Generic vs Brand Name
Written by
azzarocks86
5. Jul 2007 04:19 AM
Until recently I had been taking my scripts along to the pharmacy and when they ask if I would like the "less expensive brand" of course I say yes...
A couple of weeks ago when chatting with my doctor the topic came up about the difference between the "brand name medication" that he had been writing on my prescription and the one that i had been ending up with.
To my horror he told me that although he had no scientific evidence or proof that most of his patients who use the "chemist's brand" of medications do not receive the benifits that someone on the same dose of the "brand name" version would.
The next time I had to go to the pharmacy was to get my partner's medication for him. He is on a health care card so i didn't think that there would be a problem insisting on the "name brand"! but to my horror i was charged triple what the no-name would have cost.
I told my doctor today and he was horrified and promptly rang the PBS for an explanation and was informed that the PBS no longer subsidized all brands like it used to... It now only subsidizes the "chemist brand" pills down to the $4.35 or whatever it is.
when discussing my medications he indicated that the "chemist brand" substitutions that i was taking have always 'worked well' in his patients and that there was no reason to change onto the more expensive brand.
Has anybody else had issues with brands of medications working and or not working??????
I'd be really interested to know if anyone else has discussed this kind of thing with their doctor...
|
Pharmacy made medicine
Written by
Deleted_User
6. Jul 2007 01:22 PM
I only joined depnet last week and have not had the bravery to make a diary entry or go into chat, but i feel safe enough to put my 2c worth in.
I was speaking to my doctor like 3 weeks ago and i asked him the same thing. what he told me came as a surpride. he said it has something to do with patents, like with Coke or KFC. he said that a company only has so many years before its patent on a drug runs out and then anybody can copy the drug and sell it at a much cheaper price. said the goverment wants to keep costs down so only pays for the cheapest drug. then he said that if a parmacist sells more of the generic drugs he gets free stuff from the companies that copied the drug.
I dont know any more but would like to as well. sounds to me like someone making lots of money and goverment rying to rip us off again.
|
The pharmacist's point of view
Written by
babz
11. Jul 2007 12:49 AM
My Mum is a pharmacist and I've asked her many times about the difference between generic and brandname meds. There is absolutely no therapuetic difference as they contain the same active ingredient/s and often the same inactive ones as well. Sometimes you will find that your generic anti-depressants are even manufactured at the same plant, by the same company as the name brand ones are.
Yes, they are given free stuff when they sell enough of a drug, but its EVERY brand that does this, not just the generic. The reason that only generics are on the PBS is because it is a way to keep costs down without compromising patient care in any way.
When it comes down to it, I would prefer generic for the very reason that they are more often than not made in Australia.
|