Interesting from today's People's Pharmacy column:
"Many insurance companies have created a multi-tier payment system to discourage the use of expensive brand-name medicines. This might seem reasonable, but we are concerned. So many people have reported problems with generic drugs on our website (www.peoplespharmacy.com) that we are no longer confident in their quality."
That's pretty tough talk, isn't it? I know a recent column mentioned they had especially noticed problems with drugs that were time-released; the generic did not work the same in that regard as the brand.
That's the problem with, and why, I'm on Brand Minocin. And I've seen a ton of posts on how bad some of the generics' are for just that one drug.
Have you ever noticed how many people know which works and which don't? I think it's a lot to do with that FDA +/- 20% of the ingredients. 20% is a lot of wiggle room.
Pip
I didn't know that, but now I have another reason to trust the integrity of their column. The authors are both working pharmacists, and it has always impressed me that they frequently include OTC and 'folk' remedies in their advice, when they feel it is something that works for a lot of people.
I edited the link in the first post - the newspaper had put in the hyphen because it went to the next line, not because it was in the web address. Hyphenated gets you some online pharmacy, apparently.makes me wonder if my horrible side effects to methotrexate would have been ok with brand name.
Added:
The reason i wonder is because generic meds can hvae more additives in them, cheaper chemicals as additives or added colors to make them "look good".
I have a digestion disorder and can't take colors well, additives or preserves, so it just makes me wonder if by having different chemicals in a pill, if it might be different.