Do generic drugs work?

Floppybits

As the title says to generic drugs work in treating illness as well as the non generic drugs?

I'm on my second course of anti biotics to treat a chest infection and the first set of anti biotics were generic which didn't seem to work, when I went back to the doctor and got another prescription I told the chemist that I didn't want the generic anti biotics, low and behold finally the infection is starting go.

sbsquarepants

Your second dose of generics would have cleared it just the same.

The difference in generics is just the brand name.

Foweva Awone

They are the exact same.

weldoninhio

Are jeans still jeans if they don't have a brand name on them??

Of course they are.

Generic drugs are the exact same drug as non-generic without a brand name on them.

FutureGuy

Same drug, different company. I always ask for generics when I get any medications.

I'm not a doctor but I suspect that your infection needed two courses of antibiotics. Not uncommon.

somesoldiers

Hope so- I have been taking medication for the last 12 years since having 2 stents put in aged 30. Blood pressure, aspirin and cholesterol lowering medication. My monthly bill has gone from E140 per month to E65 every six months as various generics have been available throughout the years

of course this also means that
1) e65 per 6 months means I can afford to get all in one batch and not pay e15 dispensing fee each month (e5 per item)
2) I am claiming less back of the gubberment (20%)

win/ win

murpho999

Of course generics work.

You only think they don't work.

These "chest infections" that people here get told they have are generally just colds, which are viruses, which are not impacted by anti biotics, generally just clear after they have run their course, and I'd say that's what has happened.

Floppybits

Floppybits wrote: »

I told the chemist that I didn't want the generic anti biotics, low and behold finally the infection is starting go.

Unfortunately it is hard to tell. There are quite a lot of studies exploring that particular question but nothing near 100% conclusive. Quite often the drug itself is the same between a generic brand and another one. But the delivery technology is different - for example.

There is also the placebo effect. If a person has a higher level of confidence in an established label than a generic one - then the potential for placebo is magnified.

Perhaps _neither_ of your antibiotics are helping. You are just getting better naturally as you would have if you had taken neither of them. But timing alone might make you think the new brand is doing better than the genetic.

Unfortunately in the world of medicine - and particularly in the world of woo medicine and alternative medicine - people generally just give credit to whatever they were doing when they noticed they were getting better. No matter how nonsense it is.

Thus you have everything from homeopathy to people spreading Vicks on their feet - and swearing that it works for them. For no other reason than they just happened to start getting or feeling better just as they started in with said nonsense.

Floppybits

BigCon wrote: »

No, based on a sample size of one, we can definatively conclude that generic drugs don't work as well as the same ingredient brand name drugs.

Jaysus untwist your knickers there, is this the way to treat everyone who asks a simple question?

knipex

Not only do they work but they save patients and the healthcare system a fortune.

Generic medicines are copies of branded medicines who's patents have expired and are manufactured to the same standards as branded medicines.

That is true for antibiotics, beta blockers, proton pump inhibitors, as well as aspirin, paracetamol and Ibuprofen.

For a very very small minority of patients some of the "non active" ingredients, (fillers, bulkers, coloring etc) on some brands may cause side effects not experienced when using other brands using different non active ingredients but that's not a generic v's branded issue.

ProfessorPlum

BigCon wrote: »

No, based on a sample size of one, we can definatively conclude that generic drugs don't work as well as the same ingredient brand name drugs.

Well, no, we can’t even do that, as the active ingredient in the second branded antibiotic was almost definitely different to that in the first generic prescription.

Because no doctor is going to prescribe a second course of the same antibiotic when the first course has had no effect.

Floppybits

Deleted User wrote: »

Unfortunately it is hard to tell. There are quite a lot of studies exploring that particular question but nothing near 100% conclusive. Quite often the drug itself is the same between a generic brand and another one. But the delivery technology is different - for example.

There is also the placebo effect. If a person has a higher level of confidence in an established label than a generic one - then the potential for placebo is magnified.

Perhaps _neither_ of your antibiotics are helping. You are just getting better naturally as you would have if you had taken neither of them. But timing alone might make you think the new brand is doing better than the genetic.

Unfortunately in the world of medicine - and particularly in the world of woo medicine and alternative medicine - people generally just give credit to whatever they were doing when they noticed they were getting better. No matter how nonsense it is.

Thus you have everything from homeopathy to people spreading Vicks on their feet - and swearing that it works for them. For no other reason than they just happened to start getting or feeling better just as they started in with said nonsense.

Next time I get sick I will start with the non-generic and see if they clear it up quicker.

Mickeroo

Chances are your body's natural defences were starting to fight off the infection by the time you started the second course.

murpho999

Floppybits wrote: »

Next time I get sick I will start with the non-generic and see if they clear it up quicker.

You do realse it's a regulated industry and generics have to be the exact same as the originals.

It's not like a brand v supermarket own brand.

pekitivey

If the first dose didn't work the doc is not going to give you a second dose of the same antibiotics. He will try a different antibiotic that fights different infections. that's why it cleared up on the second round of meds. Generic are as good as the brand name, bar one or two incidents in the past where companies tried and failed and producing generic medications. but these are now off the market and well known by medical professionals

St1mpMeister

Psychosomatic ... faith in the non-generic boosted your positive feeling toward it which consequently lowered your stress level and aided the curing of the illness. Simples

Feisar

I dunno however if paracetamol cures it there wasn't anything wrong in the first place!

I'm refering to across the counter stuff, liquid form in the hospital is supposed to be a good job.

floatwinner

They just make you worse. But I know I'll see your face again.

Floppybits

Floppybits wrote: »

Next time I get sick I will start with the non-generic and see if they clear it up quicker.

That is certainly a slightly more scientific approach But really it would still tell you next to nothing as it would likely be a different drug for a different illness.

For example perhaps this time _neither_ drug helped you at all. Perhaps next time it will. And so you will think it was because you started with the non-genetic drug when in fact it was because you started with one that actually helps in the first place!

Also if all illnesses had the same incubation time and symptom time it would be a more useful approach. But the problem of people taking drugs who get better naturally - and nothing to do with the drugs (What we call "return to the mean") - is that each illness has different time periods.

So your next illness might be a much shorter or longer one than the current illness but you might put getting better faster down to having chosen the non-generic option first.

Further there is still the Placebo issue. If you have a lot more faith in the efficacy of the Brand Named option - then taking it first just means you will kick the placebo effect in sooner.

Measuring the efficacy of drugs is fraught with problems alas. The world of epidemiology is very complex at times. And a single data point - such as yourself - is more likely than anything to give misleading results.

Steve F

murpho999 wrote: »

Of course generics work.

You only think they don't work.

These "chest infections" that people here get told they have are generally just colds, which are viruses, which are not impacted by anti biotics, generally just clear after they have run their course, and I'd say that's what has happened.

And that is why Antibiotic resistance is on the increase.
Every few years a particular Antibiotic becomes redundant
Few more years and we will be back to the pre antibiotic times.What then?
Oh, and don't say scientists will come up with new ones because it isn't happening.
All thanks to people insisting on getting their "moneys worth" when they visit the Doctor
I have even heard people saying they specifically wouldn't go back to a particular Doctor because he/she refused to prescribe Antibiotics for a Cold
Madness!

Shenshen

Floppybits wrote: »

As the title says to generic drugs work in treating illness as well as the non generic drugs?

I'm on my second course of anti biotics to treat a chest infection and the first set of anti biotics were generic which didn't seem to work, when I went back to the doctor and got another prescription I told the chemist that I didn't want the generic anti biotics, low and behold finally the infection is starting go.

That's one of the arguments I'm used to hearing about homeopathy. People start out treating their ailments with actual medicine, but see little improvement at first, as many times your body simply needs the time to heal, too.They then get something homeopathic, notice symptoms improving and assume it was the sugar pill/water drops that actually cured them, when really it was just time.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I suspect in the case of the OP it was a case of;

'You can take this pill and your infection will be gone in a week, or you can choose not to take it and your infection will be gone in seven days'.

OP unless you had a bacterial infection your infection probably ran its natural course whether or not you were going to take antibiotics are not.

engiweirdo

Floppybits wrote: »

As the title says to generic drugs work in treating illness as well as the non generic drugs?

I'm on my second course of anti biotics to treat a chest infection and the first set of anti biotics were generic which didn't seem to work, when I went back to the doctor and got another prescription I told the chemist that I didn't want the generic anti biotics, low and behold finally the infection is starting go.

Missing a trick here buddy. You should be a doctor. Think of the lives you'd save. And all that filthy filthy lucre.

Floppybits

Raven Few Scrubber wrote: »

I suspect in the case of the OP it was a case of;

'You can take this pill and your infection will be gone in a week, or you can choose not to take it and your infection will be gone in seven days'.

OP unless you had a bacterial infection your infection probably ran its natural course whether or not you were going to take antibiotics are not.

If only that was the case. But when you are ill for 2 weeks and just walking is leaving you breathless and there is no sign of getting better, I think then it is advisable to go to the doctor, don't you?

4th week and yes it is probably a combination of both courses of anti biotics and time that is meaning I am finally shifting this infection.

Floppybits

engiweirdo wrote: »

Missing a trick here buddy. You should be a doctor. Think of the lives you'd save. And all that filthy filthy lucre.

Are you saying doctors are not needed and that they are ripping people off?

Harry Palmr

Generic drugs are patented drugs the patent on which has expired. All drugs have a exclusive manufactures life span to make it worth the R&D in the first place.

