We don't allow speculation about which brand/generic of a drug is "best" or "strongest", because it's just that, baseless speculation. So if no one has any scientific basis for their claims (and sources to prove it) this thread will get shut down.
We also don't allow offensive posts. You say you were "not being literal" but even if you mean "gay" as just a negative slang word, that is still offensive to say "I hate gay people". And it's ironic for you to point out that some guy you didn't agree with was black (what does that have to do with it?) but then claim you hate racists. Your whole rant is really pointless and unnecessary to your post and does not make people want to respond. This is not The Lounge.
A 30mg oxycodone pill will contain 30mg oxycodone. For most people there should not be noticeable differences in the effects because you're getting the exact same amount of the active drug. Obviously if one pill is IR ("instant" or regular release) and another is ER (extended release) that would make a big difference in effects, so I'm assuming here you are just talking about IR pills.
However I disagree that the
only possible difference is "placebo effect". There
can be differences in the so-called "inactive" ingredients in different pills, which can actually have some effects on absorption
(I have posted sources about this in other threads). Amount of inactive ingredients can be different too, for example if you have two 10mg pills of a drug they will contain more inactives than one 20mg pill.
If you want to know the differences in ingredients between different pills you can look up the ingredients lists.
Sorry this post is SO long, I'm just trying to be thorough because this issue comes up a lot and usually the only answer people get is "there's no possible difference, it's only placebo".
There is
NO reason to automatically assume brand names are better than generics. Some generics are actually identical to the name brand, they are even manufactured in the same manufacturing plant.
There is a difference also between if you are referring to just any different forms/brands of the same substance (ie oxycodone), or a generic that is supposed to represent a specific brand name drug (ie generic Roxicodone).
In the United States for example, a generic equivalent to a specific brand name drug must:
- Have the same active ingredient, quantity of active ingredient, and route of administration as the brand name product. Generic drugs do not need to contain the same inactive ingredients as the brand name product.
- Some variability can and does occur during manufacturing, for both brand name and generic drugs. When a drug, generic or brand name, is mass-produced,
very small variations in purity, size, strength, and other parameters are permitted. The FDA limits how much variability is acceptable for both.
(I can try to find out what the limits are).
- The generic drug manufacturer must do a study to show its drug is "bioequivalent" to the brand name drug. For example, they will do a study on 24 healthy people. After a person in the study takes the generic drug, the amount of drug in the bloodstream is measured, then an average is developed from all the people in the study. The average levels of the active drug in the bloodstream must be close to the same as the levels found when the brand name product is used. The generic is then assumed to have the same therapeutic action as the brand name drug.
Note: Really what these trials show is that the new drug is not inferior to an unacceptable extent, "bioequivalent" is actually a misnomer, as true equivalence (assurance that the generic drug is not any less effective than the brand name at all), could only be shown by demonstrating superiority. Because the intent of the trial is to show that the new drug is not significantly materially worse than the brand name, they are now called "non-inferiority" trials. But that too, is a misnomer, as guaranteeing that the new drug is not any (even a little) less effective than the control could only be demonstrated by showing that the new drug is superior. What non-inferiority trials seek to show is that any difference between the two drugs is small enough to allow a conclusion that the new drug has an effect that is not too much smaller than the active control. I will try to find out what the allowable difference is.
- The FDA considers "bioequivalence" sufficient to assume "therapeutic equivalence" - the equal ability of two drug forms to ease symptoms or cure disease. This assumption has been criticized [see
LA Times article].
- Generics do not have to have the same extensive clinical trials as the original brand name drug, because the results are expected to be the same, and this is why generics are cheaper.
[sources for the above: The FDA
here and
here].
[Related reading:
The FDA’s Generic-Drug Approval Process: Similarities to and Differences From Brand-Name Drugs]
Most other countries have very similar rules.
. . . . . . . . . .
One thing I thought was surprising though was I just got a new prescription and on the insert from the pharmacy it says:
Do not change brands of this medication without consulting your doctor. There are different brands and forms of this medication available and not all have the same effects.
I can only assume however, that they are mainly thinking someone might switch from, say, an IR to an ER formulation without realizing it? But that doesn't really make sense because a pharmacy isn't going to fill someone's prescription for an IR med with an ER med or vice versa.
. . . . . . . . . .
name brand is always best. somewhere I found the fda regulation for "active drug" amounts in generics and they're required to have between 85%-115% of the labeled active drug. so generics could be better or worse but name brands are dead on.
^ Post your finding then. I have heard people say that and whenever they actually do post the article it's saying that the inactive ingredients have to be within a certain percentage, but the actives have to be the same.
According to
the LA Times:
In almost all cases, the FDA permits a generic drug to release 80% to 125% of an active ingredient into the bloodstream, compared to that released in a single dose of the original medication. That range would make little practical difference in the effect that most drugs have. And the FDA and generics manufacturers defend the allowable range of variance as the same that is permitted among "batches" of brand-name drugs.
So IF that is even true*, it sounds like there is an allowable variance
in blood levels after taking the drug of +25%/-20% compared to the brand name, BUT there is also the same variance allowed for brand name drugs. I
highly doubt there is a variance that big in the allowable amount of
active ingredient present in the pill itself.
*The
Generic Pharmaceutical Association claims:
The 20% to 25% margin is one part of a complex statistical calculation used to help measure the bioequivalence. In no way does it represent the actual difference in the amount of active ingredient a patient’s bloodstream, which FDA has determined is typically less than 4% between generic and brand or between two different batches of a brand drug.
Also
inactive ingredients do not have to be the same at all Tommyboy.
