![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by john51 on May 28, 2008, at 8:23:48
Anyone taking "NEW" Nadil and finding it NOT as effective as current formulation?
Posted by Phillipa on May 28, 2008, at 11:43:19
In reply to Nardil....'New' Nardil as good as Original?, posted by john51 on May 28, 2008, at 8:23:48
Just trying to be helpful so thought I write that this seems to be a complaint of the new nardil users. Suggest a Dr. Bob Google on new nardil. Hope that helps. Phillipa
Posted by stargazer2 on May 28, 2008, at 21:28:47
In reply to Nardil....'New' Nardil as good as Original?, posted by john51 on May 28, 2008, at 8:23:48
There's a whole website on former Nardil users who have failed terribly when they were switched to the newly formulated Nardil in 2004 or 2005. It was never identified as being a new formula and users started to notice they were becoming depressed again for no reason after being very stable on Nardil for many years.
It has been found out that the "new" version has different incipient ingredients which are the buffering agents and fillers used to mix the ingredients. The active ingredients are the same, but the changes in the formula can be enough to change the way a med dissolves or stays in your bloodstream for a shorter length of time. That is why the earlier formula was more effective at a lower level (I took only 15 mg vs the 60 mg I now take). The side effects, i.e. gas, weight gain are more pronounced in the current version of Nardil.
Former users noticed changes in the was they felt and questioned a change in the medication. Pfizer was not forthcoming in the changes and over time users have lobbied Pfizer to get the old version reformulated, since many formerly stable users relapsed after taking the reformulated Nardil.
Google 'Nardil activism' to read about the whole story on this. It is very interesting to say the least.
I went through a similar situation myself when I took Marplan over two years and then Roche decided to stop manufacturing it. I relapsed and never was able to find another med to help me as successfully as Marplan did or the original Nardil.
Both those and probably many other meds are changed especially when generic manufacturers start to make a version of a brand drug name and the generic version does not work in the same way. It is always said the ingredients are the same but there is alot more to it than having the same active ingredients. The manufacturering process differs and can cause changes in the way the brand drug was designed to work. I found this happened with generic wellbutrin too.
SG
Posted by john51 on May 29, 2008, at 9:29:28
In reply to Re: Nardil....'New' Nardil as good as Original?, posted by stargazer2 on May 28, 2008, at 21:28:47
> There's a whole website on former Nardil users who have failed terribly when they were switched to the newly formulated Nardil in 2004 or 2005. It was never identified as being a new formula and users started to notice they were becoming depressed again for no reason after being very stable on Nardil for many years.
>
> It has been found out that the "new" version has different incipient ingredients which are the buffering agents and fillers used to mix the ingredients. The active ingredients are the same, but the changes in the formula can be enough to change the way a med dissolves or stays in your bloodstream for a shorter length of time. That is why the earlier formula was more effective at a lower level (I took only 15 mg vs the 60 mg I now take). The side effects, i.e. gas, weight gain are more pronounced in the current version of Nardil.
>
> Former users noticed changes in the was they felt and questioned a change in the medication. Pfizer was not forthcoming in the changes and over time users have lobbied Pfizer to get the old version reformulated, since many formerly stable users relapsed after taking the reformulated Nardil.
>
> Google 'Nardil activism' to read about the whole story on this. It is very interesting to say the least.
>
> I went through a similar situation myself when I took Marplan over two years and then Roche decided to stop manufacturing it. I relapsed and never was able to find another med to help me as successfully as Marplan did or the original Nardil.
>
> Both those and probably many other meds are changed especially when generic manufacturers start to make a version of a brand drug name and the generic version does not work in the same way. It is always said the ingredients are the same but there is alot more to it than having the same active ingredients. The manufacturering process differs and can cause changes in the way the brand drug was designed to work. I found this happened with generic wellbutrin too.