That's it.

Anyone who thinks otherwise has fallen for the "if it's cheaper it must be worse" scam which has kept many products prices artificially high.

The government's attitude to ex-patented drugs is a scandal costing hundreds of millions a year every year.

ProfessorPlum

Raven Few Scrubber wrote: »

I suspect in the case of the OP it was a case of;

'You can take this pill and your infection will be gone in a week, or you can choose not to take it and your infection will be gone in seven days'.

OP unless you had a bacterial infection your infection probably ran its natural course whether or not you were going to take antibiotics are not.

Doctors almost always prescribe antibiotics on a ‘best guess’ basis. They don’t swab and culture every pathogen. They base their antibiotic choice on the most likely pathogen for a particular illness. The OP could well have had a bacterial infection that was not sensitive to the first antibiotic, but sensitive to the next second line antibiotic. Nothing at all to do with the brand name on the packet.

Dakota Dan

murpho999 wrote: »

Of course generics work.

You only think they don't work.

These "chest infections" that people here get told they have are generally just colds, which are viruses, which are not impacted by anti biotics, generally just clear after they have run their course, and I'd say that's what has happened.

At least he didn’t call it the flu, why do people have to go to a doctor with a cold, no wonder the health system is under stress.

seamus

FutureGuy wrote: »

I'm not a doctor but I suspect that your infection needed two courses of antibiotics. Not uncommon.

Indeed. It's also common that people jump the gun and take antibiotics for a chest infection caused by a viral agent. That does nothing, but it's common for a secondary bacterial infection to follow a viral one (the walls of the lungs are exposed and inflamed, bacteria can get in).

Thus the second course of antibiotics actually works because you now have a bacterial infection.

Floppybits

seamus wrote: »

Indeed. It's also common that people jump the gun and take antibiotics for a chest infection caused by a viral agent. That does nothing, but it's common for a secondary bacterial infection to follow a viral one (the walls of the lungs are exposed and inflamed, bacteria can get in).

Thus the second course of antibiotics actually works because you now have a bacterial infection.

Jaysus I started with a chest infection and now I have bacterial infection next I will heading down to the undertakers to sort out my funeral.

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

weldoninhio wrote: »

Are jeans still jeans if they don't have a brand name on them??

Of course they are.

Generic drugs are the exact same drug as non-generic without a brand name on them.

This is not a good analogy.

Pricier jeans are usually of a much better quality than cheap Pennies shíte, they last longer, the sewing at joins is a hundred times more secure, they aren't subject to wear and tear as quickly.

Generic drugs are not like this, they are the EXACT same thing.

seamus

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

Bad cold or a 'flu can be pretty miserable and the coughing overpowering. Most people get a 'flu maybe once a decade, if at all, so the severity of it can make them think they need a doctor.

ohnonotgmail

Floppybits wrote: »

Jaysus I started with a chest infection and now I have bacterial infection next I will heading down to the undertakers to sort out my funeral.

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

If your chest infection was not caused by a bacterial infection the it is pointless giving you antibiotics. Antibiotics dont work on viral infections which can also cause chest infections. Unfortunately most GPs just prescribe antibiotics for a chest infection without checking if it is bacterial or viral in nature. The sooner that GPs realise that this is mostly useless the better.



https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg69/evidence/full-guideline-196853293

Mint Sauce

Only people who benifit from Branded Drugs are the Labs/Manufacture, and the Prescriping Doctor. Yes they get paid/rewards from the reps.

I take regular stomach medication, I ask for it by the Generic name on renewing the prescription, and when in the Chemist, and the Dr always always buts the Brand name on the prescription. It does the same job, but costs at least twice as much.

Dakota Dan

seamus wrote: »

Bad cold or a 'flu can be pretty miserable and the coughing overpowering. Most people get a 'flu maybe once a decade, if at all, so the severity of it can make them think they need a doctor.

If they had the flu the doctor would have to go to them as they wouldn’t e able to get out of bed.

ohnonotgmail

seamus wrote: »

Bad cold or a 'flu can be pretty miserable and the coughing overpowering. Most people get a 'flu maybe once a decade, if at all, so the severity of it can make them think they need a doctor.

If you actually have influenza (and not just a bad cold or "man flu") then a trip to the doctor might be prudent if you are in one of the risk groups. But they wont prescribe you antibiotics they will prescribe an antiviral.

Mickeroo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If your chest infection was not caused by a bacterial infection the it is pointless giving you antibiotics. Antibiotics dont work on viral infections which can also cause chest infections. Unfortunately most GPs just prescribe antibiotics for a chest infection without checking if it is bacterial or viral in nature. The sooner that GPs realise that this is mostly useless the better.



https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg69/evidence/full-guideline-196853293

I think they already know it's useless but it's easier to give people antibiiotics than deal with irate patients who think they need them.

