Blog Layout

May 09, 2023

Generic vs Brand Name Drugs

How do Pharmaceuticals compare?

There are a lot of questions about generic medications. Are they equivalent to name-brand drugs? Why are there generic versions of some drugs and not others? What are the differences? Which are better?

Generic medications have the same active ingredients as their name-brand counterparts. In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows for a 20 percent variation in the active ingredient of generic medication, but, in most cases, the amount of active ingredient varies by around 4 percent. Generic drugs are also required to be the same as the name brand when it comes to quality, dosage, strength, and administration. There are no real guidelines for inactive ingredients, as long as they are safe to consume.


Some drugs do not have a generic version. Sometimes, this is due to patents. The current period for patenting pharmaceuticals is 20 years, during which time only the name-brand can be sold. Once the patent has expired, generic versions can be produced for sale. In other cases, it may be difficult to replicate an ingredient or process used to create a drug even if the patent has already expired.

This article is the first in a series on pharmaceuticals. It will explore the similarities and differences between generic and name-brand medications based on cost, efficacy, safety, side effects, and access.

The information here discusses generic medications in general. In all cases, it is best to discuss your individual prescriptions and treatment options with a doctor or pharmacist.


Cost

When generic medications were first introduced in the U.S. in 1984, the primary focus was to reduce the cost of medications. In general, generic drugs cost 80-85 percent less than the name-brand equivalent. In one study, generic drugs were found to save $1.67 trillion in U.S. healthcare costs from 2007-2016.

There are two reasons why name-brand medications cost more. The first is that name-brand medications must go through extensive clinical trials before they can be approved for treating a specific disease, ailment, or indication. These trials are often expensive, and companies pass these costs on to the consumer.


Generic drugs can be sold by several companies, increasing competition and driving down the price. Further, if a company wants to sell a generic drug, they will only be approved if they can sell it at a lower price than all existing generic versions of that drug.


Efficacy

When generic drugs were approved in the U.S., most of the drugs were manufactured in the U.S. or Europe. They were highly regulated and generally just as effective and name-brand versions. Today, many generic medications are manufactured in India or China. This has somewhat affected the quality control of generic drugs and the ability of regulators to ensure compliance.


While the FDA has the right to audit and inspect all pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities, the laws of other countries vary. In the U.S., the FDA can show up unannounced to inspect the facilities. However, in India or China, the FDA must give notice of the inspection and is only able to inspect the facilities every few years. It’s therefore difficult to know what’s going on in those facilities between inspections.

Because the efficacy of name-brand drugs is already known, generic drugs with the same active ingredient do not have to prove whether the drug will have the same effect.


Despite these potential risks, a large study found that there was only a 3.5 percent difference in the absorption rate between generic drugs and their name-brand counterparts.


Safety

There have been some recent recalls of generic drugs such as metformin and ranitidine due to the presence of carcinogens, but instances like these are fairly rare. The overwhelming majority of generic drugs are just as safe and effective as their name-brand equivalents.


Generic drugs are required to go through rigorous testing to make sure that any other ingredients are safe. The FDA also tests the sturdiness of the container, how long the unused drug takes to break down, and whether the drug manufacturer can consistently and correctly make the drug. These tests are administered before a generic drug is approved for use by the FDA.


Side Effects

All pharmaceuticals have the potential for side effects. There is the possibility that the generic versions of medications may have different side effects due to differences in the inactive ingredients. However, the majority of studies show that, in general, there is no significant difference.

 

There are some notable exceptions. A Canadian study examined data for 24 months before and 12 months after generic versions of the blood pressure medications losartan (U.S. brand name Cozaar), valsartan (Diovan), and candesartan (Atacand) went on the market. Before the generic versions became available, 10 percent of patients taking the drugs had to go to the emergency room or be hospitalized each month. The rates of hospitalization changed to 8 percent for losartan, almost 12 percent for valsartan, and 14 percent for candesartan. However, the study notes that something else may have caused the increase in hospitalizations.


