is better understood/easier to get right, so you are probably safe with generics in pill form, but will want to double-check on generics in any other form.
    - refurb 14y ago
      That's very true. Creating an instant release generic is nowhere near as difficult as producing an extended release or transdermal formulation. The FDA recently pulled a 300mg generic bupropion generic because the extended release formation produced nowhere near what the branded medication did. Most generics are equivalent to the branded medication, but there are exceptions out there. http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/12/05/fda-pulls-one-generic-form-of-wellbutrin-off-the-market http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/12/0...
  - oxide 14y ago
    lemme guess. fentanyl? if so, you're a liar. the generic patches undergo thousands of tests before a doctor ever has one prescribed. sorry to burst your anecdotal evidence bubble. but you are fabricating things.
    - DanBC 14y ago
      There are less confrontational, more useful, ways to convey your point than to call people liars. 'Anecdotal evidence bubbles' are fascinating. Try posting links to research about the placebo effect instead of resorting to name calling.
- sbank 14y ago
  I'm curious, which ADHD medication and generic did you use? I'm on Ritalin myself.
andrewflnr 14y ago
Oh, it's not wrong, just embarrassing as a human being. ;)
- maratd 14y ago
  > Oh, it's not wrong, just embarrassing as a human being. ;) Care to explain why? I buy Tylenol branded acetaminophen. Granted, I only buy one bottle every three years or so, but I'm perfectly fine spending a few dollars more. While acetaminophen is acetaminophen, when I buy Tylenol, I'm buying into their quality control and the experience that has come with that company, over many years. It's worth a few dollars to me to make sure that I'm getting what I'm buying and nothing more. Do explain how brand loyalty is "embarrassing" to humanity.
  - andrewflnr 14y ago
    It may feel like it's safer, but personally, I doubt it. You're paying mostly for a feeling, and that's somewhat irrational. Medicine is a relatively good place for paranoia though, and for feeling safe. Most brand loyalty is even sillier. Don't get me started about designer clothing.
    - Fargren 14y ago
      I can't think of anything I where I don't pay for a feeling. I could live in a closet and eat the bare minimum to survive, but I like to feel cozy and feel that my food is tasty.
    - maratd 14y ago
      > Most brand loyalty is even sillier. This makes no sense to me. If I have a good experience with a company, then any subsequent experience is far more likely to be good than a random selection? The entire point behind brands is consistent experience.
      - UVB-76 14y ago
        If we're being pedantic, that's inductive reasoning. See the problem of induction [1]; you cannot justify any inference about future experiences of a product based on past experiences of it alone. Brand loyalty is broader and can potentially be justified. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

TheLegace 14y ago

In some very extreme/rare cases it does matter. Something like ADHD medication can make a difference. One of the most difficult months I've had has been a month where I tried the generic and the side effects were way worse than the brand name at same dosage.

logn 14y ago
In generics they can change the inactive ingredients and obviously they don't always use the same equipment or facilities to produce it. Some people have allergies to inactive ingredients which may explain the different side effects. But in my mind the generics are just as good as name brand, albeit sometimes different. I guess I'd be just as likely to react poorly to the inactive ingredients in the name brand and might find a generic better in some cases.
- haldujai 14y ago
  Actually that's not true. Generics (at least in Canada but probably true elsewhere as well) only have to give between 85%-120% of the dose of the brand name drug, this is despite having the same official dosage as printed on the label. The difference comes from preparation, pill coatings, and inactive ingredients.
  - kvb 14y ago
    That's right. The impact that this has on the quality of the medication is dependent on the dose-response curve. I wouldn't expect this to be a big deal for painkillers, for instance, but it could easily cause noticeable differences elsewhere.
  - shubb 14y ago
    Also, my friend who works at a pharma factory says brand names have much tighter quality control - more batches are tested with far less tolerance. In addition, some of the details of the chemicals (such as I guess the angles of the molecules) may be different, because the generic manufacturer imperfectly reverse engineers the process used to make the drug. Clinical trials to validate the generic are less strict.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I once took a medication through a skin patch. The same issue: the generic did not deliver the medication consistently at all. The patch was supposed to be replaced every three days, so I'd get a huge rush of medication the first day and next to nothing the last day. What was worse was that there were two generics. One was as described, the other actually was fine. The moral, for me, is to be very cautious with generics. I believe most of them are fine (I would never pay full price for Tylenol :), but the more critical the medication is to me, the more research I will do on the generic.
- npsimons 14y ago
  I'm no expert on this, but just guessing here: have pills been around longer than patches? Perhaps manufacturing pills is better understood/easier to get right, so you are probably safe with generics in pill form, but will want to double-check on generics in any other form.
  - refurb 14y ago
    That's very true. Creating an instant release generic is nowhere near as difficult as producing an extended release or transdermal formulation. The FDA recently pulled a 300mg generic bupropion generic because the extended release formation produced nowhere near what the branded medication did. Most generics are equivalent to the branded medication, but there are exceptions out there. http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/12/05/fda-pulls-one-generic-form-of-wellbutrin-off-the-market http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/12/0...
- oxide 14y ago
  lemme guess. fentanyl? if so, you're a liar. the generic patches undergo thousands of tests before a doctor ever has one prescribed. sorry to burst your anecdotal evidence bubble. but you are fabricating things.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    There are less confrontational, more useful, ways to convey your point than to call people liars. 'Anecdotal evidence bubbles' are fascinating. Try posting links to research about the placebo effect instead of resorting to name calling.
sbank 14y ago
I'm curious, which ADHD medication and generic did you use? I'm on Ritalin myself.

andrewflnr 14y ago

Oh, it's not wrong, just embarrassing as a human being. ;)

maratd 14y ago
> Oh, it's not wrong, just embarrassing as a human being. ;) Care to explain why? I buy Tylenol branded acetaminophen. Granted, I only buy one bottle every three years or so, but I'm perfectly fine spending a few dollars more. While acetaminophen is acetaminophen, when I buy Tylenol, I'm buying into their quality control and the experience that has come with that company, over many years. It's worth a few dollars to me to make sure that I'm getting what I'm buying and nothing more. Do explain how brand loyalty is "embarrassing" to humanity.
- andrewflnr 14y ago
  It may feel like it's safer, but personally, I doubt it. You're paying mostly for a feeling, and that's somewhat irrational. Medicine is a relatively good place for paranoia though, and for feeling safe. Most brand loyalty is even sillier. Don't get me started about designer clothing.
  - Fargren 14y ago
    I can't think of anything I where I don't pay for a feeling. I could live in a closet and eat the bare minimum to survive, but I like to feel cozy and feel that my food is tasty.
  - maratd 14y ago
    > Most brand loyalty is even sillier. This makes no sense to me. If I have a good experience with a company, then any subsequent experience is far more likely to be good than a random selection? The entire point behind brands is consistent experience.
    - UVB-76 14y ago
      If we're being pedantic, that's inductive reasoning. See the problem of induction [1]; you cannot justify any inference about future experiences of a product based on past experiences of it alone. Brand loyalty is broader and can potentially be justified. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction