A generic drug is exactly the same dosage, safety, strength and quality as a brand named drug. Generic drugs also do not take longer to work in the body, again, its the same ingredients as the name you are more familiar.

The reason generic drugs are cheaper is because the makers of these drugs don't have the costs of the original developer of the drug. When the patent on the developer expires, 20 years, other manufactures can introduce competitive generic versions to the FDA for approval. This also creates greater competition in the industry once generic drugs are approved and keeps costs lower.

A great place to go is here for more information on your generic drugs.

As complied by Forbe's HealthDay, half of the top ten health news of 2006 feature issues of interest to cancer patients and the cancer community in regard to cancer research, treatment and prevention. The top health story involves the concern over cost of medical care among those with health insurance and the continually growing numbers of uninsured. A recent study shows that one in six, or 50 million people, are struggling to afford medical treatment as they now spend more than ten percent of their income on medical expenses.

After much controversy regarding ethics and morality, this year saw the approval of the first cervical cancer vaccine. The federal government recommends that girls as young as nine-years-old be given the vaccine. The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) re-approved the use of silicone breast implants. Although banned in 1992 because of concerns that silicone leakage might be linked to cancer, silicone implants were still offered to women undergoing breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery. Supposedly the implants are now safe for all women. Some consumer advocacy groups still strongly disapprove of the FDA decision.

Another controversial issue being debated based on ethics and morality is stem cell research. According to Forbes, the majority of Americans are in favor of stem cell research and the promise it holds in the cure of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's disease, and many other diseases.

Lastly, scandals swept throught the research community as fake research and researchers were exposed, as was conflict of interest over questionable financial ties in the research community.

Other health news stories that made Forbe's HealthDay top ten list included: Tainted-Food Scares Rattle Public; Drug-Eluting Stents May Stay; 'Morning-After' Pill Goes OTC; Antidepressants' Link to Suicide Debated; and More Progress Against Alzheimer's Disease. You can read the Forbe's top ten list in its entirety here.

Is it a sign of the times? A harbinger of things to come? A chilling move to bar patients from receiving medical care who fall into categories that make them less than ideal patients?

According to UK's Daily Mail reporting, last year it was obese patients in east Suffolk who were refused medical care involving surgery. Now, if you are a patient treated through the Norfolk Primary Care Trust or Newcastle-Under-Lyme PCT in north Staffordshire, in need of life-changing surgery and smoke, you will be denied care unless you quit smoking.

It appears to be a matter of saving money. Public health trusts are stating that smokers suffer more complications after surgery and require more care which translates into higher health care treatment costs in financial dollars.

It would be a good idea for people who are overweight to maintain a healthy weight. Being overweight can lead to a diminished physical quality of life and disease. It would be a good idea for a smoker to quit smoking. Smoking is bad for your health, no doubt. Each of us should feel a sense of personal responsibility to live as healthy as possible to avoid disease, and to a certain extent be held accountable for the choices we make. But to be denied medical care? Today it is hip and knee replacements. Tomorrow?

This new health care policy seems a slippery slope. It makes me feel uneasy -- not reflecting our most humane and compassionate nature. It raises more than a few questions. One day, will there be additional lifestyle choices added to the criteria of who is denied care? Cancer treatments are very expensive. Could we see a day, in order to keep costs down, that some cancer patients would be denied care based on lifestyle choices? More than one expert has suggested a significant percentage of cancer development is based on lifestyles. I am just wondering where this type of policy might eventually lead.

How does the policy in cutting health care costs based on a patient's weight or lifestyle habits make you feel? Would you be in agreement to deny care to someone who practices a lifestyle habit deemed unhealthy?

The breast cancer chemotherapy drug Adriamycin is often called The Red Devil. It's red in color and devilish in it's attack on both cancer cells and healthy cells. After her own personal attack by this drug, Katherine Russell Rich wrote a book, and she called it The Red Devil: To Hell with Cancer -- and Back. It's her account of how she got sick at the age of 32 with a relentless form of breast cancer. Although she was given just a short period of time to survive, Rich conquered cancer. And years later, she is alive and well. And she has discovered -- by mere coincidence -- that her book years ago inspired a group of women in Baltimore who are helping breast cancer patients through kind deeds. They foot the bill for transportation costs, housecleaning, and massage. They pick up and deliver medications. They gather and hug and eat. They take strolls. They call themselves The Red Devils.

Rich only found out about The Red Devils support group when a friend noticed a mention of the group in a newspaper. She informed Rich who visited the group's website. What she found took her breath away.

It seems a woman named Lark Schulze had at one time been desperate to learn about young women with stage IV breast cancer -- the same stage her 30-year-old daughter faced -- and she could not find any helpful resources. Until she came across Rich's book and poured herself into one woman's story. Moved by Rich's words, she tried to locate her, with no luck. So she took what she gathered from the book and after losing her daughter 19 months after diagnosis, became a founding member of a powerful support group -- The Red Devils -- in late 2002.

Despite failed attempts at finding Rich, Schulze says Rich changed her life. And now that the women have connected, Rich says Schulze has changed her life. At first Rich was afraid to be drawn into Schulze's world. But with a hunger to understand breast cancer from a mother's perspective, Rich took the plunge. She talked to Schulze, visited her, strolled with her, and soon the hard lump she'd carried in her stomach for so long began to soften as she connected in a deep and bizarre way with a woman she had inspired -- a woman she had never before known.

