how much of what we believe about TGA actually comes from New Zealand threads
Question in the title, detail here: how much of what we believe about TGA actually comes from New Zealand threads.
Registration by the therapeutic goods regulator establishes that a product may be supplied. Subsidy listing is a separate decision about public funding, with its own criteria and its own timetable.
Compounded supply arrangements have changed materially in recent years. Advice predating that change describes a situation that no longer applies.
Australia and New Zealand have different regulators, different funding bodies and different arrangements. An answer for one is not evidence about the other.
Ask me anything specific. Anything general I will probably get wrong.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Pharmacy-level availability and national supply are different questions: a pharmacy can be out while the wholesaler is not, and the pharmacist can check in minutes.
Which indication is the script written for?
[deleted]
PBS criteria are published and searchable
Push back: the compounded arrangements changed and the advice you are quoting predates the change.
Same. Private pricing varies here as much as anywhere and people assume it is fixed.
Cosigning on asking the pharmacy to check the wholesaler. It converts speculation into a fact in one phone call.
Personal importation provisions exist, are narrow, and carry conditions. Any summary of them here should be checked against the current official wording rather than a forum post.
Disagree — that is registration status, and the question was about subsidy. Different decisions, different bodies.
Is this about registration or about subsidy?
keep the script and the receipt for private health claims
a streamlined authority code is not the same as a general listing
say which state only if it matters, but always say which country
Pharmacy staff name removed; the pharmacy itself can stay in a pricing post.