NHacker Next
login
▲Threat in Your Medicine Cabinet: The FDA's Gamble on America's Drugspropublica.org
78 points by lentoutcry 7 hours ago | 51 comments
Loading comments...
idopmstuff 3 hours ago [-]
For more on this, I highly recommend Bottle of Lies by Katherine Eban. Fantastically written book that goes deep on this topic and will absolutely horrify you about everything related to the manufacture of generic drugs.
ls612 3 hours ago [-]
My mom was a hospital pharmacist when she was still working and was beating the drum on this all my life as far as I can remember. All it accomplished was getting her called racist and xenophobic and losing friends :(
32 minutes ago [-]
soangry 5 hours ago [-]
I'm so angry right now. I did a deep dive into this at one point after being prescribed some generic Vyvanse through Sun via Dillons/Kroger. The pills smell like fish and seem like they didn't work at all. I checked some records from the FDA and Sun wasn't listed. I brought it up to my doctor and they just brushed it off.

I really hope another class action lawsuit is brought against Sun.

timr 5 hours ago [-]
The "fishy odor" is a classic hallmark of amine-containing compounds [1], of which Vyvanse has three [2], including a terminal amine, which is so infamous (at least in the di-amine form) for being smelly that they have delightful names like "Cadaverine" [3].

I don't know if the completely purified drug officially has an odor, but usually you get some free amines that come along for the ride. More likely, some got outside of the gelatin capsule during shipping.

[1] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/amines-and-landsca...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisdexamfetamine#/media/File:L...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaverine

eightys3v3n 42 minutes ago [-]
I pursonally took Vyvance brand name for over 1.5 years by opening the capsule and mixing it in a bottle of water. Never did it have a smell or taste. Even if Vyvance is manufactured with compounds that often have a smell or taste associated with them, the fact that this generic smelled almost certainly speaks to lower quality controls than the brand name based on my experience. At the very least it would speak to them choosing a component that smells over one that does not.
jnsie 5 hours ago [-]
I have nothing but respect for physicians but my experience is that each acts as a more narrow filter than the last and, beyond their direct expertise they have very little expertise in billing, pharmacy or anything outside of their direct domain, nor do they have the bandwidth for it. Add to that the advertising phenomenon of 'ask your doctor about X' and I suspect that anything beyond the immediate care you're receiving has very little chance of receiving thought/cogent answers.
xpe 4 hours ago [-]
I respect doctors (and people in general), but I don’t give the medical profession a passing grade. To speak in generalities (there are exceptions), their training is somewhat insane: long hours, sleep deprivation, knowledge cramming, and more. Their daily practice leaves little time or incentive for keeping up with studies. Most were not adequately taught statistics in the first place. To vent a bit more, I don’t think it is unfair to say the system is crap. If we could redesign it from scratch, understanding human nature, how people learn, and the need for ongoing learning, and evidence-based medicine, it would not be this. None of this is meant to assign blame to individuals.
thfuran 4 hours ago [-]
>Their daily practice leaves little time or incentive for keeping up with studies.

Their certification requires it, at least to some extent.

xpe 4 hours ago [-]
Two responses. First, CME is criticized as being largely influenced by industry rather than primarily intended to advance medical learning. [1]

Second, assuming medical continuing education is something like 20 to 40 hours depending on the region [2], this feels meager and insufficient. In contrast, think of how much learning a software developer does during a year -- perhaps close to 5+ hours per week on average! [3] Very different contexts, very different incentives.

[1]: https://www.chronicle.com/article/lessons-from-a-professors-...

[2]: Based on very quick research: could be off -- corrections are welcome

[3]: There are many differences, of course. Just to pick one example: to what degree does a software developer's continuing exploration into an area (such as a specific business process that their application needs to understand) help their craft? Does it improve their skill level? Does it result in transferable skills? Does it improve the quality of their work?

thfuran 4 hours ago [-]
A software developer is not required to do any continuing education at all.
potato3732842 3 hours ago [-]
Software developer doesn't hold a certification from a trade group that has a government violence backed monopoly on deciding who can make a buck performing said craft.
thfuran 3 hours ago [-]
Yes, they're missing a pretty strong incentive.
xpe 3 hours ago [-]
Ok, but you are moving the goalposts relative to my original quote: “Their daily practice leaves little time or incentive for keeping up with studies.” My first point is that software developers (generally, more often than not) have the time and incentive to learn on an ongoing basis.

