Bluelight

Thread: D-Amphetamine salt combo - very different results by generic manufacturer?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 53
  1. Collapse Details
    D-Amphetamine salt combo - very different results by generic manufacturer? 
    #1
    I was at Walgreens and they changed my generic prescription for D-Amphetamine salt combo - 30mg (Adderall) from an orange, football pill to a pink, diamond pill.

    The pink pills seem to make me very jittery, have poor concentration, anxious, stomach pains, etc. Not the 'drive' and fantastic concentration from my previous orange pills.

    I've researched a bit online and it looks that others have experienced something similar. But I trust bluelight, so is this all in my head or have others experienced something?

    Thinking about returning the script and filling elsewhere.
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    Bluelighter sarsXdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    U-S-A! U-S-A!
    Posts
    418
    I'm not positive, but I don't believe they will or can take drugs back. You'd probably need to talk to the doctor, rather than the pharmacist.

    And, yeah, on addforums and some other boards (/stim/ on 420chan) I've seen enough people complain that I do believe something's up. Someone's probably going to tell you that generics are the exact same thing, just with different binders, but even my old Veterinary Science teacher brought up some studies with human and animal generics. Analysis showed that they're not really always the same. I don't have the handouts anymore, but Google Scholar might turn something up.

    FDA or whoever regulates them only requires generics come within 80% of the original's content. Less active ingredient shouldn't cause the problems people seem to have on these, so I can't figure it out, but I definitely believe something's up.
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    Bluelighter red_eyed_wonda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    from tex to cali, every hood, every alley
    Posts
    188
    you can't return a prescription, but you can give it to the pharmacy to dispose. it'd be something i'd discuss with your doc. people react differently to different generics. i do believe the jitters are caused from the l- isomer of amphetamine.

    i'm on vyvanse, and that has no l-isomer in it, and i never get jittery off of it. i have seen the generics being mentioned as affecting people differently with adderall, on a lot of different boards too. enough for me to think that its not in your head.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_levoamphetamine:
    Levoamphetamine causes sweating, racing/irregular heartbeat (tachycardia), "jumpiness" or "jitters", and cotton mouth in some users. Although levoamphetamine has not been proven to have any therapeutic potential, it is still prescribed heavily by doctors for the treatment of ADD/ADHD in the form of Adderall, which is a preparation of four amphetamine salts, two of them being pure dextroamphetamine and the others being racemic (meaning they contain about equal amounts of both dextro- and levo-amphetamine). Dexedrine and its different brand-name equivalents (dextrostat, vyvnase, etc.), are the only amphetamine-based medications that contain only pure dextroamphetamine sulfate and are generally more well-tolerated than other stimulants largely due to the absence of levoamphetamine.
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    Bluelighter Riemann Zeta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Land of Wind and Ghosts
    Posts
    1,814
    People seem to report annoyances with the CorePharma brand of generic equivalent "Adderall blend," which comes as a pink, scored tablet. I have no idea why this would be, however.

    I just can't understand what underlies the negative reviews of the CorePharma generic: a chemical is a chemical is a chemical and any clone of Adderall should have exactly the same enantiomeric ratio of d- and l-amphetamine. Unlike many other compounds, the bioavailablity and absorption of dl-amphetmaine should be quite uniform, regardless of binders and excipients. Nevertheless, I had a friend in college who took Adderall and paradoxically responded extremely well to the brand-name IR formulation, but quite poorly to the generic. I have never noticed a difference between different generic brands for Dextroamphetamine XR (Dexedrine), nor did I ever notice a difference between the brand and the Barr pharma clone back (a long time ago) when I was on Adderall.
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    you're not the only one who hates the new pink generics- i know a drug is a drug is a drug, but i'd been on addie for 3 years before the switch and something in this formulation is definitely different. whatever it is it does have an effect and a lot of people have noticed.

    after taking the shitty ass pink 30's for 12 months i did a search for "corepharma" to research the company, and quickly found a blog post dedicated to how shitty and different the new generics are- with hundreds of comments from other users who agree that there's something wrong with this brand.

    i've discovered in the past couple months that the old orange tabs from Barr are still available at Target and Wal-Mart, but all Walgreens as far as i've found have switched to the dark side. prices are lower if your insurance doesn't cover it, too (~$60 vs $80-90 for 60 30mg pills). o and i love that they taste like candy again so i don't need to drink anything to swallow 'em. i've switched back & forth a couple times to see if i could still tell a difference between brands, and i can, but not as obvious as it used to be to me. since i know both are available i'll stick with Barr from now on.
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Bluelighter delta_9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Planetary body completing its rotation every 831,364.09053 seconds
    Posts
    8,801
    As zeta said, they should have the same forumla and ratios of isomers. Maybe something about different counterions?
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Bluelighter sarsXdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    U-S-A! U-S-A!
    Posts
    418
    You'd think that with so much of our legacy being built on modernization and industry, that "ought to" and "is" should at least be equal with regards to medicine.