The Bishop Basher

It’s worse on the continent.

I work with a few French and Germans who go to the doc at the mere thought of a sniffle and always seem to get antibiotics for it.

They stopped working for me years ago so I stopped taking them. I’ve never had so few colds and infections since and I was plagued with chest infections growing up. I’ve lots of other health issues and meds now but my body fights infection much better since I stopped taking antibiotics.

I’m convinced big the drug companies are making us sick so they can make us well again..

As always, follow the money

Would it be legal that they didn't? No. Therefore, they're the same.

murpho999

Floppybits wrote: »

Jaysus I started with a chest infection and now I have bacterial infection next I will heading down to the undertakers to sort out my funeral.

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

You need to understand that all infections are from bacteria.

Below is from the HSE website. Link is here.

Although treatment from a GP for acute bronchitis is rarely necessary, there may be times when you should see your GP.

Your GP will not routinely prescribe antibiotic treatment for acute bronchitis for a number of important reasons:

Most cases of acute bronchitis are caused by viral infections, which means that antibiotics will have no effect.
You are almost as likely to experience a side effect from taking antibiotics, such as vomiting and diarrhoea, as you are to receive any benefit from the treatment.
The more antibiotics are used to treat mild conditions, the greater the likelihood that the bacteria will develop resistance to antibiotics and go on to cause more serious infections.
Many experts believe that the reason there are so many dangerous strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, such as MRSA and multi-drug resistance tuberculosis (MDR-TB), is because antibiotics have been overused in the past to treat mild conditions.

GPs here do give out anti biotics too much as stated above.

I'm always wary of people saying they have chest infections as it's just a bad cold that antibiotics have no impact on.

Somedaythefire

Floppybits wrote: »

Jaysus I started with a chest infection and now I have bacterial infection next I will heading down to the undertakers to sort out my funeral.

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

If you didn't have a bacterial infection you just wasted your money on antibiotics.

ohnonotgmail

murpho999 wrote: »

You need to understand that NOT all infections are from bacteria.

Below is from the HSE website. Link is here.




GPs here do give out anti biotics too much as stated above.

I'm always wary of people saying they have chest infections as it's just a bad cold that antibiotics have no impact on.

FYP

Why have they all come out of this morning, was there a conspiracy convention yesterday or something.

Generic medicines contain the exact ingredients as branded.

ohnonotgmail

mariaalice wrote: »

Why have they all come out of this morning, was there a conspiracy convention yesterday or something.

Generic medicines contain the exact ingredients as branded.

To be specific they contain the same ACTIVE ingredient as the branded version. They dont necessarily contain the same fillers or the same delivery method.

murpho999

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

FYP

Yes there are viral infections but they cannot be treated by anti-biotics.

ohnonotgmail

murpho999 wrote: »

Yes there are viral infections but they cannot be treated by anti-biotics.

Exactly. Blanket prescribing of antibiotics for chest infections is nonsense.

optimist16

does anyone else think Augmentin has become popular with GPs?

Floppybits

Floppybits wrote: »

Who goes to the doctor with a cold? Surely people can tell the difference between a cold and a chest infection?

I wish that was true. But one of the issues we have in the medical space is we see people going to the doctors for the most mundane things.

Worse however is many patients self diagnose and demand the drugs _they_ think will help them. One of the problems we have is with over use of Anti Biotics for example. And it has been suggested doctors prescribe them because their patients literally demand them or take their business elsewhere.

I have heard - anecdotally so treat it as such - of patients even being diagnosed with a virus and still demanding an Anti Biotic be prescribed. Given those drugs kill bacteria not viruses - this is often a demand born of nothing but sheer and complete ignorance.

ohnonotgmail

optimist16 wrote: »

does anyone else think Augmentin has become popular with GPs?

It is become more popular because over-prescription of antibiotics has led to strains of bacteria resistant to earlier antibiotics like amoxycillin.

gctest50

And that's why we'll have Antibiotic Armageddon by about : 2050


People will be wandering around with bits falling off, oozing pus n stuff - whoever thought up the idea of zombies wasn't too far off

seamus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If you actually have influenza (and not just a bad cold or "man flu") then a trip to the doctor might be prudent if you are in one of the risk groups. But they wont prescribe you antibiotics they will prescribe an antiviral.

That's a bit absolute, tbh.

Many still prescribe antibiotics on a preventative basis. There is such considerable crossover between symptoms of many illnesses, including 'flu and a severe chest infection, which are very difficult to effectively identify in a 15-minute session.

So patient presents with 'flu, thinking they have a chest infection. Doctors prescribes anti-Bs', worst-case scenario they do nothing and the flu resolves itself.

Some doctors might say, "You probably have the 'flu, go home to bed and come back to me a in week if you're not feeling any better". Others will take the scattergun approach.