Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 283363

Shown: posts 43 to 67 of 95. Go back in thread:

 

Just Tell Me the Expients, Please? (nm)

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 8, 2004, at 19:54:24

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 8, 2004, at 19:02:39

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 8, 2004, at 19:58:40

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 8, 2004, at 19:02:39

You know that I am, Ace.

"I am well aware of how buffering agents work"

I once thought you might know what you were talking about, but statements you have made at another board have absolutely convinced me otherwise. If you would like, however, I will drag that post over here so you can re-examine what you said.

"The info I was given which I relayed to you, was assured to me by Mr. John Bacon. I begged to differ with Mr. Bacon,"

Why did you beg to differ if Mr. Bacon was telling you the truth?

"but he assured me he was positive of his facts-
which were gleaned from psychopharmacologists. To me it sounds implausible, but YOU asked what Mr. Bacon said, not for my opinion."

Actually I asked for the name of the expients of Link's Nardil, which you have yet to tell me - not anyone's opinion. I don't care what anyone's opinion is. I want to know the names of the ingredients in Link's Nardil. It's that simple and you either cannot or will not supply them.

Hence, my frustration with you.

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond

Posted by ace on January 8, 2004, at 23:04:02

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by Dave Hammond on January 8, 2004, at 19:58:40


>
> Hence, my frustration with you.

Sorry about your frustration, but I am a busy boy, Dave. I have tried on the phone for the guy every day to no avail. I have a lot of things going on, and I am making time for this when I don't have to.

Most people are grateful for my help, and I am sure I have helped them. But if you are continually frustrated I think you should maybe ask someone else- and you will then have to wait anyway, just like your having to wait with me.

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 9, 2004, at 0:10:32

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 8, 2004, at 23:04:02

"Sorry about your frustration, but I am a busy boy, Dave. I have tried on the phone for the guy every day to no avail."

I can see that it has been to no avail, and I'm sorry that is the case.

"I have a lot of things going on, and I am making time for this when I don't have to."

I know you don't have to. However, if Link is just down the street, what prevents you from making that short walk? You did say that you wanted to help. That was no my imagination, I hope.

"Most people are grateful for my help, and I am sure I have helped them. But if you are continually frustrated I think you should maybe ask someone else- and you will then have to wait anyway, just like your having to wait with me."

Believe it or not, I am grateful to you, Ace. What I cannot understand is why you do not yet know the ingredients of the very drug you take -- the drug that is likely keeping you alive. I am running of time, Ace. Is it asking too much for you to list these?

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond

Posted by ace on January 9, 2004, at 5:36:03

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by Dave Hammond on January 9, 2004, at 0:10:32

Dave, I do know the ingredients of the very drug keeping me alive. Do not come on this website and try and make me look like an uneducated fool please. I love this website and the folk on it. I have spent so much time research Nardil, and I do indeed know its pharmacological properties very well. But I try to explain things real easy, without the big words. Can we leave it at that?

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 9, 2004, at 7:19:52

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 9, 2004, at 5:36:03

Ace, that's good news indeed. Could you be so kind as to list the inactive ingredients of Link's Nardil then?

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond

Posted by ace on January 9, 2004, at 16:53:27

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by Dave Hammond on January 9, 2004, at 7:19:52

> Ace, that's good news indeed. Could you be so kind as to list the inactive ingredients of Link's Nardil then?
>

We have a deal. I ring again first thing Monday. Also, I will give a detailed graphic description of the pill again- please ask further qstns about its appearance as there is only so much i can describe...

Ace
Nardil, 105mg
Zyprexa, 2.5mg

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by shytilwet on January 10, 2004, at 2:52:15

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 9, 2004, at 16:53:27

Dave......Thank-you so much. Your post gave me the courage to ask my pharmacist if Link was now making Nardil. He said that Link is a subsiduary of Parke-Davis and is going to make some phone calls for me to see what the situation is.
I feel that Nardil was a medication that kept me alive. What I'm doing now is not living......just existing in a bleak, grey world......

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 10, 2004, at 9:11:51

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by shytilwet on January 10, 2004, at 2:52:15

Now, that is outstanding news to hear, shytwilet.
Link does manufacture Nardil so have no fears. This drug makes all of the difference in my life too. I suspect that is the case for everyone here. When I cannot take Nardil, my life simply is not worth living, and the world is indeed extremely drab and grey appearing. Yes, I agree with you completely; life becomes mere existence without it.