Teenager Abraham Cherrix made national headlines recently with a legal battle that earned him the right to fight cancer on his own terms. Cherrix, 16, who chose to treat his disease with alternative treatments after traditional therapy failed to cure him of Hodgkin's disease, was told by the courts that his choice was not acceptable -- that he must undergo higher doses of chemotherapy in combination with radiation and followed by stem cell transplant. Cherrix ended up a winner in court and is currently receiving the therapy of his choice. But despite the legal win, Cherrix and his family are losing financially.

The Cherrix family owns a kayak company in Virginia, and spring and summer are peak seasons. Since the family had to close shop on many occasions due to court appearances, profits suffered. So on Sunday afternoon, local musicians headlined a fundraising concert -- billed as Voices for Choices -- to help with medical and court costs. Cherrix could not attend -- he's in the midst of treatment in Mississippi -- but the show went on. And while the money raised is not enough to cover all outstanding bills, it is enough to remind the family of all the caring people in the world.

Reports from family indicate Cherrix is doing well with treatment and that his tumor is shrinking. If he continues to make progress, he may be able to return home soon -- so he can thank those whose support is so much more than money can buy.

We received an alert from friends of Lynne Smith about important news regarding the cost of a colonoscopy. While it does not make much sense that the same diagnostic procedure could differ in cost by thousands of dollars, depending on the insurance company and institution, that appears to be the case.

Having a colonoscopy is without a doubt one of the best strategies a person can choose to take in cancer prevention or early detection of cancer -- but unless you are aware ahead of time of having a colonoscopy scheduled how the billing system works, you might find yourself needlessly owing thousands of dollars.

This is what happened to two of Lynne Smith's siblings. One owed nothing -- the other owed $2,600 dollars. At the Lynne Smith Fund blog, you will find valuable tips on how to keep the costs at a minimum.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) colorectal cancer is the second leading cancer killer in the U.S. For men, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer after prostate cancer and lung cancer. For women, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer after breast cancer and lung cancer. The CDC has published Basic Facts on Screening available as a PDF document that includes a chart explaining the different screening procedures and estimated cost for each.

But first, visit the Lynne Smith Fund for advice on becoming an informed patient.

Just before my treatment for breast cancer began and during a consultation about what chemotherapy drugs I was about to receive, my oncologist stepped away from my exam room to check on something. When she returned to the room, she told me that she was determining whether or not I qualified for a clinical trial. I had no idea what this meant at the time. All I knew was what she told me -- that my prognosis was too good at that moment to qualify for anything currently under study. I did not fit a profile for anything. I was not a candidate for a clinical trial.

I now know that clinical trials are a critical component of research -- they validate a drug's success or weakness and they provide hope for many who may be at the end of their treatment rope and need something new to consider. A clinical trial is a comparison of standard treatments to newer treatments in an effort to discover better methods for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. Doctors, scientists, and other health professionals conduct these tests according to strict guidelines set by the Food and Drug Administration -- which establishes mandatory guidelines to ensure the maximum safety of the patient.

Clinical trials rely on volunteers -- and sadly, there is a current shortage of patients willing to participate in trials. Experts say that, for the past few decades, just five to 10 percent of all cancer patients in the United States have joined a clinical trial. There is an urgent need -- because the demand for willing, eligible participants far exceeds the supply. Some experts are even recommending that the small pool of candidates that does exist be rationed to only the most important cancer studies -- leaving other studies with no hope for completion. There is no good solution in sight. But the reasons for the shortage are becoming apparent. It's not that patients are unwilling to join. It's that they are unaware, uninformed, not even sure this opportunity is possible -- because doctors are not suggesting trials to their patients. Treatment on a protocol is more demanding for doctors than routine medical care. And it costs doctors to submit to a trial. And trials burden doctors with regulations and paperwork. And some doctors worry about litigation if something experimental goes wrong. So they often don't approach the topic -- and the result is that a wonder drug may sit in a dark freezer because there are not enough people to test it. This potential wonder drug may never show promise, may never save a life, may never see the light of day.

So I guess my oncologist was ahead of the game in this matter -- she compared my diagnosis and prognosis with the needs of all available clinical trials and found that there was not match. Had she not done this, I would have never thought to ask about the possibility -- which is exactly what patients should do instead of waiting for a doctor to make the suggestion. Because it may never happen.

For more information on clinical trials, please visit the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups.

Few would disagree that the health care system in this country is breaking down. If you are one of the 45 million without health insurance you already know how difficult it is to get health care, and if you have medical insurance you continue to watch as your insurance premiums and deductibles go up year after year. Medicine has become more about money and less about patient care. We are told we spend more because we have the best health care system in the world.

But as Maggie Mahar points out in her new book, Money-Driven Medicine: The Real Reason Health Care Costs So Much, "We spend twice as much as Japan on health care -- yet few would argue that our health care system is twice as good." Mahar, a seasoned financial journalist, takes an in depth look at what she calls America's complicated and increasingly dysfunctional health care system, and what she finds is disturbing. Frankly, from a patient's perspective, it's reprehensible.

Doctors aren't allowed to function as doctors in putting a patient's needs first -- no -- medicine is business and corporations decide on a patient's treatment. To put it bluntly, medicine is a market-driven $2 trillion industry rife with competition. To cite just one example of what is taking place, and to illustrate how medicine truly sees itself  -- Milwaukee hospitals spent more in one year on advertising than fast food business did. Reviewers are calling Mahar's book a thoroughly researched and carefully reasoned study. I call it gutsy because she takes no prisoners and she isn't keeping any secrets. Until the day comes when doctors are allowed to practice medicine once again, with the priority on the patient and not corporate profit, the wheels on this buggy are going to keep falling off one by one until the axle completely splits in two. A must read for anyone who wants to understand how the system works and what motivates the players. The patients aren't even in the game. And that is what is truly appalling.