Posted by Spotcheck on January 31, 2004, at 11:51:09
In reply to Re: Thank You Shy! Dave Hammond, posted by luther on January 31, 2004, at 7:20:03
Hello Brian. I changed my online name for this forum, so this one you will not recognize, but we did e-mail each other a couple of times, about one month ago - I would estimate -- so we are familiar with each other cases more or less:
"Hello Dave,I'm sorry you are still suffering like the rest of us, it really sucks to put it mildly. I replied to you once before and didn't you say you were taking 37 & 1/2 mg. of Nardil?
Yes, I certainly did.
"This is a very low dose and I remember you said you were taking something along with it, possibly
Tricyclic?"100 mg of Amitriptyline along with it -- my primary antidepressant anti-anxiety medication.
"Nardil comes in 15 mg. tablets, how do you take 37 & 1/2 mg? Did you get it mixed up with your other med?"
No, and all you have to do is take 2, 15 mg tablets and cut another 15 mg in half. It's not hard to do at all.
"What have you been diagnosed with......"
Atypical depression, Brian, remember?
"Now I have nothing that works,"
I know it, and I have been worried about you as well as myself and several other people ever since we first talked, Brian.
"Nardil was changed by Pfizer for the worst, read my new posting. We need to take some of the old and some of the new to an independent lab and have the stuff analyzed. If it really it different"
Brian the Phenelzine Sulfate in the "new" Nardil is identical to the same active ingredient in the "old" Nardil -- Phenelzine sulfate. It is the inactive ingredients known also as the excipients that have radically altered so that a less expensive and more stable medication could be made. It is these excipients that actually determine how any drug is metabolized - not the Phenelzine per se. Does that make sense to you at all yet, because I am throwing allot at you?
"we need to all get together and file a Class Action Law Suit! It doesn't matter if the FDA approved it or not, they are not above the law
either."But Pfizer broke no laws, Brian. She, and other drug companies, are free to change any drug they manufacture any time they want to. So you will get nowhere attempting to sue Pfizer. You will not even be able to find a lawyer who will take the case. All Pfizer has to do is produce something that is "in vitro" not "in vivo" bio-equivalent to the "old" Nardil. Well, guess what? The "new" Nardil really is in vitro bio-equivalent to the "old." It's simply metabolized differently because of the radical chance in excipients now being used. That is why we are in such trouble, and that is also why Pfizer is not.
"Enough about all that, a few different votes in Florida and we wouldn't even be dealing with this, I promise."
This is quite simply incorrect, Brian, even though I agree your assessment of the last election. Pfizer broke no laws. She changed her drug because MAO Inhibitors are no longer being prescribed as much as they used to be, and so they just sit around and go flat. Well, guess what happens when some pharmacist sells "flat" Nardil to customers? The people who take it relapse, and then Pfizer and that pharmacist and perhaps even the chain they are working for are in trouble, which is real the reason why Pfizer changed this medication in the first place.
"I'm just not so sure what they have done is by accident."
Of course it wasn't. Pfizer found out she could be hurt by selling Phenelzine in the older formulation. She had to change it and when she did, she made something that is metabolized differently -- which would have to be the case. Still, it was not done out of malice, Brain, even though I once though this myself.
"They are greedy and want to make more money, but if something doesn't work how can they do that?"
It does work in most people, Brian, and that is precisely the problem. And they have to take a bit higher dosage -- which is my real problem, because my therapeutic window is smaller that most other people who only have to take Nardil.
Pfizer will continue to make money and, in fact, she is doing exactly that."Something is in the wind, I just can't put the pieces together,"
Re-read everything I said above, and if you still have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask them, all right?
Brain, I still believe that one of us or all of us are going to have to make our own "old" Nardil ourselves. The problem with this idea is twofold, but here they are:
1. We must gain access to the manufacturing specifications of the "old" Nardil, which might only exist inside Parke-Davis - a division of Pfizer. I am not certain of that. They might also exist elsewhere, but so far I have not been able to find them and I have been looking a bit, but not enough.
2. We will probably have to spend quite a bit of money to do this.
Still, it's very probably your only chance of saving yourself. So why don't we figure this together and do it?
You see Pfizer is NEVER going to make the "old" Nardil again. I urge you to get cracking in this direction, if you can, that is.
poster:Spotcheck
thread:283363
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20040131/msgs/307698.html