Posted by laima on March 1, 2007, at 9:12:27
In reply to Re: Drug manufacturing and quality control, posted by Squiggles on March 1, 2007, at 7:36:26
Well, whatever the reality of the laws and inspections turn out to be, the fact is that for this particular case, this particular generic does not behave like the original it is supposed to be interchangeable with, and I can't exagerate how frustrating and upsetting it has been to have umpteem pharmacists roll their eyes and insist I'm wrong. And part two of the upset- I go through hours of traipsing around the city to find what has worked for me- only to discover when I got home that the particular generic company I didn't do well with took over the brand version. Will that mean some minor tweaks will happen that add up to it no longer working out for me? I guess there is no way to know at this time, logically. I know other generic versions exist, but in practical terms, I might have a hard time getting my hands on them since Barr has an apparent monopoly with the pharmacy my insurance requires me to use. Besides- now I can't help but wonder if they are all different too! So it's been frustrating.
In another thread, someone offered an amazing insight. He actually prefers Barr, and explained he's got a theory or suspicion that Shire's version either contains more dexedrine or releases it differently- and he doesn't like dexedrine. I've done well with dexedrine in the past, and liked it a lot. He feels Barr contains either more l-amphetamine-or releases it differently- and he feels l-amphetamine agrees with him better. Perhaps that's part of what I reacted to, should there be anything to this theory. So I found it to be very interesting. I'll see how the month goes, if I still think I have a problem by the end of the month, I may ask my doctor about dexedrine. In fact, the dexedrine I trialed in the past was a generic version-not sure the brand- and it agreed with me very nicely. Just was too much stimulation in combination with welbutrin, but that's another story I won't get into here. I still believe for a number of reasons that the fda is paying more attention to brand name new drugs than to generics, which have been turning out their products for years, but I can't offer you any proof, and to start digging for irrefutable proof will ultimately only end up taking loads of time and upsetting both of us-and I see no value in that. Wouldn't be useful in any practical way anyway.
Yes- I am all in favor of generics that help patients! I've used many generics myself, and have never had an objection about one ever before. This particular one didn't help me one bit, and I've been very dismayed to find it doesn't behave like the original version. The other poster loves Barr version, so perhaps "bad generics" isn't even a good term to use. In my ideal world, the drug descriptions would be clear and open about that this version is like this, that one is a little more like that.
Well, thank you for your reply, too. I don't wish to be argumentative- and I always enjoy reading your thoughtful posts. I've had a difficult time not feeling defensive just because I've been (generally speaking- not specific to yourself) encountering an awful lot of skepticism over my experience. Ie- "no-no-you're not feeling that, see, the chart here says it's impossible for you to feel that", etc. Enough to drive the most sane and stable person absolutly nuts.
I hope that makes sense.So I'll go try to think about other things now.
> Thank you for your courteous reply. OK- I am suggesting that it would be very difficult to detect lack of bioavailability or bioequivalence in generics once they are on the market. If I understand bioavailability correctly, it may be easier to detect that. So, my point is that you would have to do a really massive statistical test on *suspected* bad generics. You may as well try it on brand-name ones. The FDA, and Health Canada sometimes *do* find error in these drugs and report it, but I don't know that there are more such reports for brand-name drugs than generics-- I don't think so.
>
> Squiggles
poster:laima
thread:735309
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070224/msgs/737292.html