Would you do me one favor please, shy? It's a very hard one to keep, so do not agree to it at all, unless you are willing to follow through upon your promise -- especially when you start feeling better -- something you might not be able to fully appreciate right now.

You see once people start feeling better, they tend to bail right out of here and begin enjoying there lives again, thus leaving the rest of us in the lurch. It's perfectly understandable, but it then does nobody else, besides yourself, any good.

Would you be so kind as to keep me appraised of your situation? I would very much like to know what Link's Nardil is like. Pfizer Parke Davis in America changed their formula for Nardil completely, and I cannot take it anymore, due to an untoward side-effect that I never encountered when I used their older product. You see I need to know if Link's Nardil would be suitable for me to take. However, because Link cannot import their product into America (very probably due to an FDA restriction here), there is no way for me to know what Link's Nardil is like -- something I really need to know. The only person here who has been kind enough to assist me so far is Ace -- who also lives in Australia and takes Link's Nardil.

Therefore, if you could find out what the properties are of Link's Nardil are -- specifically what the inactive ingredients of it are (Link will tell you this or your pharmacist will)--I would quite literally be in your debt forever! You see it is these inactive ingredients that determine precisely how our bodies metabolize this product. I need to know what those ingredients are in Link's product. Would you please help me find this information out?

I do realize it is a great deal to ask of someone who probably does not yet feel very well right now. But would you now help me?

David

PS

If there is anything you do not understand in what I just wrote above, pleased do not hesitate to ask me either here or in an e-mail at the following address: Twinoppose@hotmail.com

 

Re: please be civil Dave Hammond

Posted by Dr. Bob on January 10, 2004, at 16:55:40

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by Dave Hammond on January 9, 2004, at 7:19:52

> I once thought you might know what you were talking about, but statements you have made at another board have absolutely convinced me otherwise.

I'm sorry if you're frustrated, but please don't post anything that could lead others to feel put down.

> Just Tell Me the Expients, Please?

> I want to know the names of the ingredients in Link's Nardil. It's that simple and you either cannot or will not supply them.

> if Link is just down the street, what prevents you from making that short walk?

> Could you be so kind as to list the inactive ingredients of Link's Nardil then?

Also, please don't pressure others. Thanks,

Bob

PS: Follow-ups regarding posting policies should be redirect to Psycho-Babble Administration; otherwise, they may be deleted.

 

Re: please be civil

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 10, 2004, at 17:10:21

In reply to Re: please be civil Dave Hammond, posted by Dr. Bob on January 10, 2004, at 16:55:40

"I'm sorry if you're frustrated, but please don't post anything that could lead others to feel put down."

Certainly, Dr. Bob. I'm sorry I posted this, since it's a carry over from another board and it's not a polite statement.

"Also, please don't pressure others. Thanks,
Bob"

I will endeavor not to do so in the future.

"PS: Follow-ups regarding posting policies should be redirect to Psycho-Babble Administration; otherwise, they may be deleted."

I'm sorry but I honestly do not understand what you are saying right here:

1. Do you mean that I should re-read the posting policies of your website?

2. Or do you mean I should get in touch with you about this incident?

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by shytilwet on January 11, 2004, at 5:25:44

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by Dave Hammond on January 10, 2004, at 9:11:51

Dave.....your post made me cry, and I'd thought I was incapable of any more tears. Thank-you so much for your good wishes.
I realise that once people start to feel better they might not return to this forum.
I promise you that if I do get some Nardil I will do my best to find out the properties and let you know.
Dave, having been down there......and being still down about as low as a person can get and still be alive........I would consider it an honour to be able to help you in any way I can.
shy

 

Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond

Posted by shytilwet on January 11, 2004, at 5:36:54

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond Dave Hammond, posted by ace on January 9, 2004, at 16:53:27

Dear Ace......I'm so so sorry to bother you but I was wondering which state you live in and how you managed to get Nardil?
Please forgive this intrusion; it's obvious you're a busy man. It's just that I am so so desperate for the only anti-depressant that has ever helped me.
I'm not sure whether I can post my email address here but I will, in case you don't like to say which State you're from in front of everyone, and I hope Dr.Bob will forgive me if I shouldn't have done it.
shytilwet24@aussiewebmail.com

 

Thank You Shy!