Access

Generic versions of drugs can be found in many over-the-counter medications next to or nearby their name-brand versions. For prescription medications, a generic version is often offered by the pharmacist instead of the name brand. Generic versions have become so popular that on many prescription pads used by doctors, there is a clause stating, “This prescription will be filled generically unless signed online stating ‘filled as written’”. It is generally assumed that a prescription will be filled generically unless the doctor specifically states otherwise.


Choosing Between Name-Brand and Generic Medications

Generic medications are safe, effective, and lower cost. They are easy to access, and, in most cases, nearly identical to their name-brand versions.


That said, there are times when an individual may choose a name-brand drug. For example, some drugs don’t have a generic version due to patents or difficulties creating a specific ingredient. In other cases, some drugs have a narrow therapeutic index, meaning a tiny change in dosage or blood concentration of the medication can have serious health consequences. Some examples include anti-epileptic medications, blood thinners, or thyroid medications.


Finally, some people respond poorly to generic versions or find that the generic version is not as effective. While this is rare, those individuals will work with their doctor to find the right medication for them.



Generic medications have been highly successful since they were first introduced. This article is for informational purposes only, and you should never change your medications without talking to a doctor or pharmacist. If you notice a change in the way you respond to medication, you should immediately seek medical advice.

23 Dec, 2023
Context A CBC News article discussed the possibility of the Canadian economy heading into a recession, or whether the country has already passed that threshold. The article discussed this possibility based on slowed growth, high inflation, and the Bank of Canada’s continued interest rate hikes. Analysis A recession is a significant reduction in economic activity that occurs over a length of time, usually months or years. One of the most accepted definitions of a recession comes from the economist Julius Shiskin in 1974, who identified the threshold to an economic recession as two consecutive quarters of declining GDP, although economists often argue about the comprehensiveness of this measure. The causes of a recession can be quite complicated and have many contributing factors. Some common examples include a sudden economic shock such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic, excessive debt, asset bubbles, inflation, deflation, or large technological changes. One major factor influencing the probability of an economic recession includes rising interest rates from the Bank of Canada, which has implemented the highest hike in the shortest amount of time in all of the bank’s history, raising the rate over eight times since 2022. The Bank of Canada increased interest rates in order to curb inflation since rising interest rates discourage taking on debt and spending. This further encourages companies to lower prices or slow inflation to increase demand. Currently, the Bank of Canada is keeping at the 5.0 percent rate but has said that further hikes are not off the table as inflation may continue to exceed acceptable rates. Increases in interest rates can certainly contribute to or precede a recession. In fact, the Bank of Canada has raised interest rates three times to slow inflation since the 1960s and all three times this action led to an economic recession. Current fears of a looming economic depression are also not unique to Canada, as following the COVID-19 pandemic, the global inflation rate increased to 8.73 percent in 2021. This was due to supply chain issues, as well as the effect of the Russia-Ukraine War creating rising food and energy prices, as well as general fiscal instability. A majority of the World Economic Forum’s lead economists agreed earlier this year that we could see the beginning of a global recession starting in 2023, which would certainly affect the Canadian economy. The article also discusses the Canadian economy’s slowed economic growth, as the GDP has stagnated in the second quarter of this year. However, it suggests other factors may explain the decrease, including striking port workers in British Columbia, and the resulting negative effect on economic activity. An RBC report mentions how on a per-person GDP basis, there has already been a decline for four straight quarters despite a surge in population growth, and concludes overall predictions for GDP growth do not look promising despite local factors including Canadian wildfires and strikes. They also point to a 0.5 percent increase in the unemployment rate over the past few months, which has historically tended to indicate a looming recession.
21 Dec, 2023
