Posted by djmmm on February 3, 2005, at 10:29:41
In reply to Re: Nardil maintenance dose not effective IMO » Maxime, posted by Maxime on February 2, 2005, at 12:01:27
> See I can't even submit a post properly. My question is how is the chemical make up different
> with new Nardil compared to the old?
>
> Anyone?????
>
>
> Maxime
>The only difference is in the excipients (the fillers, binders, etc) which for some, seems to have an impact on either rate and or amount of absorbtion. The "new" Nardil still contains the exact same amount of the active ingredient Phenelzine.
These changes should not have a significant effect on the drugs efficacy, yet for some, it is "ineffective" Sadly, in forums like this and others, we only really hear about the negative experiences. Most people who have positive experiences don't need a community forum to discuss the positive way the "new" nardil has effected their lives.
My opinion, the difference in excipients can alter the the efficacy of the medication, but not in a statistically significant amount. It doesn't make sense for a drug company to "remake" and effective drug into an "ineffective" drug, especially a MAOI (which, unlike SSRIs, is consistantly superior to placebo).
poster:djmmm
thread:450404
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050202/msgs/452404.html