Second point: if continuing education has to be mandated, it is likely a symptom of a system that lacks proper incentives.

On the positive side, as more patients educate themselves and press doctors for statistical understanding and synthesis across studies, “Dr. Expert’s” stale knowledge will no longer fly.

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago [-]
> if continuing education has to be mandated, it is likely a symptom of a system that lacks proper incentives

I’m a pilot and work in finance. They both have continuing-education requirements. The ones in the former are practical and helpful. The ones in the latter are mostly performative. (In some cases, arguably counterproductive.) The existence of continuing-education mandates per se tells you almost nothing about the system as a whole.

xpe 2 hours ago [-]
Point taken. Interesting example. Do you have some theories about why continuing education requirements are so different in aviation compared with finance? Some factors might include: individual skin in the game, observability, feasibility, and the temporal and causal distance from action to consequences.
thfuran 3 hours ago [-]
Mandated continuing education isn't a sign of missing incentives, it is the incentive. Being required to do something to keep working in the field seems like a pretty strong incentive to me.

But I certainly won't dispute that doctors in most systems in the US are overworked starting at least in residency.

xpe 2 hours ago [-]
We both know there is a difference between intrinsic and extrinsic incentives. This difference underlies so many things, including: (i) justification for regulatory frameworks; (ii) individual motivation; and (iii) likelihood of follow-up / compliance.
derbOac 3 hours ago [-]
I have plenty of criticisms for the physicians lobby in the US, but kind of agree this is one area where I'm not sure the problems lie in physicians (outside of some very general sense that they tend to be in key positions of influence in healthcare systems in government and elsewhere).

I do think it's a good example of why pharmacists should maybe have more power in the drug prescription process, and also wonder why insurance companies or pharmacies don't ban drugs from certain places and/or sue them themselves more often.

VeninVidiaVicii 3 hours ago [-]
I had the same exact issues on generic Vyvanse, which also causes me intense palpitations compared to the brand-name, I legit thought I was going to have a heart attack several times a day. So much so, that I quit it altogether—I couldn’t stand the side effects or the constant unavailability of the brand-name.
5 hours ago [-]
LoganDark 5 hours ago [-]
Oh boy. I've had quite the experience with my own ADHD medication (dextroamphetamine in my case, which is essentially the stuff Vyvanse metabolizes into), and when they substituted for a different brand, that brand was completely different and so totally not compatible with this body. So now I have a Brand Medically Necessary because when they tried to switch it on me I went into hypertensive crisis :)
pyuser583 4 hours ago [-]
The drug you mentioned had a reputation for these sorts of problems.
leereeves 5 hours ago [-]
How did you find out what factory the Vyvanse was made at?
sct202 5 hours ago [-]
You can figure out the generic manufacturer by matching the active ingredient with the pill shape, color, and imprints on a pill identification website. Finding the exact factory of that manufacturer is much harder though.
wl 3 hours ago [-]
If you're going to a pill identification website to find out the manufacturer of a prescription drug, you're working too hard. The manufacturer printed is on the prescription label.
actionfromafar 5 hours ago [-]
Isn't the new direction of capitalism in America Freedom from Regulation?
derbOac 3 hours ago [-]
The US is long past the point where we need to stop talking about medical regulation generically. Some regulation and enforcement needs to be increased, and others need to be decreased or eliminated, at least in my opinion.

To me this sort of thing is fraud, and I feel like the FDA needs more resources and oversight to fight it. But with other things I think the FDA needs to back off completely, where it's overstepped its useful mission. I personally would like to see the FDA stop telling people what they can purchase or receive from whom, but spend more time guaranteeing that whatever is on the label is what it says it is and nothing else.

mindslight 1 hours ago [-]
To continue making a follow on point, also needing nuance - pharmaceutical manufacturing is exactly the type of industry that can and should be brought back to the US. First, through outright subsidies [0] to get the plants built. And then when domestic supply is high enough, through regulations prohibiting healthcare management plans from buying imported drugs.

[0] spending some of the surplus from having a reserve currency on deliberate policies rather than it being blindly given to asset holders

billylb42 4 hours ago [-]
How did you arrive at that conclusion? All of the evidence provided in the article is prior to the “freedom of regulation” as you call it.

To me, it’s indicative of a rotting regulatory institution that lost its way. FDA is about safety, not low cost drugs. I don’t know how that mandate became mission critical for them but it happened before the current administration.

cogman10 3 hours ago [-]
Almost certainly happened because of Clinton and the FDAMA. It's a law that "cut red tape" IE removed safety protocols and standards.

These agencies are rotting primarily because they've been reworked to be business friendly over the last 40 years

cogman10 5 hours ago [-]
Yes. This is a clear example of why that's bad and why these agencies need funding and competent staffing.
throwawaymaths 4 hours ago [-]
these agencies had funding and competent staffing. they correctly identified that the factories were producing dangerous products.
cogman10 3 hours ago [-]
The funding comes in because they didn't have the funds to test the drugs. That's something I'd hope was happening with all drugs.

The competence comes in because they put availability above safety. That's an incompetent trade-off.

kgujdtjof 4 hours ago [-]
Manufacturing drugs in India is like manufacturing them in Haiti. Why would anyone think that would be a good idea?
barbazoo 3 hours ago [-]
Care to explain?
quickthrowman 30 minutes ago [-]
150 million people still shit in the open in India. Is that a sufficient explanation?

It’s substantially better than it used to be. FWIW I believe the people of India deserve to have proper sanitation.

Arkhadia 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
3 hours ago [-]
cowpig 4 hours ago [-]
I have a pet theory about the medical industry in the USA.

The US is the most pure-capitalist nation on the planet, and medical services are as bad a fit as it gets for a market economy:

* interactions with the market are ideally as few as possible

* there is massive information asymmetry

* people can't "shop around" during medical emergencies

* the externalities are orders of magnitude more potent than the forces directly acting on a transaction

* most importantly, individuals in many cases *literally cannot exit the marketplace* (unless you consider death a viable consumer choice).

That second property creates a market incentive to squeeze every consumer dry. What can they do about it, really?

But it's insanely unethical, and extremely against the common good (externalities abound).

Those forces push the middlemen, the insurance providers, to do horrible shit. And since they are the middlemen with all of the power, and interact with literally every market actor, the culture of pure evil seeps into everything. Clinicians either becomes numb to the fact that insurance companies will literally just not pay things they agreed to pay, or live a life of endless frustration.

This is just "how it is", and so everyone, including regulators, shift their overton window to be able to function in a decrepit, toxic system.

tacitusarc 3 hours ago [-]
I completely agree with your points about medical services, but I think it’s important to point out the US does not have, and never really has had, a meaningful market economy when it comes to healthcare.
dantheman 3 hours ago [-]
The majority of medical care and expenses are not emergency.
fn-mote 4 hours ago [-]
The report is horrifying, but in the current US political climate it is very hard to see how a government agency could undergo any positive cultural change.

A quick search finds recent firings [1] and [2]... who would lead a change?

[1]: https://floridianpress.com/2025/06/rep-wasserman-schultz-sla... [2]: https://fortune.com/2025/02/16/trump-cuts-fda-layoffs-food-s...

soangry 4 hours ago [-]
The issue I described existed before the administration change.

Neither's parties people wants to be poisoned.

wat10000 3 hours ago [-]
I’m pretty sure one party’s people does want to be poisoned, given the consistent advocacy for reduced pollution controls and such.
komali2 3 hours ago [-]
> Neither's parties people wants to be poisoned.

Voters for one party keep taking horse medicine and we can't seem to stop them when they experience negative side effects, and we couldn't get them to get vaccines even as their friends and loved ones were dying begging for it at the last minute. There's definitely a party divide here.

derbOac 3 hours ago [-]
I share your skepticism about false equivalence in general, but have to admit this particular issue to me gets at the heart of serious problems in US healthcare, and I don't see either party really addressing it. The way in which these problems get ignored by each party, and the rationale for doing so, is very different but so far I see both parties as either turning a blind eye to these problems, or lacking vision.
tacitusarc 3 hours ago [-]
It feels like there’s a house on fire and one party is like, “It’s fine, I don’t see the problem and neither do you” and the other party is like “OMG the house is on fire, quick pour gasoline on it.”

I’ve sort of accepted it’s going to burn down. The problem is that it doesn’t seem there’s anyone capable of rebuilding it.

hnuser123456 3 hours ago [-]
On the other hand, my liberal parent gave me stimulants for 8 years that made me anxious when I previously wasn't, and killed my appetite so hard I couldn't take more than 1-2 bites of anything at dinner, and now I'm 32 looking like a 16 year old but with the fatigue of a 64 year old.
Loughla 3 hours ago [-]
I have no opinion on ivermectin. I don't think it's a miracle cure, but I also have no idea about the actual research in that space.

But.

My assistant at my last job was all in on it during COVID. It cures everything, according to her. The moment when her cognitive dissonance hit its peak was when she gave her husband ivermectin for a cold, and was absolutely astounded that he ended up in the emergency room with diarrhea and dehydration. She was convinced it was "vaccine injury" and that he did a sneaky and got the COVID shot without her knowing. Spoiler; he did not get vaccinated.

It really was pretty funny at the time, but also sad. She was sort of my bellwether for nuts behaviors. When she started spitting Q-anon talking points, as a middle aged woman completely disconnected from anywhere that should exist, I knew we had problems.

atmavatar 1 hours ago [-]
Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic. Since having parasites on top of another condition is generally worse than just having the condition, it's not uncommon to see a positive impact when taking ivermectin for a variety of conditions in places where parasitic infections are common, if only because the body no longer has to fight the parasites in addition to the condition.

Since anti-vaxxers during COVID were looking for anything to take the place of a vaccine, ivermectin was an easy thing to latch onto.

3 hours ago [-]
Arkhadia 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
aaron695 5 hours ago [-]
[dead]
jmyeet 4 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
3 hours ago [-]
dantheman 3 hours ago [-]
Medicine is one of the most regulated and least capitalist markets.
3 hours ago [-]
jmyeet 3 hours ago [-]
Capitalism cannot exist without regulation. There is no such thing as a "free market". Capitalism relies upon regulation to enforce the enclosures it builds. Regulations are a direct product to protect profits.

For example, Medicare is prohibited from negotiating prices with drug companies for most medications. A few exceptions were carved out with the IRA passed under Biden. The VA can it pays a lot less. Why is Medicare forbidden from negotiating? Because the pharma industry lobbied for it.

Also, cheaper generics are banned from being imported even though you can buy the exact same thing for a 95%+ discount in Canada.

To see this regulation in action, you can pretty accurately predict what courts and the government will do by simply asking "what do the capital owners want?".

Just this weekend, we had an actual domestic terrorist in Minnesota kill a state lawmaker (and her husband) and attempt to kill at least one other. So far he's been charged with second-degree murder and some federal charges [1].

Now compare this to Luigi, the alleged shooter of UHC CEO Brian Thompson where the AG and US attorney immediately came out calling for the death penalty and laying first-degree murder and terrorism charges on him.

Now maybe the federal or state charges will be upgraded to first-degree but there's none of the same rhetoric about an actual terrorist. Ask yourself why.

[1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/vance-boelter-fbi-det...

vanillax 3 hours ago [-]
"Capitalism cannot exist without regulation. There is no such thing as a "free market". Capitalism relies upon regulation to enforce the enclosures it builds. Regulations are a direct product to protect profits." - Source?
jmyeet 3 hours ago [-]
This is self-evident.

Imagine a society with no laws, no regulations and no courts. How would you enforce a contract? How would you resolve a dispute other than "might is right"?

Even beyond this, we have a thriving commercial aviation industry. How would that work without safety standards? How would consumers have confidence in the planes? What about pilot qualification? Managing airspace? Having confidence in the parts you need, the people you need to maintain the planes and things like the fuel that goes into the plane without regulation?

Occasionally anarchists or libertarians and argue you can Yelp review your way to a functioning market. "Pilot could not fly plane but was nice to us. 2 stars"

The idea of "deregulation" is fundamentally silly and entirely devised to increase profits by getting rid of pesky safety regulation while maintaining regulations that protect profits and restrict competition. Imagine what deregulation would do to Vertizon or AT&T. Do you really think deregulation will remove restrictions on municipal broadband? Or instead just remove requirements to build out their networks to less profitable areas?

Libertarianism and deregulation are just fundamentally ridiculous ideas. Ergo, you need regulation for a market to function.

mschoch 2 hours ago [-]
[dead]