Context The City of Ottawa Mayor, Mark Sutcliff released a statement about a revised plan for the redevelopment of Lansdowne, an urban public park containing historic landmarks and commercial venues. The project includes the demolition of a sports arena complex, stadium stands, and the building of a new event center, residential units, and retail space. Despite suggesting the new plan has addressed the concerns of residents, many issues remain. Analysis The City of Ottawa and the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG) have been in partnership to develop Lansdowne since 2012 and finished an original redevelopment of the park back in 2014. A few years later in 2019, the financial sustainability of the park came to the city council’s attention, and in 2020 the partnership was extended another 10 years with direction to develop a new plan to revitalize Lansdowne. Consultation with community members started in 2020, with the original concept released last year in 2022, and a revised version released this month. Community feedback was acquired through various platforms including public information sessions, an open email for feedback, and public surveys. A summary report of that feedback was published on October 6th, which highlighted the six most common themes of community residents’ concerns. The first concern was related to the size and number of the multiple high-rise apartments which were designed to exceed 30 floors. In the new plan , they have removed one of the three planned buildings, with fewer total units in each, and only one tower with the potential to be built at 40 stories. Residents were also concerned about the loss of greenspace due to the new event center construction. Many people suggested they wanted that greenspace allocated elsewhere, or alternatively, an accessible greenspace roof on the event center. Although in the original plan the city had conceptualized a greenspace rooftop on the event center, this was scrapped in the new plan as it was deemed too expensive to maintain. Respondents wanted a restriction of vehicles to the premises to promote pedestrian safety, a concern that has existed since Lansdowne was first renovated back in 2014. They also wanted more public transportation infrastructure to and from the park, whether that is the local city buses, trains, or cycling infrastructure to reduce congestion on connecting roads. Relatedly, residents also desired more accessible public use space from washrooms to water fountains to usable and free space for people to occupy. The new plan has reduced the number of parking spaces for the residential buildings to meet the Bylaw limit of 0.4 spaces per unit, down from 739 to 336 spaces, while they added 36 new spaces for the event center. In terms of accessible public space, the new plan includes 27,000 square feet of space originally earmarked for the third residential building, now available for an unspecified “public realm.” Residents also wanted more local and less corporate or big-box businesses, to reflect the unique local community better. The new plan does suggest the amount of retail space has been reduced from 108,000 square feet to 49,000 square feet but does not directly address the desire to attract smaller, local businesses. Finally, there was also a concern about financial transparency of how the project is being funded and the resulting impact on the City. The Federation of Citizens Association (FCA) which represents over 70 community groups voted unanimously to oppose the new plan, which comes with a very costly price tag of $419 million, increased from $332 million of the first plan. They cite that the debt comes at a time when the transit system is facing major issues, and the city is struggling with a housing affordability crisis.
20 Dec, 2023
Context Newly elected Premier of Alberta Danielle Smith has defended her cabinet which is coming under fire over conflict-of-interest concerns. Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz’s husband, Cole Schulz , may be lobbying the government in the areas that the Minister works in. Cole Schulz's firm is working on removing the protection of a threatened caribou range to make room for the oil and gas industry – which has raised concerns over who has Minister Schulz’s ear. Analysis The company that Cole Schulz is a partner with, Garrison Strategies, was hired by the Explorers and Producers Association of Canada and is working to influence the government on the issuing of reclamation certificates for oil and gas sites. The lobbyists are working to gain more access to protected caribou habitats to expand the oil and gas industry. They are hoping to “ address the moratorium on tenure in caribou regions ” which would effectively give them better access to land and investments. The Little Smoky and A La Peche herds in northwest Alberta were protected by a moratorium in 2013 which stopped the granting of new energy leases in this area. At the time, 95 percent of the herd’s range was heavily damaged. Phillip Meintzer of the Alberta Wilderness Association found that though records show that Garrison didn’t contact Environment and Protected Areas directly, the firm’s causes are “ too close for comfort ”. Meintzer also notes that as Garrison works on opening the protected caribou land for Alberta Energy, Environment and Protected Areas should be working on a protection plan for the federally and provincially designated threatened animal . Minister Schulz is working closely with the ethics commissioner, however, Danielle Smith confirmed that “ the ethics commissioner has looked at it, given guidance and there’s no violation [of the Conflicts of Interest Act]”. Cole Schulz also indicated that his firm wasn’t aware that Minister Schulz breached the Act at any time. Meintzer suggests that this situation “ calls for a further look ” from a third party. Sources https://globalnews.ca/news/9988998/alberta-premier-danielle-smith-rebecca-schulz/
Share by: