Image: 4 panels organized in a rectangle following a sequential order like a comic strip. The first panel is of a man with a very serious face stating, "Hey man, got any diphenhydramine?" The second panel is a grainy picture of the actor Robert Downey Jr. with a slightly inquisitive face and saying, "What's that?" The third panel is an identical copy of the first image and saying, "Benadryl the allergy medicine." The fourth and final panel is a grainy picture of Bobby rolling his eyes and taking a deep breath.
Edit: Tony Start -> Robert Downey Jr. I didn't know that Tony Stark was a character Robert Downey Jr. played ๐คฆโโ๏ธ
I do. I extend it beyond medicines as well. Corporations have spent lots of money for their brands to be household names. They don't control my language.
Specifically to medicine, I will note that the generic name actually carries information that the brand name does nothing for. Lisinopril and enalopril are the same medication class, act similar. Amlodipine, nimodipine, nicardipene are all the same class. Those generic names have important meaning.
Oh, you want facial tissues? Why didn't you ask?
Sure, here's some acetaminophen and ibuprofen.
Don't you mean bleach wipes?
Corporations are terrified of their name becoming genericized, though. At least in the US, a company can lose it's protection of the use of their name if they don't fight it being used for things that are not their product. For example, "Dumpster" used to be a trademarked name for a large outdoor garage bin. It became so popular that every large outdoor garbage bin was called a dumpster, and now everyone making and selling them can call it a dumpster without getting sued
They also didn't adequately defend their brand though. You can prevent genericization if you make it clear that it's a brand, in which case it's only to your benefit that people are confused.
It's why the bandaid advertising jingle actually specifies the word "band-aid brand" because they're a hairs breadth away from becoming generic.