![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by tapiocamonk on January 28, 2008, at 5:22:48
I've heard over and over that people were nearly side-effect free on the old version of Nardil, but that the new Pfizer formulation induces a wealth of side effects.
My understanding is that the active ingredient (Phenelzine Sulfate - 15mg) in both formulations would have to be the same, meaning that some of the other junk they put in it is the culprit (alternately, there could have been something added to the original formulation that is missing from the current formulation).
Well, what about using a Compounding Pharmacy to get rid of that other junk. For those who aren't familiar with what compounding pharmacies do, here's a description:
"Compounding has been around since the origin of pharmacy. There are many good reasons why we still practice it today! Some patients, for example, are allergic to certain preservatives and dyes used in many prescribed drugs while others are sensitive to the standard drug strengths. Compounding allows us to eliminate offensive ingredients in the medication and to adjust the strength to meet the specific needs of our patients. All this is done through consultation with the patient and his/her physician."
-->As a side question, does anyone have a package insert from the original Nardil formulation or know how the inactive ingredients differed from the current formulation so that we could figure out what would need to be compounded in or out?
Posted by bleauberry on January 28, 2008, at 5:22:48
In reply to Nardil Side-Effects: Compounding as solution?, posted by tapiocamonk on January 27, 2008, at 10:07:59
I think there was a discussion on Nardil very recently in which one of the posts had a link to a Nardil forum. Somewhere in that discussion, I do not remember where, it was said that others have already tried to compound Nardil without being successful. Not sure why.
I think one of the key ingredients missing in the new nardil is acacia? Not sure what that is, but I thought it had something to do with absorption. There were two other ingredients as well, and I believe those also were involved with intestinal absorption.
Posted by stargazer2 on January 31, 2008, at 0:10:27
In reply to Re: Nardil Side-Effects: Compounding as solution?, posted by bleauberry on January 28, 2008, at 5:22:48
I saw the ingredient list comparing the Old and New Nardil, I'll try and find it...One of the ingredients in New Nardil is Simethecone, which is the main ingredient in GAS-X, so whatever they added or removed to the older version, caused enough of a gas problem to warrant adding this ingredient.
I had heard that no testing was done on the New Nardil because the active ingredients were the same. But there must have been testing if a new ingredient like Simethecone was added.
What if you were allergic to Simethecone and thought the old and new Nardil were the same product?
I'll try and find that list...Stargazer
Posted by stargazer2 on January 31, 2008, at 0:50:47
In reply to Re: Nardil Side-Effects: Compounding as solution?, posted by stargazer2 on January 31, 2008, at 0:10:27
Lots of good information, see the Simethecone added to the new version? Why is gas my biggest side effect now? It can only be from the new additives. There's lots of site for activism on Nardil, I should fill some of the forms which tell Pfizer that the supposedly small changes they made to the original formula are continuing to hurt people in many ways, some more than others. When I took the original formula I can't even tell you how much better I felt with no side effects and I knew it on the second day that it was working, none of this waiting for months or taking massive doses either. I only took 30 mg.
Posted by stargazer2 on January 31, 2008, at 22:59:25
In reply to Nardil Side-Effects: Compounding as solution?, posted by tapiocamonk on January 28, 2008, at 5:22:48
Posted by Phoenix1 on February 1, 2008, at 19:04:42
In reply to Nardil Side-Effects: Compounding as solution?, posted by tapiocamonk on January 28, 2008, at 5:22:48
> I've heard over and over that people were nearly side-effect free on the old version of Nardil, but that the new Pfizer formulation induces a wealth of side effects.
>
> My understanding is that the active ingredient (Phenelzine Sulfate - 15mg) in both formulations would have to be the same, meaning that some of the other junk they put in it is the culprit (alternately, there could have been something added to the original formulation that is missing from the current formulation).
>
> Well, what about using a Compounding Pharmacy to get rid of that other junk. For those who aren't familiar with what compounding pharmacies do, here's a description:
>
> "Compounding has been around since the origin of pharmacy. There are many good reasons why we still practice it today! Some patients, for example, are allergic to certain preservatives and dyes used in many prescribed drugs while others are sensitive to the standard drug strengths. Compounding allows us to eliminate offensive ingredients in the medication and to adjust the strength to meet the specific needs of our patients. All this is done through consultation with the patient and his/her physician."
>
>
>
> -->As a side question, does anyone have a package insert from the original Nardil formulation or know how the inactive ingredients differed from the current formulation so that we could figure out what would need to be compounded in or out?Hi tapicamonk,
Although I was never on the old Nardil, I've never had any bad side effects with the new Nardil and it has been very effective. Unless you have previously been on the old Nardil and have noticed a difference, or are not responding well to the new Nardil, why go to the trouble and expense of going to a compounding pharmacy?
Phoenix
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Neurotransmitters | Extras | FAQ
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.