    But, whatever, I guess capitalism always plays a big role and maybe dropping a couple milligrams of d-amp saved a few jobs. I doubt it, but hopefully that's way more likely than active impurities.
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Posts
    1,068
    do yourself a favor and see if your doctor will switch you to dexedrine
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    What's better about dexedrine?
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by aspena View Post
    What's better about dexedrine?
    its pure dextroamphetamine, its not a salt combo,therefore its stronger but only by 5 mgs....its hard to find, atleast around here...i remember my doc prescribed it to me and when i called pharmacies for it some of them told me how bad it is and nobody had it so i had to wait like a week to get my prescription filled.there seems to be a big social stigma around dexedrine but not adderall. its weird its only like 5 mgs. stronger than adderall.
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Posts
    1,068
    Quote Originally Posted by aspena View Post
    What's better about dexedrine?
    it has no l-amp, when i switched over I lost about 90% of the negative amphetamine side effects like jitters, muscle aches, etc. yes, it is less common but once a pharmacist knows you have a monthly script for it they will stock it for you. its cheaper than adderall too. and for me as far as effects go, 15mg of dexedrine = 15mg of adderall. I didn't find it to be any stronger, just cleaner feeling.
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Bluelighter sarsXdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    U-S-A! U-S-A!
    Posts
    418
    I know, it's so ridiculous how they want to curb abuse just by sticking to the one that has more side effects, so you don't feel like you can take as much.

    It makes sense in a way, but you're also making it rougher the bodies of everyone who takes as prescribed. It's why I'm actually thankful Vyvanse came out, because my university psych was wary of Dex, and claimed it gave his patients a "caffeinated" feeling, which is exactly opposite of everything I've ever heard about it. Dude was okay with Vyvanse and Adderall IR, but got a very cautious look on his face when I mentioned Dexedrine.
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Posts
    1,068
    fortunately dextroamphetamine costs me half the copay of generic adderall on my insurance so it was an easy conversation with my doc. I brought him the printout and said "can i try this it will save me 50%'
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    I also found the Corepharma generic not as effective. I called Walgreens and they said they would order the brand name (although if I remember correctly, this is now also made by Barr). We'll see if they have it when I go in for my next script.
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    i found that blog with tons of comments on this subject, if anyone's interested here it is:

    http://loveadderall.wordpress.com/20...pink-adderall/

    i realize the name of the blog alone would normally turn me off of it immediately, but seeing how over a hundred other random people found it & have the same opinion, i don't think that can be discounted.
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Greenlighter
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    42
    I think the generic adderall works better for me because I LIKE TO EAT and I dont wan't to be anorexic and malnourished which is was the brand name caused me to be. It also won't keep my up and night and it really treats the ADD.
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Bluelighter SteeleyJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    We use our palm as a map.
    Posts
    2,419
    Quote Originally Posted by sarsXdave View Post

    FDA or whoever regulates them only requires generics come within 80% of the original's content. Less active ingredient shouldn't cause the problems people seem to have on these, so I can't figure it out, but I definitely believe something's up.

    Wrong, The FDA mandates the exact same amount of active ingredient in each generic. Within 80% is a sham, Think about that....what would stop a company from putting less ingredient in each tablet just because they could....or for that matter putting more in to get thier customers addicted. Again FDA mandates that a generic must contain the same active ingredient at the same dosage as it's original.
     

