Posted by kid_A on July 20, 2001, at 12:13:51
I've read and researched and followed my own preconclusions... I had thought that the Geneva alprazolam I had purchased was not as potent as the Upjohn equivalent prior to reading any information about this... I had not been on xanax for a few weeks since I had run out of my Upjohn suply prior to this, so the effectiveness should not have been a question due to tollerance...After reading several posts here, and many posts online where patients have come to the exact same conclusion from the exact same supplier (Geneva) of alprazolam, I can only assume that Geneva, who manufacture the alprazolam themselves, unlike some other generic suppliers who I have not read negative comments about, must be producing non-bioequivalent alprazolam.
Geneva's bioequivalency rating for alprazolam is listed as AB, which means that it 'meets' bioequivalency standards... a rating of A (one above AB), means that it -is- functionaly bioequivalent...
It seems to me that .25 Upjohn xanax is approximately equal to .5 Geneva alprazolam... Just my opinion, its entirely difficult to tell effectively, and its of course imposible -for me- to measure by any scientific means, but that is my intuition from having used both during different seperated intervals...
Thats my 'buyer beware'... Anyone else share the same feelings? I dont think I would waste my money on Geneva alprazolam if It came down to an extra 5.00 dollars or so for the Upjohn Xanax... This is if your fortunate to have a copay, if its comming right out of your pocket, your priorities may be different.
nEways...
poster:kid_A
thread:71063
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010720/msgs/71063.html