this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
372 points (99.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43912 readers
842 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I saw this post and wanted to ask the opposite. What are some items that really aren't worth paying the expensive version for? Preferably more extreme or unexpected examples.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 188 points 10 months ago (8 children)

Medicine. The house brands and generics are the exact same, tested the same, made the same.

[–] Shadow@lemmy.ca 69 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

But real Advil has the candy coating on the outside, and I haven't found a generic that does =(

Otherwise 100% identical yes.

[–] Raptor_007@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (3 children)

A few years ago, I wondered why that was and googled it. I came to an Advil site with an expandable FAQ, and one of the questions was β€œwhy does Advil taste sweet?”

So I expanded it out to reveal this shocking answer (or something similar): β€œAdvil tastes sweet because it is lightly coated in sugar.”

Thanks, I guess. I just closed the tab in mild irritation and moved on with my day.

[–] psud@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

That sucks for those of us trying to avoid sugar.

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Problem with the candy coating is you can't enjoy it, unless you want to suddenly learn what pure poison tastes like. It's such a tease. Doesn't help that they look like scrumptious little caramel-y morsels.

[–] Shadow@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh I suck on them first. It lasts long enough.

[–] instamat@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Are you free tonight?

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

Yep

There may be a difference in things like pill shape, texture, release mechanism / time to absorb (if it's not very important for how the medication works)

So it's ok to have a preference for one brand over the other when one of those points is relevant to your situation. I know some people also prefer the generic brand version over the regular (even if prices were the same)

[–] Johandea@feddit.nu 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wait, what? I have no idea what advil is, but sugar coating any drug is a recipe for disaster.

[–] chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Sugarcoating pills is fairly common, especially for pills which are frequently ingested or target older demographics. It's because sugar coatings are much gentler on the esophagus (i.e.: less likely to cause esophagitis, "pill burn"). Advil (i.e.: ibuprofen) is a cheap, well tolerated, and non habit-forming pain reliever -- it's about as safe as such a thing could possibly be, so hopefully that helps to explain why a sugar coating might be warranted given the aforementioned upsides (for the love of all that is holy; always read the directions on the label, it's still quite possible that Advil is not safe for you specifically). FWIW: the bottles also have childproofing mechanisms built into the caps (... at least in U.S. markets. Not sure about elsewhere?)

[–] anothermember@beehaw.org 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I've never heard of sugarcoating pills, is it a US thing maybe?

[–] Norgur@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think you have a wrong image of how this looks/works. It's not like there is a cany-shell or something. It's a regular, smooth pill. You usually do not notice this coating because you don't keep a pill in your mouth. If you were to, the pill would taste sweet.

If you ever have gotten a pill of some sort that dd not feel chalky on the outside but smooth and looked kinda shiny, that probably has been a sugarcoated pill.

[–] anothermember@beehaw.org 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think you're right then, and honestly I can't say I've noticed.

[–] Norgur@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

many birth control pills are sugarcoated for example. Or anti-histamine allergy medication like Cetericine

[–] cerpa@kbin.social 31 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Not exactly. Just a fun fact and disclaimer that I use generics if at all possible. But my pharmacology class taught that generics can have higher tolerance of error in % of active ingredient. Not usually a big deal unless the drug has a very narrow therapeutic range, meaning too little doesn’t work and too much will harm you. 99.9% of generics is fine. But if you ever wonder if one batch of your med doesn’t seem to work as well this it’s likely that batch was on the lower end of acceptable.

[–] DillyDaily@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I think this depends where you live, having worked a summer as a trolley runner for blister pack production, we produced thousands of blisters, and at the end of the line half got pharmacy own brand foils and the other half got name brand foils.

Same pills, same packs, same factory same standards and testing, just different ink on the foils. But the pharmacy brands would have shorter contracts so they would only be identical to this name brand for 6 months, then try might get a contract with another factory and be identical to another name brand there.

I know with some drugs (Warfarin is the only one that's instantly coming to mind) it is important to pick a brand and stick with it because the slightest change can effect the therapeutic value.

For myself, I have allergies so sometimes a certain brand or manufacturing company will use a filler, binder or dye I can't have. And frustratingly there are no ingredients lists on pills for fillers and dyes.

[–] Jarlsburg@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That's true but the difference is exceedingly small.

According to 1 FDA study, the mean difference for AUC values between test and reference products was found to be 3.5% in the 2-year period following the Waxman-Hatch Act, and 80% of the absolute differences between generic products approved since 1984 and the corresponding innovator products were within a 5% range.

Debunking a Common Pharmacy Myth: The 80-125% Bioequivalence Rule Jun 8, 2016

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 13 points 10 months ago

Often made by the same.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Depends on the meds. I take concerta for ADHD and as I understand it, the generic doesn't use the same release mechanism.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago

I'm also on concerta (ADHD highfive) and I've found lower efficacy with the generic... I sure wish it was the same though.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Crunched the numbers years ago for cost per mg of a med in question, and unsurprisingly generics were the best deal, but Costco's generics (Kirkland) specifically blew the competition out of the water. Comparing it to the most expensive options (name brands from places like Walgreens) was pretty comical - no exaggeration, some of them were literally over 100x more expensive per mg than the Kirkland equivilent. Comparing it to other generics, Kirkland still won by a factor of 5 to 10 sometimes.

Between that and gas, a Costco membership pays for itself before you even step foot into the food aisles or other random shit they sell.

Caveat: they do also sell a lot of fancy, stupid expensive shit, so don't let the comment paint the picture that everything in that store is a super good deal - it's not - but the things that are good deals, are crazy good deals, pharmaceuticals in particular.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

Also, a cheaper alternative is to eat less and eat healthier. I know we can't all afford expensive healthy foods but just simply cutting out excess fats, sugar and empty carbs from your diet will add years to your life and also add better years to your life.

[–] Admetus@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

Aspirin and paracetamol I don't think are patented by any one company now. Supermarket brand is super cheap.

[–] WeeSheep@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Off brand Tums (and some newer flavors of Tums) is made with dextrose instead of corn starch. Sugar gives me heart burn, so generic and newer stuff does absolutely nothing for me.