Brand names vs. generics
It's not online, but I had an article in Wednesday's paper about a talk given Tuesday night by Dr. Ed Weisbart at a forum sponsored by the League of Women Voters and the Moses Cone-Wesley Long Community Health Foundation.
Dr. Weisbart talked about the need to use more generic drugs, instead of brand-name prescriptions, primarily because doing so would save between $20 billion and $40 billion a year. He also said generics are safer because any safety issue with a drug tends to surface while it is still in the brand-name phase, before its generic equivalent can come on the market.
The article prompted an e-mail from Dr. John Lusk, a retired local physician active in the Greater Greensboro Society of Medicine. He writes:
A caveat for patients seeking less costly drugs is that they should realize that generics and brand name drugs are not all equal.One should be certain that the generic being offered has been made by a reputable manufacturer. The major chains and the locally owned pharmacies most probably vet the source of their non-brand named drugs.
Your readers should be careful if drugs are ordered via the internet. This is especially true if the order is place with an off-shore supplier. Some of these medications have the potential to be counterfeit, and contain none of the active ingredient.
As you are more than likely aware, the FDA requires that tablets and capsules carry some type of identification, printed or embossed. I've seen some "ineffective" pills without these markings.
Another potential difference is the use of different excipients and binders. Occasionally one of these compounds will react with the active ingredient to render it inactive. I have sometimes seen evidence that pills pass thru an intestinal tract intact and almost unchanged in appearance.
I suppose the old advice is the best advice: Talk to your doctor and your pharmacist.