>
> SGHello again, my name is John and I began this post. Thanks to the people that have responded. I would also like to add another very significant fact. Not ONLY did they change the formulation and/or the manufacturing process and I am fairly sure they did this in a way that it now costs LESS to manufacture than did the "original" Nardil, but to make matters even WORSE, if you have Medicare Part D Drug Coverage you will find that a prescription for Nardil is filled as Brand Name Drug and NOT as a generic. For me this means that a one month supply costs me $30.00 instead of $7.00. When Nardil was still being produced by Parke Davis it was priced as a generic, of course, because it had been on the market for so long....but, of course, when Pfizer 'took it over' I'm sure that they were allowed to put it on the market as a "NEW" drug again. I believe that this is most likely the reason that they "messed" with the formulation. Sad, sad news for many people who found the original Nardil to be the only drug that ever helped them and now they have none. Thanks for 'listening'!!
Posted by Treehugger on June 3, 2008, at 11:59:08
In reply to Re: Nardil....'New' Nardil as good as Original? » stargazer2, posted by john51 on May 29, 2008, at 9:29:28
I took "old" Nardil about 10 years ago - it helped unbelievably with my social phobia - it actually made me a new person. Problem then for me were the sexual side effects - anorgasmia! I was younger, of course, and decided to stop the Nardil. For a few years now I have been reading about the reformulation, and now that I would like to take Nardil again, I have actually been afraid because of the change. So what to do ? I have tried Emsam (inconsistent), & a lot of SSRI's. What's left - I don't know. The old Nardil was a miracle in many ways & even though my 3 food groups were cheese, red wine & avocados - I had no difficulty with the diet - & when I cheated (experimented) I had no problems. Was Marplan reformulated or discontinued?
Posted by stargazer2 on June 3, 2008, at 22:20:01
In reply to Re: Nardil....'New' Nardil as good as Original?, posted by Treehugger on June 3, 2008, at 11:59:08
Marplan was discontinued in 1994 while I was on it and I was destabalized and it took years to find another med combination to help me, and even then it was not the same as my complete and total response to Nardil and Marplan. Marplan is now back, and I tried it last year without any success, and I believe it was reformulated too since that is how they make it more cheaply and by doing this render it a completely different med.
Why don't the stupid greedy drug compnaies know once the formula is changed, they are essentially sealing their fate and will never market the product successfully again. Small changes in psych meds can completely change the way the drug is absorbed, especially if they mess with the excipient ingredients, like they seem to all do.
When will they learn it is not just the active ingredients that count but also the way the ingredients are combined which greatly effects the absorbancy and half life.
Stupid scientists. I thought they had the science of drug availabilities well understood...they don't at least based on the reformualtion of nardil and more than likely Marplan.
I think there were (are) many more users of Nardil than Marplan that were left high and dry, although the changes in both formulas have greatly affected my recovery from a treatment resistent depression which only responded to MAO's as they were originally formulated.
Why mess with the effective formula, you will not achieve a home run after reformulating it. It may be cheaper to make but the users know the difference and will not tolerate the negative changes in the newer formualtions.
Big Greedy Pharma is all about $$$. I hope you have a relative with depression who is suffering too as a result of your cheaper methods to reformulate a once superior product.
make the real thing and you may find you will have a product that can beat out many of the newer, useless antidepressants. MAO's were the greatest until you got your greedy hands on them.
It's all about the money not the patients anymore, no ethics or altruism, just bloody greed.
Prove me otherwise and reproduce the real Nardil and Marplan again. bet it will never happen...you messed up the best treatment I ever had for depression. Too bad you never tested the reformulations on real patients, that would be too honest and meaningful. Just test it on normal, healthy patients, who have nothing to lose, except perhaps experience some nasty side effects, like I live with every day.
Testin on healthy subjects is a useless endeavor for a reformulated drug, I hope you go out of business for your less than scientific apprach to being as greedy as you possibly can.
can anyone forward this to Pfizer. They are such A$$HOLES, they shoud go out of business.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.