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 11, 2004, at 10:32:18

In reply to Re: COMP(L)AINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL » Dave Hammond, posted by shytilwet on January 11, 2004, at 5:25:44

Shy, you stick with this now. Have your Pharmacist find out where Link is and who distributes their product. It should allow you to start living a much better life again, which is exactly what I hope happens for you, because I remember the pain and agony I suffered until I finally found Nardil.

As for me, the story remains problematical. If the ingredients in Link's Nardil are close enough to the original 1959 Lake Pharmaceutical specifications (there should be about 15 of them in it) then I'll fly to Australia to get my prescriptions filled. Perhaps later I could work something else out that is more convenient.

However, if they are closer to the "new" Nardil that Pfizer now makes (9 ingredients only -- only 3 of which are the same as the old formula), then it will not help me for the same reason the "new" Nardil doesn't. My body cannot take have that high a concentration of Phenelzine in my blood stream without it causing me serious trouble.

Now, this might actually be a hybrid of these two,
in which case I'll simply have to try it to see how my body metabolizes it. Yes, I could clobber Pfizer for changing this, but they did and they are not going to change it back.

So, while you have your pharmacist on the telephone, please have him/her find out what the "inactive ingredients" are in Link's Nardil and then we will have some idea of what it really is. Just make sure they do it, because in America everything is becoming so depersonalized, that one can barely get a word out of one's pharmacist these days.

Still, it is the inactive ingredients that finally determine how any drug is metabolized and that is the key.

But believe me, people can and do bail out of these fora the once they start feeling better, because everything is all right for them again. And that is a perfectly natural act to commit -- one I would also do once I figured this out -- if I ever do, that is. However, now that I have been dealt this setback, I am going to start coming back to the two places I frequent, and see how people are doing, so I can help them if that's possible. Because there is nothing worse than not getting any help when one genuinely needs it.

Shy, I cannot adequately express to you how grateful I would be if you would follow up on your promise to assist me. I mean I truly would not know what to say, but I would most assuredly be elated. That much I promise. And if there is anything that I can help you with all you have to do is ask me, and I will do my very best to help you too!

An overly verbose,

Dave

 

Re: posting policies

Posted by Dr. Bob on January 12, 2004, at 22:48:50

In reply to Re: please be civil, posted by Dave Hammond on January 10, 2004, at 17:10:21

> I'm sorry I posted this, since it's a carry over from another board and it's not a polite statement.

Thanks.

> > PS: Follow-ups regarding posting policies should be redirect to Psycho-Babble Administration
>
> I'm sorry but I honestly do not understand what you are saying

Just that if there's any further discussion about civility or related issues, I'd rather it took place at PBA (another board) than here, that's all. Best wishes,

Bob

 

Re: posting policies

Posted by Dave Hammond on January 12, 2004, at 23:21:17

In reply to Re: posting policies, posted by Dr. Bob on January 12, 2004, at 22:48:50

Certainly Dr. Bob. I am sorry I allowed this incident to occur at all.

 

Re: Just Tell Me the Excipients, Please?

Posted by Spotcheck on January 27, 2004, at 17:33:13

In reply to Just Tell Me the Expients, Please? (nm), posted by Dave Hammond on January 8, 2004, at 19:54:24

Excuse me for misspelling this word, Ace. We were both incorrect but this is correct.

 

Re: COMPAINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL

Posted by luther on January 31, 2004, at 6:11:59

In reply to COMPAINTS REGARDING NEW NARDIL, posted by ace on November 24, 2003, at 18:59:51

> PLEASE COMPLAIN TO BOTH THE FDA AND PFIZER...
>
> YOU CAN COMPLAIN ONLINE OR BY PHONE- PHONE IF POSSIBLE.
>
> THE NEW NARDIL IS NOT EFFECTIVE. THE OLD NARDIL IS EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE.
>
> CHECK OUT 'ANXIETY COMMUNITY- NARDIL MEDICATION' IN GOOGLE SEARCH FOR MORE DETAILS.
>
> C'MON GUYS! LETS FIGHT THIS BATTLE AND WIN!
>
> ACE.

