the stuff in here about 'minor differences in coating could make a difference but shouldn't' is surprisingly badly researched

both teva + shire manufacture a branded and a generic -- just ask them what the difference is between the two, right? and if they hang up you can write, 'both teva and shire refused to say if their generic works'

I'm fairly sure this is Shire's original patent for XR beads https://patents.google.com/patent/US6322819B1/

they have a subsequent patent for a more continuous delivery system https://patents.google.com/patent/US6913768B2/

(from plasma concentration, the double-pulsed one looks as smooth as continuous delivery, but I'm guessing the brain + blood half lives are different)

but the bead material is probably FDA scrutinized, and any chemical difference between the branded + generic version is in theory public knowledge; shocking nyt didn't like, call a chem lab or something before hitting send on this one

the author speculating that someone is complaining about switching from an immediate release to an XR also feels bogus -- presumably I would say in my tiktok that it's a capsule instead of a tablet?