Replies

Good for you in being persistent and sic'ing your senator on them. This type of behavior by is just plain wrong; the contract was sold as regulated by US law. (Although I would prefer that less of my money were confiscated and I had more freedom in how I purchase medical care and medication,)one has to deal with reality and the provider who sold the contract is bound by law.

I helped someone go through something similar; also went through the 'we didn't receive the info from the doctor' routine.(Wound up someone gave me the fax number for the initial request, not the appeal to the denial of the initial request.)

Along I came by information that was 'hidden in plain sight' that would have sped up things had I had it sooner. That is why I posted the link in my prior post # 47.

Here's another link that may help in the future. This regulates decisions by providers of Med D regarding coverage of specific medications, along with allowed time frames. You can browse forward and back as needed.

It amazes me that drug coverage providers are allowed to demand that you try other versions for synthroid which is one of a handful of medications in which generics, (and somethings even other branded versions of a medication) are not bioequivalent.

Again good for you!

It says that the generic is not as good as the brand name under TFL’s own paper work. Our drugest explained it quite well that not only doesn’t the generic form work as well, it doesn’t come in as many strengths either.

We are retired Military and are more or less forced onto TFL and Medicare at age 65. They are both admined out of the same agency. Now you can see why we had such trouble.

It is the only generic I react to so far. I only take 4 RX meds daily, and at my age, with fibromyalgia, peripheral neuropathy (non-diabetic), osteoarthritis in 5 disc, both hands, and osteoporois in my right hand that is not bad.

I HATE getting old! I have to much I want to do.

Thanks for the links, booked marked.