I'm behind ya 100% ACE, but what can we do? I did call Pfizer in October and was mad as hell to have my life taken away from me after 12 years of Nardil. They gave me a refund on my prescription, but no explanation on why the new stuff doesn't work other than the Gluten coating being removed. They then contacted my doctor and asked him why he was giving me Nardil when I said to Pfizer it doesn't work, do believe that BS!! I had to explain to my doctor what really transpired and showed him my refund as well. He actually agreed with me that they are up to something! We know the pharmaceutical companies, it must have something to do with money, I just haven't figured it out yet. I'm sorry to say they will never change it back, only possibly discontinue it if we complain. Somehow I feel this is really their objective. They are afraid of lawsuits because of all the side-effects that are way overrated! Remember they just took over Park Davis and some idiot bean counter that knows nothing about psychology probably looked at the side effects and figured they had better do something. I'm just out guessing because I really can't figure out why they would make something ineffective and loose money on a product when patients will stop purchasing it. I would really would like to hear any comments anyone has, because I would like to do something about it as well, maybe a jail break for the unibomber, lol, just kidding for the Homeland Security folks out there monitoring this stuff. My e-mail is:luthermeeks@peoplepc.com and I would really like to hear any ideas, if I get some good one's we will follow through on them!!
Sincerely,
Luther

 

Re: Thank You Shy! Dave Hammond

Posted by luther on January 31, 2004, at 7:20:03

In reply to Thank You Shy!, posted by Dave Hammond on January 11, 2004, at 10:32:18

> Shy, you stick with this now. Have your Pharmacist find out where Link is and who distributes their product. It should allow you to start living a much better life again, which is exactly what I hope happens for you, because I remember the pain and agony I suffered until I finally found Nardil.
>
> As for me, the story remains problematical. If the ingredients in Link's Nardil are close enough to the original 1959 Lake Pharmaceutical specifications (there should be about 15 of them in it) then I'll fly to Australia to get my prescriptions filled. Perhaps later I could work something else out that is more convenient.
>
> However, if they are closer to the "new" Nardil that Pfizer now makes (9 ingredients only -- only 3 of which are the same as the old formula), then it will not help me for the same reason the "new" Nardil doesn't. My body cannot take have that high a concentration of Phenelzine in my blood stream without it causing me serious trouble.
>
> Now, this might actually be a hybrid of these two,
> in which case I'll simply have to try it to see how my body metabolizes it. Yes, I could clobber Pfizer for changing this, but they did and they are not going to change it back.
>
> So, while you have your pharmacist on the telephone, please have him/her find out what the "inactive ingredients" are in Link's Nardil and then we will have some idea of what it really is. Just make sure they do it, because in America everything is becoming so depersonalized, that one can barely get a word out of one's pharmacist these days.
>
> Still, it is the inactive ingredients that finally determine how any drug is metabolized and that is the key.
>
> But believe me, people can and do bail out of these fora the once they start feeling better, because everything is all right for them again. And that is a perfectly natural act to commit -- one I would also do once I figured this out -- if I ever do, that is. However, now that I have been dealt this setback, I am going to start coming back to the two places I frequent, and see how people are doing, so I can help them if that's possible. Because there is nothing worse than not getting any help when one genuinely needs it.
>
> Shy, I cannot adequately express to you how grateful I would be if you would follow up on your promise to assist me. I mean I truly would not know what to say, but I would most assuredly be elated. That much I promise. And if there is anything that I can help you with all you have to do is ask me, and I will do my very best to help you too!
>
> An overly verbose,
>
> Dave

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? This is a very low dose and I remember you said you were taking something along with it, possibly a Tricyclic? Nardil comes in 15 mg. tablets, how do you take 37 & 1/2 mg? Did you get it mixed up with your other med? What have you been diagnosed with, I'm not saying I know more than all the doctors, just most of them. I did graduate from Ball State University and had to diagnose myself as my doctor was incapable of doing so. Then after I found the medications that would work for my Atypical Depression, Social Anxiety Disorder and Generalized Anxiety Disorder she was reluctant to write the prescriptions. Only after I threatened to see someone else did she give in, $$$. Now I have nothing that works, 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 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. The only people above the law is Budweiser Bush Skywalker and all his Texas friends and Enron-WorldCom buddies. Did you know Tipper Gore has been treated for depression most of her life? Guess what med? Nardil, you got it. Is Martha Stewart as bad as the Enron guys that stold all the employee's savings, hell no? She did contribute a large amount of money to the Gore campaign though. Enough about all that, a few different votes in Florida and we wouldn't even be dealing with this, I promise. We can't change the past though, so we must work like hell on the future and make Pfizer pay. I'm just not so sure what they have done is by accident. They are greedy and want to make more money, but if something doesn't work how can they do that? Something is in the wind, I just can't put the pieces together, like the JFK assination, which I consider myself to be an expert. Take Care! Hope I can be of some help.
Sincerely,
Luther

 

Hey there Luther........ luther

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.

 

Re: Hey there Luther........ (nm) Spotcheck

Posted by luther on February 1, 2004, at 0:44:12

In reply to Hey there Luther........ luther, posted by Spotcheck on January 31, 2004, at 11:51:09

 

Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version.

Posted by SuzyQ1 on April 9, 2004, at 18:34:46

In reply to Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version., posted by luther on December 15, 2003, at 12:08:49

I've been on Nardil since 1979, which would make it 25 years this July 2004. It literally saved my life. For the past few months, I've been on the new formula, and it seems that little by little, it's losing its effectiveness. I thought it was in my mind, til I read all these posts. I've been under some extra stress lately, so I'm not sure if it's psychological, or actually that the drug is not working as well as the earlier version. I take 30 mg. daily (2 pills), and have been fine on that dose for half of the time I've been on Nardil. For the first 12 years or so, I was on 60 mg. daily. I was able to slowly reduce the dose to 30mg. I'm not sure what's going on, but I sure hope that it's not the new formula, and is just a phase I'm going through. But I'm seriously considering increasing my dose to 45 mg. for the first time in a long time, as I'm feeling very anxious as well as shaky, even when I try to talk. I wonder if anyone else has had these symptoms? If anyone can get proof that the formula has indeed been changed to make it less effective (even if it's something in the inactive ingredients), then I think that we should file a class action suit against Pfizer. My life could literally depend on it. Also, has anyone heard of the new Selegiline Patch called EMSAM, By Somerset Pharmaceuticals, which is supposed to be approved by the FDA sometime this year? It's supposed to work similarly to Nardil, as it increases the levels of serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine in the brain, the same as Nardil, but with no food or drug interaction, since it bypasses the stomach.

 

Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version.

Posted by King Vultan on April 9, 2004, at 19:55:14

In reply to Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version., posted by SuzyQ1 on April 9, 2004, at 18:34:46

Well, the formula has definitely been changed, and the changes are all in the so-called inactive ingredients. The drug itself, phenelzine sulfate, is still the same. However, the inactive ingredients can have an effect on the absorption rate, which is apparently why some people are having difficulties.

From what my doctor said, it sounds like there were similar problems back when Tofranil (imipramine) went generic years and years ago. People would all of a sudden start having problems and complaining of reduced effectiveness. He would ask if the pill was the same, and they would reply no, it was different. With imipramine, it was a simple matter to run a blood plasma level and determine that the level of the drug in the blood had dropped. The reason was that the contents of the pill were passing through the system in a different manner, resulting in less ultimately getting absorbed into the blood.

From what you're saying about your experience since the new formulation came out, yes, it does sound like it would probably be a good thing to try going up by one pill, but I'm always in favor of including your doctor in this decision. I'm a newcomer to this drug and have only been on it for a month and half, so I do not know how the old formulation compared. I will say that for me, 45 mg/day had no effect at all, 60 mg/day started producing adverse effects (insomnia), as well as some slight therapeutic effects, and 75 mg/day is producing enough improvement in my mood that I want to hold it here for a while and see what the ultimate effect of the dosage will be. There is a school of thought that an effective Nardil dosage is related to one's weight, with a person needing to take at least 1 mg/kg/day, at least at the beginning of treatment (I am about 65 kg); however, this number is based on the old formulation. I have read that, yes, lowered maintenance dosages for Nardil are sometimes used.