  18. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Quote Originally Posted by SteeleyJ View Post
    Wrong, The FDA mandates the exact same amount of active ingredient in each generic. Within 80% is a sham, Think about that....what would stop a company from putting less ingredient in each tablet just because they could....or for that matter putting more in to get thier customers addicted. Again FDA mandates that a generic must contain the same active ingredient at the same dosage as it's original.
    I was just about to say the same thing. Where this 80% figure comes from is beyond me. It seems that people believe just because they know something, it must be true. Well in the absence of proof, I will take the word of a pharmaceutical company making billions of dollars, and the regulating body of these billion dollar companies (the FDA), over "hundreds of posts" from anonymous bloggers saying the generic is weaker.
    The burden of proof is on the naysayers, and I have yet to see a study showing that generic formulations are not bioequivalent to their brand name counterparts. So dig thru Google Scholar by all means and prove me wrong, but I have yet to see anything even remotely suggesting what alot of people are suggesting

    I think the generic adderall works better for me because I LIKE TO EAT and I dont wan't to be anorexic and malnourished which is was the brand name caused me to be. It also won't keep my up and night and it really treats the ADD.
    This is what I'm talking about. You are talking about amphetamine. A generic version of amphetamine is still amphetamine. It's not some cheaper version of amphetamine. In fact, the formulation is the same in the case Adderall (salt ratios identical), so the only difference is the inert ingredients in the pill. Perhaps these inert substances are delaying absorption, but it's a real stretch saying generic amphetamine is good because you can eat and sleep on it, whereas brandname amphetamine is horrible as it stunts hunger and keeps you awake. Um, that's amphetamine for you.
    I'm not saying YOU don't believe there's a difference, but there isn't. So take that as an assurance of just how powerful the human brain's power to direct beliefs can be
    I'll bet $1000 you started off on brand name Aderall and couldn't eat or sleep at first, so eventually you switched to generic when you had been on the meds for a month or two... now tolerance is rising at this stage, so when you start on the generic version, your perception is that it's different. You reason that because you can eat and sleep better now, the generic must be different. If it was the other way around (you started on generic meds and switched to brand name) your belief would be reversed. As I said, its all in your head
    Last edited by djsim; 15-04-2009 at 23:10.
     

  19. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Quote Originally Posted by djsim View Post
    I was just about to say the same thing. Where this 80% figure comes from is beyond me. It seems that people believe just because they know something, it must be true. Well in the absence of proof, I will take the word of a pharmaceutical company making billions of dollars, and the regulating body of these billion dollar companies (the FDA), over "hundreds of posts" from anonymous bloggers saying the generic is weaker.
    The burden of proof is on the naysayers, and I have yet to see a study showing that generic formulations are not bioequivalent to their brand name counterparts. So dig thru Google Scholar by all means and prove me wrong, but I have yet to see anything even remotely suggesting what alot of people are suggesting



    This is what I'm talking about. You are talking about amphetamine. A generic version of amphetamine is still amphetamine. It's not some cheaper version of amphetamine. In fact, the formulation is the same in the case Adderall (salt ratios identical), so the only difference is the inert ingredients in the pill. Perhaps these inert substances are delaying absorption, but it's a real stretch saying generic amphetamine is good because you can eat and sleep on it, whereas brandname amphetamine is horrible as it stunts hunger and keeps you awake. Um, that's amphetamine for you.
    I'm not saying YOU don't believe there's a difference, but there isn't. So take that as an assurance of just how powerful the human brain's power to direct beliefs can be
    I'll bet $1000 you started off on brand name Aderall and couldn't eat or sleep at first, so eventually you switched to generic when you had been on the meds for a month or two... now tolerance is rising at this stage, so when you start on the generic version, your perception is that it's different. You reason that because you can eat and sleep better now, the generic must be different. If it was the other way around (you started on generic meds and switched to brand name) your belief would be reversed. As I said, its all in your head
    I find this kind of ignorance coming from a moderator here at BL to be somewhat chilling. You of all people should know better. Just do a little research and the answers are right here in other threads as well as posted elsewhere on the net. Just check under generic bioequivalency tests - the testing process has been posted more than once, and it isn't 20% - it is 20% either way from baseline.
     

  20. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Bluelighter BaybeX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Central Florida
    Posts
    2,584
    Ignorance, huh.. haha.

    Djsim is a med student.. and I believe he is/was in pharmaceuticals.

    From FDA.gov:

    Are generic drugs as strong as brand-name drugs?

    Yes. FDA requires generic drugs to have the same quality, strength, purity and stability as brand-name drugs.

    http://www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo....htm#strong-as


    I'd love to see your source for this +/- 20% data.
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Bluelighter sarsXdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    U-S-A! U-S-A!
    Posts
    418
    I don't know if this site is considered super credible, but here:

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/410695_7
    EDIT: I noticed the direct link doesn't work without a login. Just go here and pick the third result from the top:
    http://www.google.com/search?q=fda+8...ient=firefox-a

    It discusses how, generics WERE allowed to vary by 20% either way, until the 1980s. They have apparently moved to new statistical measures, but it's not exactly the same as so many people on BL like to claim either.

