Ibuprofen turns 50! Do you buy branded or own-label drugs?

Dan

I agree that companies have to make major investment to research, develop and test new drugs. Many products never reach the pharmacy or supermarket shelves, and some are withdrawn as a result of reported problems, including unforeseen interaction with other commonly used drugs.

However, companies have patent protection, so they can charge what they want until the expiry of the patent, at which time other companies are at liberty to produce the same product at a cheaper price. It is becoming so difficult to produce new antibiotics that there is a good case for extending the duration of a patent, particularly since a large chunk of the duration of a patent can have expired by the time a drug reaches market.

I cannot remember which company developed ibuprofen but I think it has had more than enough opportunity to recover costs for development of this valuable drug and to support research etc. to produce new products.

Nurofen tablets are not on the list of drugs available for NHS prescription (though Brufen is for some reason that I am not sure of). Pharmacists will often provide whatever they can buy cheapest, unless the GP specifies a particular brand name. I once questioned my supermarket pharmacist about why I was being given a couple of drugs produced by the market leader and was told that it has such great buying power that they get a better deal from that company than from the producers of the generic drugs.

I have tried to explain both sides of the argument, and it’s cheap supermarket ibuprofen for me. 🙂

Incidentally, you don’t lose copyright after a year. For example, the Bass name and logo for beer are often regarded as the oldest UK logo, though it’s now owned by a foreign company.

As far as I know, the term of a patent is 20 years in both the UK and US. I have just read that UK pharmaceutical patents can be extended by up to five years.

I never did understand patents, even though my name is on four commercial patents from when I did university research funded by industry. That was nothing to do with the pharmaceutical industry, I hasten to add, and the patents expired years ago.

I think we need some expert input here, Dan. It’s certainly an interesting subject. 🙂

Don’t forget that the big pharmaceutical companies are major players when it comes to developing products to get round the valuable patents of their rivals. The incessant legal action by manufacturers of mobile phones and other electronic devices is the best publicised example, but the same thing goes on in the world of pharmaceuticals.

I very much agree with that. I would trust a well known UK-based consumer organisation to present the opposing views in an authoritative way and explore reasonable solutions. Unfortunately, the outcome of legal cases will dictate the way forward rather than any common sense approach.

I had an interesting discussion with Walter who thought it was disgraceful that I should buy a packet of LIDL chocolate digestive biscuits rather (in similar but distinctively different packaging) than paying three times as much for the market leader’s equivalent. Walter pointed out that copycat products help suppress innovation by the market leader. I must say that I have much more sympathy for the pharmaceutical companies than biscuit makers. Search for ‘copycat’ if you are interested in looking at that Conversation.

It’s not clear who you are addressing or quite which point you are making Anthony. Boots has been a major developer and manufacturer of drugs for generations, not always as ‘own-brand’ products, and ibuprofen was one of those [first marketed as Brufen and available to pharmacies independently of the Boots shops]. Sometimes pharmaceutical companies recoup their research and development investment by licensing other companies both here and abroad to manufacture and market their products well befoe the original patent has expired.

If we take the example of Ibuprofen, this is a pain killer / anti-inflammatory that was first developed in 1961, came to market in 1969 and the patent expired in 1984. I am sure that Boots made their cash back… and then some !!!

remember of course that the research chemists that work on chemical compounds for the pharma industry are often pharmacologists who have either been trained at publicly funded universities, or are grant funded to conduct the research at public universities as part of their studies.

Medicine is a public good and while I understand the profit motive is a good thing I won’t lose a great deal of sleep over a multinational only making $0.05 per pill for something that costs £0.019.

Prehaps if the larger brands were not overcharging PURELY because of their marketing costs, more people would be more supportive of them and buy into the research cost idea more

This comment was removed at the request of the user

Selling the ‘brand’ is another way of recouping investment in drug development. Once the product has established a strong presence in the market, and the volumes and distribution logistics exceed the capacity of the original manufacturer, it can be a good idea to cash-in the value of the brand [without necessarily letting go of the intellectual property rights] and let another company with the required scale and reach develop the market. The proceeds of the brand disposal can then be reinvested in further reearch and development activity.

Without comparing the precise formulations, it is impossible to say to what extent the brands of ibuprofen listed by Rakesh above are identical and have exactly the same properties.

PS – Wyeth now belongs to Pfizer and I am not sure if ‘Motrin’ is still available as a separate product, Pfizer’s ‘Advil’ having become the leading US and worldwide brand.

John – At least with prescription drugs, the amount of drug in generic products is exactly the same in generic brands. Two variations that can occur between different brands of drugs are different choices of filler, the use of enteric coatings and modified release. Fillers are inactive components such as starch or lactose present in tablets and capsules.

A very small proportion of people are affected by certain fillers and if this is the case, a different brand would be a better choice, but for most people the filler makes no difference.

Enteric coating and modified release can result in considerable difference in efficacy of different formulations of a drug, irrespective of whether it is a well known brand or generic product. Enteric coatings are used to protect drugs from stomach acid until they reach the small intestine. Modified release makes the drug available more slowly, in order to help overcome the variation in concentration that would otherwise occur between doses.

Thanks Wavechange – I thought that was the case. The drug formulation has to be consistent but the effects of a drug for different people and, possibly, different situations, are suseceptible to modification as you describe and it is this form of product differentiation that the big brands trade on. They create the fear in users’ minds that the generic or ‘own-label’ version will be less comfortable to take or be more unappetising. Since childhood I have had a minor and occasional cold-sore problem that is averted by ointment. I can buy the brand leader [Zovirax] at something like £6 for a tiny tube or get Tesco’s own label version with a near-identical composition for around £2. So far as I can tell they both work the same but the branded product is more viscous and – if the ointment is applied sparingly – the tube lasts longer; whether that difference equates to the price difference I cannot be bothered to compute!

You are absolutely right John. The big brands do try to persuade the public that their products are better. With non-prescription pharmaceuticals the position is more complicated because different formulations often include multiple active ingredients. For example, Nurofen contains both ibuprofen and codeine. Since the amounts are declared, it is very easy to take both generic ibuprofen and codeine if you want both drugs.

I mentioned earlier that differences in fillers (inactive ingredients) usually affects few people, but your example of cold sore ointment would affect all users. Hopefully other makes of generic ointment do not have the same problem and maybe it would be worth alerting Tesco. Look for products containing 5% aciclovir (the old name is acyclovir) for cheaper alternatives to Zovirax.

I’m very happy with almost all generic brands but their instruction leaflets are often poor compared with the well known brands. A magnifying glass would be useful in some cases.

I am no authority on drugs research but am aware that proprietary pain killers can interact with existing medication. There are slow release pain killers and drugs especially formulated to gradually enter the system according to individual requirements which are normally only obtained on prescription. As we have become a nation of pill poppers it may be wise to check with your GP with any over the counter drugs, branded or unbranded, if you are already taking other prescribed medication, owing to the dangers of contraindication with sometimes dangerous and unpleasant side effects.

Personally I only ever take paracetamol for minor aches and pains and usually buy the capsules as they are much easier to swallow.

Beryl – Slow release painkillers are an example of the modified release drugs I mentioned. Slow release ibuprofen is now sold under various brand names at reasonable prices.

You are absolutely right about the dangers of self-medication and it is important to read the product information and to consult your GP if you have any concerns or need to use any non-prescribed drugs regularly.

Two interesting aspects about cold sores: first, they are highly contagious, and second, once the virus is contracted [usually in childhood] it is with us for life. To address the first point, sufferers must be responsible and limit the risk of infection [there are a number of simple precautions through personal actions that people can take]. However, there is no answer to the second point as no preventative is available. For comfort, and pimarily to limit the risk of contagion, it is advisable to apply an anti-viral cold sore cream at the onset of an outbreak. The manufacturers of these creams are very lucky to have a condition that can only grow in numbers of users; I hope they are ploughing some of their profits into discovering a permanent cure!