Generics: Attack of Clones
The same illness may be cured with various pills: cheap or expensive, imported or home-made. However, when it is the time to choose a medication both doctors and patients think that the more expensive is the drug the better are its properties. Still, not many people can explain, what is the real difference between expensive patented medicines and their cheaper analogues, or, as they are called by pharmacists, generics.
What are generics?
They are the so called analogues of the medications having developed and implemented into clinical practice, which patent protection has already run out. Generics have the same properties as original medications, as with its development everything may be copied: either composition, or the name and even the design of the package. In other words, generic is an imitation of the medication of original manufacturer, actually it is a counterfeit but a legal and a good quality one
The most popular generic was, is, and evidently will be aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid). Felix Hoffman, a German chemist, received a patent on it in 1899. Due to the patent Bayer, the company, up to the 1930 was the only manufacturer of aspirin and set prices as they see fit. (The same, by the way, is the case nowadays: when the medication is protected with the patent, its price is very high, and it is prohibited to produce analogues.)
In 1930 the life of the patent lapsed, and the medication became to be manufactured by other laboratories which were selling it on much cheaper price. Either "original" aspirin from Bayer, or many its analogues one may buy just now, more than 100 years after its invention. All those medications contain the same active substance - acetylsalicylic acid, still the Bayer's medicine is more expensive than all others.
Why so cheap?
The process of development of a new medication is a bed of thorns. Not all invented formulas, which cost much money, will reach a consumer – far from being it. Various phases of tests may find out defects of a new medication, for instance, high toxicity or some other serious specific side effect.
But let us imagine that everything is all right, and the newcomer has bright prospects. Then the scheme will be more or less as follows: there is invented a chemical formula (active substance) for which the manufacturer receives a patent.
Then the new medication undergoes preclinical trials (on mice and rats), and then clinical trials on healthy volunteers and patient with the diseases for which treatment this medication is developing.
If phase 2 has been successfully passed, the medication is registered as a medicinal agent and is permitted for use.
However, the manufacturer keeps on the run. Then there are series of clinical investigations: the medication is continued to be studied from various parts, in order to prove its efficiency and safety. Perhaps, these investigations will result in some other indications or medical regimen which will help to soothe the suffering of patients.
If you suppose that the manufacturer will always skim the cream off the earnings from a new medication – you are wrong. There is such a notion as a term of patent protection – it is a period during which the formula belongs to the inventor-firm. Averagely it is 20 years. Thus, a pharmaceutical company has about five years in reserve to pay for multimillion expenses for researches. That is why an innovator medicine costs so much money.
Generic manufacturers do not ever have such expenses. They are just to repeat what was developed before. That is such a pharmaceutical company does not spend money for tests and does not assert the right of existence of an active substance, it is enough to manage to include the agent into a suitable drug product, take care of pureness of the substance and of the good quality of additives. When a generic enters the market a pharmaceutical company does not need to spend money for advertisement and promotion of the brand. That is why the copy costs several times as cheaper as its background.
Is cheap bad?
Regardless its low cost most generics are of a good quality and quite safe, pharmacists think. The thing is that "generic firms" most often produce the versions of popular and efficient medicines, of which production and side effects are known much. They do not take up suspicious drugs.
For instance, a popular antidepressant costs about 20 dollars. But other tablets of several times cheaper price also contain active substance. If these medications are produced by good reputation manufacturers their quality will not be worse of innovator ones.
Pharmacists have reached verdict: well bought are those medications that have approved themselves or are supported by an active advertising. They also think that eventually the number of innovator medications will reduce, whereas the quality of generics and their equivalence to "innovators" will grow.
Who needs generics?
First of all a consumer.
But many medical doctors refilling prescriptions do not take account of the income of a patient. Do you often meet a doctor who asks a patient which medication to prescribe: an expensive one or a cheap one? Unfortunately, not. Pharmacists say that in their pharmacies there often come old-aged pensioners with a refilling prescription for a medication that costs hundreds of dollars. Whereas its analogue, having given a good account, costs two-three times cheaper. Of course, doctors have no time to come down to financial problems of their patients. However it may be the case that the innovator medication is just more known, its manufacture has spent for its advertising more funds…Or, prosily has encouraged the doctor to prefer an innovator medication rather than a cheap generic.
Who will win the future?
Generics were, are and will be – pharmacists are sure. Of course, the purchasing power of people is growing, but it will not soon reach such indications when a price difference of one or two hundred dollars is negligible. That is why "cheap copies" is possibly the best decision for the pharmacy business and the public health in whole.
FEED BACK
What an average customer buys most often? Innovator (brand) medications or generics approved themselves?
George, a manager:
– It is a usual practice, when, for instance, you need an antibiotic. But instead of an excellent medicine of a decent price you will be offered an analogue, but much more expensive. I was caught several times with the same bait, in the same pharmacy. The say "Unfortunately, there is no such medicine now, there is another one, imported, better than the medication you need, but a bit more expensive". You buy….but it is in the best case of no use. Query, why should I pay more? I'd better buy a cheaper analogue.
Mark, a teacher:
– Of course, I do not like the idea to pay for a thing I do not need. The medicine must cure. Whereas prestigious brands are attributes of fashionable clothes and similar goods. So, I, whenever possible prefer a generic from a reliable and tried-and true manufacturer.
Valentina, medical doctor:
– Of course, generics are substantially cheaper than innovator medications, and their effectiveness are not at all less. That is why I most often prescribe tried-and true generics. Their quality suits me and for my patients generics are more accessible.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment