While some brand-name companies will argue that this legislation is necessary to protect patients, what really is at work is an effort to protect their market share from less expensive, but equally effective, generic drugs. We believe that this is significant because the FDA is considered to be extremely cautious in its decision-making. Because of all the activity to erect new barriers to generic pharmaceuticals in various states for the past two years, the FDA sent out a letter in January 1998 to health professionals across the country. I would encourage you, if you have not already, to read our report, David v. Goliath . Once a list is created in which a substitution can only occur if the pharmacist makes the extra effort to contact the physician to let him know the generic drug has been dispensed, the substitution will simply not occur.
Pharmacists are busy they fill hundreds of prescriptions a day.
Doctors are busy they see many patients each day. Whether a pharmacist is required to notify the doctor before or after dispensing the generic, the outcome will be the same. Pharmacists will soon learn it is easier and quicker to dispense the brand-name. Furthermore, this law will send a false message to consumers. It will put an unnecessary doubt in a patient s head that perhaps the generic drug isn t as safe as the brand-name.