the TGA thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down
the TGA thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down. Making the case below, and I expect to lose some of it in the comments.
Rang three pharmacies for a private price and got three different numbers, all in the same city.
Checked the shortage database myself instead of reading the coverage. Expected resolution date was right there and the panic thread was wrong.
Subsidy criteria and authority requirements are published. For eligibility questions those documents are authoritative and this board is not.
Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The two decisions that this whole board turns on, kept apart.
Registration means a product may lawfully be supplied. Subsidy listing means the public system will fund it, for a defined indication, against published criteria. They are made by different bodies on different timetables, and a product can be registered and unsubsidised for a given use for a long time.
Almost every "why can I not get this" thread here is really a question about the second decision being answered with facts about the first. Say which one you are asking about and the thread resolves in two replies.
On the compounded supply question, which changed and left a trail of superseded threads.
The arrangements that governed compounded supply here have changed materially, and a great deal of what is written on this board describes the previous position. Search results do not carry a date warning, so people arrive at old threads and act on them.
If you are reading anything on this subject here, check when it was posted and check the current official position before relying on it. And if you know the current position well, writing it up plainly with a date on it is probably the single most useful thing anyone can post on this board this year.
[deleted]
do not import US advice into an Australian thread
Australia and New Zealand have different regulators, different funding bodies and different arrangements. An answer for one is not evidence about the other.
The compounded arrangements changed while I was mid-thread and I was arguing from a superseded position.
I would not treat one pharmacy’s quote as the national price. Variation between them is substantial.
Yes — the shortage database is the source. The news coverage of it is downstream and usually a week behind.
What did the pharmacy quote for the private price?
Read the published criteria for my indication rather than asking. Twenty minutes, and it answered everything I had been guessing at.
Country added to the title. Australia and New Zealand answers differ and the thread was unusable without it.
Assumed the New Zealand position applied here. It does not, and someone corrected me politely with the actual source.
Right, and the compounded supply position moved. Threads from two years ago are describing a different situation.
Are you quoting advice from before the compounded arrangements changed?
That is a pharmacy-level stock issue rather than a national supply issue. They feel identical and are not.
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.
Is this about registration or about subsidy?
the TGA shortage database is public and it is the source, not the news
Yes — importing US threads into an Australian question produces confident nonsense every single time.
Compounded supply arrangements have changed materially in recent years. Advice predating that change describes a situation that no longer applies.
private script pricing varies by pharmacy here too
- 1Pharmacy-level availability and national supply are different questions: a…6 comments in this branch · started by u/anecdata_annie