As for Pfizer's responsibility in all this, I don't know what the root cause of their changing the formulation was. I've heard stuff about increasing shelf life, but you have to wonder why this would be necessary when the drug appears to have been working fine for decades. I tend to be cynical about what large companies say, but as someone who also works in the formulation industry, I can tell you that there are often legitimate reasons for changing a formulation. In any case, if a person happens to be one of the individuals who is sensitive to the formulation change but can restore the original effects just by taking an extra pill or two, that doesn't sound that horrible. Considering the fairly miniscule number of people taking Nardil, I think it's fortunate that it's still being produced.

Todd

 

Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version.

Posted by Spotcheck on April 9, 2004, at 22:49:56

In reply to Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version., posted by SuzyQ1 on April 9, 2004, at 18:34:46

We've been on Nardil for almost exactly the same number of years since I first found it for my Psychiatrist in 1978. He was raw one might say. I had to break him in some. It was rough on both of us, but worth it of course.

"For the past few months, I've been on the new formula, and it seems that little by little, it's losing its effectiveness. I thought it was in my mind, til I read all these posts. I've been under some extra stress lately, so I'm not sure if it's psychological, or actually that the drug is not working as well as the earlier version. I take 30 mg. daily (2 pills), and have been fine on that dose for half of the time I've been on Nardil."

That's a low dosage relatively speaking. I now take 45 mg of the new, whereas I only had to take 37.5 mg of the old. I had to kick it up a bit because it's not as effective, which did not please me, although I had no choice.

"For the first 12 years or so, I was on 60 mg. daily. I was able to slowly reduce the dose to 30mg. I'm not sure what's going on, but I sure hope that it's not the new formula, and is just a phase I'm going through. But I'm seriously considering increasing my dose to 45 mg."

If you have to, go ahead and increase the dosage.
There will be an increase in side-effects, but if this is the only medication you take that should no problem at all.

"for the first time in a long time, as I'm feeling very anxious as well as shaky, even when I try to talk. I wonder if anyone else has had these symptoms?"

Yes, allot of people have, Sue, but so far not me, thank God although it took me two or three trials to get the dosage right, because I take another antidepressant as well. Some people do not respond to it at all, and you well know, that is personally disastrous to them! I've seen careers wrecked over this change in Nardil and people's lives dramatically altered one might say.

"If anyone can get proof that the formula has indeed been changed to make it less effective (even if it's something in the inactive ingredients), then I think that we should file a class action suit against Pfizer. My life could
literally depend on it."

I know your life depends upon this medication. Here's the story: of the 15 original excipients in the good "old" Nardil, only 3 remain unchanged and the number of excipients has been reduced to 9 in the "new" Nardil. What Pfizer did is to use the FDA to legally turn Nardil into a generic drug. There is no more "old" Nardil being made in the world to the best of my knowledge, and only Link UK makes another generic version. Link Australia, which will cannot important their Nardil into America uses Link UK's formula, but then actually go to the effort and expense, I might say of adding the old sucrose M and M orange sucrose coating to their Nardil for some reason.

"Also, has anyone heard of the new Selegiline Patch called EMSAM, By Somerset Pharmaceuticals, which is supposed to be approved by the FDA sometime this year?"

I have heard a patch was coming out, but I never knew the manufacturer before. Thank you. That might prove useful indeed.

"It's supposed to work similarly to Nardil, as it increases the levels of serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine in the brain, the same as Nardil, but with no food or drug interaction, since it bypasses the stomach."

Yes, but it also increase the concentration of Gamma Amino Butyric Acid (GABA) as Phenelzine Sulfate does? Because if it does not, then I do not see how it can possibly be as effective in treating anxiety disorders as Phenelzine Sulfate is with the proper excipients.. Thank you for this information though, Sue.

 

Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version.

Posted by gardenergirl on April 10, 2004, at 11:12:41

In reply to Re: Nardil from Australia = 1950's version., posted by King Vultan on April 9, 2004, at 19:55:14

>Considering the fairly miniscule number of people taking Nardil, I think it's fortunate that it's still being produced.

Bite your tongue! :) Acutally I have had the same thought, but I hate to voice it. It would be devastating to lose Nardil.

gg


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.