    I was somewhat wrong as are you. Just because the FDA says they are the same doesn't mean they are, it means they fall into some government-regulated margin of error that's considered "same-enough" like all products. Again, I admit that I was somewhat wrong, but it wasn't based on some high school pillhead legend.

    Here's FDA's current statistical idea to approve of something as "bioequivalent," if some don't want to click the link:

    "I. When the current rule was adopted in 1986, if both the upper and lower limits of the CI were within 20% of the reference mean (80% to 120% ), the generic product was declared bioequivalent to the reference product. In 1992, the FDA issued a guidance in which the use of log-transformed data and an upper limit of 125% were adopted. These criteria remain the current rule for bioequivalence decisions."


    EDIT: I just realized I phrased one of my above posts funnily. I meant it had to be AT LEAST 80% (I guess "within 20%" would've been the right way to say it). The way I said it, I'm sure it sounded like a pretty big potential difference.
    Last edited by sarsXdave; 16-04-2009 at 05:15.
     

  22. Collapse Details
     
    #22
    Bluelighter SteeleyJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    We use our palm as a map.
    Posts
    2,419
    Basically what it all boils down to is that the active ingredient stated does haveto be exactly the same but the inert binders do not, which could ( and probably do ) change the rate of absorbtion/ bioavailability ( to a certain acceptable extent ).


    Sorry for jumping on you bro, but i've seen TONS of people just pull that stat out of thier ass.
     

  23. Collapse Details
     
    #23
    Quote Originally Posted by stringtheory View Post
    I find this kind of ignorance coming from a moderator here at BL to be somewhat chilling. You of all people should know better. Just do a little research and the answers are right here in other threads as well as posted elsewhere on the net. Just check under generic bioequivalency tests - the testing process has been posted more than once, and it isn't 20% - it is 20% either way from baseline.
    Ignorance is believing something despite evidence proving otherwise. I am a qualified pharmacist, and I can tell you that all generic medicines have the same bioequivalency as brand name counterparts. I have no vested interest in this arguement; hell, I dont own shares in pharmaceutical companies. I base my agruments on facts.

    ...Not to mention logic suggests that testing the FDA's power isnt in the pharm companies best interest. Any profit from underdosing (or overdosing to get ppl addicted) would be readily offset by the repurcussions the FDA would impose.

    I can recalll a recent US recall of morphine tablets as there was a remote chance that a batch of tablets may have been overdosed with ~10% extra morphine IIRC. The company spent a fucking fortune recalling every single box of medicine on the off chance a few overdosed boxes made it to the market. Why? Because if even one single box of one single product is not as it is meant to be, the FDA will shut them down in a nanosecond.

    Speculation aside, all I ask for is proof.
     

  24. Collapse Details
     
    #24
    Bluelighter sarsXdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    U-S-A! U-S-A!
    Posts
    418
    ^Well, djsim. I'm not trying to be arrogant or a dick anything, but why don't you have to show proof? I do believe your anecdotal evidence (the morphine recall) to probably be true, but I could always combat that with anecdotal evidence from my human and veterinary science professors who've said many generic human and animal medicines have tested to not be equivalent to the name brands.

    I know confidence intervals aren't quite the same as the straight percentages I used when this thread was first started (though, the straight +/-20% bioequivalence were shown to have been used as late as the 1970s), but they do allow for variance.

    I totally admit that it usually should have no effect and always buy generics when I can. But, in the informative spirit of the BL community, can you either show evidence that FDA does not use the regulations I just posted or explain why I'm incorrectly interpreting these regulations?

    I totally admit I'm not good with logarithms. But it seems to me (again, I admit I may be wrong) that the "bioequivalence is bioequivalence" or "generics are always the exact same (aside from inert binders)" are oversimplifications and not actually true either. I really doubt that the vast majority of people for most brand vs. generic formulations should ever be able to tell a difference, but would the FDA regulations I posted above (if accurate) not allow for the possibility, especially when multiple active ingredients are used, of a certain formulation producing noticeably different effects in many people?
    Last edited by sarsXdave; 16-04-2009 at 08:47.
     

  25. Collapse Details
     
    #25
    Any idea as to which binders would cause such a difference in the pills?
     

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •