From: Legba Jean Petro Subject: brand vs. generic [was Re: endocan] Date: 1997/11/05 Newsgroups: alt.drugs.hard 1009 wrote: > > I read that the generic pain pills are never as good as > the real ones, and that was in JAMA. [...] As for this ongoing (and tiresome) brand vs. generic debate... Any and all generic formulations have to be the same drug (or combination of drugs), the same dosage, and the same dosage form as the original branded product to be marketed as generic equivalents. Brand name and generic drugs are subject to the same quality control standards and generics have to demonstrate bioequivalence for the full "A-B rating" (i.e. to be freely sustitutable). Yes, there have been cases in the past where generic drug manufacturers have violated the laws governing manufacturing standards, but those companies were either purged from the business some years ago or have since cleaned up their acts to the satisfaction of the FDA, DEA, DOJ, etc. In any case, those were isolated instances of deliberate criminal misconduct and not matters of different laws or policy allowing for different standards for brand vs. generic. Most of this "debate" centers around such misunderstandings of the applicable laws. The existence of generic drugs has rather more to do with patent law than patent medicine. Hearsay testimony of drug abusers who "swear" that brand X isn't as good as the "real thing" are just so much bullshit. Most dopers aren't analytical chemists. I am and I've done pharmaceutical testing. My advice: save some money and buy generics where available. Drug dealers charge more for the name brands only because they cost more to acquire and they know that users will typically pay more for them, it has nothing to do with quality. -LJP --