Asklemmy

43975 readers

635 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

353

What are some items that really aren't worth paying the expensive version for? (lemmy.zip)

submitted 10 months ago by kzhe@lemmy.zip to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

378 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I saw this post and wanted to ask the opposite. What are some items that really aren't worth paying the expensive version for? Preferably more extreme or unexpected examples.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Shadow@lemmy.ca 68 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

But real Advil has the candy coating on the outside, and I haven't found a generic that does =(

Otherwise 100% identical yes.

[–] Raptor_007@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (2 children)

A few years ago, I wondered why that was and googled it. I came to an Advil site with an expandable FAQ, and one of the questions was “why does Advil taste sweet?”

So I expanded it out to reveal this shocking answer (or something similar): “Advil tastes sweet because it is lightly coated in sugar.”

Thanks, I guess. I just closed the tab in mild irritation and moved on with my day.

[–] jws_shadotak@sh.itjust.works 43 points 10 months ago

[–] psud@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

That sucks for those of us trying to avoid sugar.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

Yep

There may be a difference in things like pill shape, texture, release mechanism / time to absorb (if it's not very important for how the medication works)

So it's ok to have a preference for one brand over the other when one of those points is relevant to your situation. I know some people also prefer the generic brand version over the regular (even if prices were the same)

[–] Johandea@feddit.nu 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wait, what? I have no idea what advil is, but sugar coating any drug is a recipe for disaster.

[–] chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Sugarcoating pills is fairly common, especially for pills which are frequently ingested or target older demographics. It's because sugar coatings are much gentler on the esophagus (i.e.: less likely to cause esophagitis, "pill burn"). Advil (i.e.: ibuprofen) is a cheap, well tolerated, and non habit-forming pain reliever -- it's about as safe as such a thing could possibly be, so hopefully that helps to explain why a sugar coating might be warranted given the aforementioned upsides (for the love of all that is holy; always read the directions on the label, it's still quite possible that Advil is not safe for you specifically). FWIW: the bottles also have childproofing mechanisms built into the caps (... at least in U.S. markets. Not sure about elsewhere?)

[–] anothermember@beehaw.org 4 points 10 months ago

I've never heard of sugarcoating pills, is it a US thing maybe?