unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about New Zealand is guesswork
unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about New Zealand is guesswork, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it.
The compounded arrangements changed while I was mid-thread and I was arguing from a superseded position.
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.
Someone posted US advice in an Australian thread and it took four replies to untangle it. Say your country.
Not medical advice, obviously, and nothing here is approved for human use. One person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The national shortage database is a primary source with expected resolution dates attached. It is public, searchable, and consistently more accurate than reporting about it.
Rang three pharmacies for a private price and got three different numbers, all in the same city.
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.
Is this about registration or about subsidy?
Is this about registration or about subsidy?
renal_outcomes_r is right that the two countries are separate systems and the answers diverge.