Posted by bleauberry on October 21, 2009, at 17:24:46
In reply to Brand name Buspar vs. generic, posted by Monica L on October 20, 2009, at 19:32:13
Buspar does take several weeks to work, if it is going to work.
It is not unusual for generic and brand to be quite different. The archives here abound with reports of inequivalence between generic and brand. Too many reports to be random glitches or placebos. Probably one of the more outstanding ones was SLS decline on generic lamictal, even upon raising the dose considerably higher, with a prompt return to efficacy upon reinstating the brand. That is one case in hundreds reported here, not to mention the rest of the nation outside pbabble.
Keep in mind, generics do not have the same ingredients brand does. They do have the same active ingredient, but no one can say with absolute certainty how the chosen fillers impact the absorbability characteristics or any other molecular characteristics of a drug. In respect to the active ingredient, the FDA allows a rather significant different in the amount of the dose in generic versus brand. It can be off by as much a 16% and still be considered equivalent. The word equivalent itself is misleading...the active ingredients are equivalent in the lab, but never shown to be equivalent in the clinic. While the brand had to undergo stringent testing by the FDA, the generic never did. A generic drug has never been tested for therapeutic equivalency. Only by secondhand reports from patients and doctors can we see that in many cases therapeutic equivalency does not exist. Because no one knows for sure why that is, it is often poo-poo'ed by critics, basically claiming that if you felt good on brand and then deteriorated on generic it is all your imagination, and the same wild imagination with thousands of other people.
My doctor specifically requires his patients to take brand only, with the exception of a few meds where he has discovered that he gets better therapeutic response with a particular generic manufacturer compared to the brand. So it goes both ways, but more often in favor of the brand.
None of this is scientific yet. There is no money or profit for anyone to research this topic. It is based on experience in the real world with real people, not science in the lab.
Some antiseizure meds are required to be brand because there have been enough cases of generic relapse to demand it. I wonder if anyone is ignorant enough to think this phenomenon only applies to antiseizure meds but couldn't possibly be an issue with any others. Only antiseizure meds are not immune to this weird thing?
Speaking of Buspar specifically, I personally do not recall a report here of whether there was a noted difference between brand and generic.
I think if whatever you are taking...brand or generic...is not working for you at 4 weeks, it does make sense to switch to the other for 2 weeks before throwing in the towel. I think, personal opinion, many people have missed out on what would have been a good med for them by never giving the brand versus the generic a chance.
Me for example, I did better on generic Nortriptyline and felt bad on the brand. Like I said, it can go both ways.
I asked my local pharmacist about this topic, if they ever see a difference between generic and brand. Their answer, "We see that quite a lot". When I asked them why, their answer, "We don't know."
Different is different. Period.
poster:bleauberry
thread:921726
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20091021/msgs/921841.html