Meds, Mind, Body & Benefits > Research News & Studies

generic drugs

<< < (4/5) > >>

mitch777:

--- Quote from: jg1962 on January 16, 2013, 08:57:13 PM ---Back in the olden days of sustiva my doctor seemed to be doing the happy dance when he switched me over to Atripla , kinda like I was going to get sliced bread for the first time . I joked with him about how was I going to manage all the new spare time coming my way and thanked him from sparing me certain death lurking around every corner from a two pill burden . I think I ruined his moment .

--- End quote ---

Meanie! ;D

mitch777:
i do think Bug has some valid points.
i'm tired of being pushed around by the greed of big pharma and insurance companies.
Larry Kramer would be and still is pissed!
and rightfully so.

tednlou2:
After back surgery, I got brand name pain meds.  I eventually had to get a generic made by a company called Watson.  I found these just as good.  However, many pharmacies began using a different generic, made by a company called Mallickrodt.  I found it seemed like I was taking a placebo.  My pain was no longer being helped.

I thought perhaps it was just all in my head, even though I didn't think that about the other generic.  One day, the pharmacist asked me what I thought of the new generic.  I told him my complaint.  He said they had gotten several complaints.  I would talk to patients at the neurosurgeon's office, and they would say this generic, most pharmacies had switched to, was inferior. 

When I told the pharmacist that generics have to be the same, he said that's not quite true.  They have to have the same active ingredients, but the fillers can make the difference.  He believed the fillers in this new generic were causing the active ingredients to not be metabolized properly.  This is exactly how it felt-- it was taking forever to break down that the med was being released very slowly.  I felt if I ever needed life-saving meds, this would be a consideration.  My mom takes Coumadin.  When she took the brand name, her INR lab was always good.  When she took the generic, it was always off and the med needed to be adjusted.

Of course, this is just anecdotal.  And, of course, most generics work just as well.  But, the pharmacies obviously switched because this generic was cheaper over the other generic, and probably offered a higher profit margin.  I believe the lower cost equaled poorer quality, in this case.  I went online and found numerous complaints.  In fairness, there were some who liked this generic, but I would say it was 20 to 1. 

MitchMiller:
Always appreciate these articles but sometimes I start to wonder whose publishing them.  Maybe I'm being totally dense but I read this in the Wash Post and with a statement like this, this article seems to have lost a lot of credibility: 

At the same time the lifetime financial savings would be $42,500 (26,500) per patient, say the Massachusetts General Hospital investigators.

My generics cost $225/month (for all three, including shipping costs).  The same brand name combination retails for about $1600/month.  Do the math.  I save almost $17000/year. Even using the reduced prices ADAP pays, the number still don't add up.  What gives?  I think they dropped a zero!

Miss Philicia:

--- Quote from: buginme2 on January 15, 2013, 03:35:53 PM ---
Until the combination treatment is itself available as generic (such as a generic Atripla pill) then there is an arguement that changing your treamtment due to the wishes of your insurance company, is limiting.

--- End quote ---

OMG... cry me a fucking river. You'd have been a joke back in the 90's taking 30 pills, in three times doses, some with and without food. Now go ahead and have a grand old party with your all-in-one Atripla.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version