Thyroid UK
82,929 members97,972 posts

Armour by Actavis

I am sorry if this has already been discussed (which is probably the case) but, the STTM has criticised Armour ever since the unappreciated late 2008/early 2009 reformulation. Now, however, the STTM seems to think that Armour is not what it used to be since Actavis bought it from Forest, about six months ago...

I like the STTM; over the years, I have found great information there; however, now, I no longer follow its logic: the STTM has been critical of Armour ever since it was reformulated about six years ago, but now seems even more critical of it since Actavis took over production...I am no longer sure what to believe. Has anyone tried Armour by Actavis...? If so, is there a considerable difference (=is it even worse)?

4 Replies

Anna69, look at thecat346 posts as she has questioned this. Last time I Googled I couldn't find anything to suggest that Armour has been reformulated since Actavis bought it from Forrest in 2014.


Thanks, Clutter.-) It sounded strange that Actavis would reformulate Armour again (unless they wanted to go back to original Armour, with less cellulose and more dextrose), so what you say actually makes a lot of sense. Thanks,



It doesn't matter how far back you go - to my knowledge you can go at least 15 years. One of the staple subjects of thyroid forums has always been to question Armour:

Has it changed? (Again? Back to what it was?)

Are there supply issues?

Is the FDA going to ban it?

Are high-dosage pills different to low-dosage pills?

Does it contain lactose?

So long as there is Armour, so too will there be trail of questions.

On a technical/financial point, I don't think that Actavis bought Armour from Forest, they bought Forest.

1 like

It's true, it seems Armour was reformulated for the first time in 1996; mineral oil was removed, and cellulose was added for the first time; although, apparently, not enough to cause problems...then came the unappreciated 2009 reformulation:-( Such a shame, when it used to be such a good product. There were a lot of rumours back then that the FDA forced Forest to reformulate Armour but, according to the STTM, the FDA would not interfere with fillers and binders (inactive ingredients)...kind of makes sense to me.


You may also like...