[Meta] the Australia rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining
the Australia rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining. Short post, long comment section, probably.
The compounded arrangements changed while I was mid-thread and I was arguing from a superseded position.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.
Corrections welcome, especially the pedantic ones. Pedantry is how this board earns its reputation.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Flagged as describing the superseded compounded arrangements — left up with a note rather than removed.
Cosigning on asking the pharmacy to check the wholesaler. It converts speculation into a fact in one phone call.
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.
Read the published criteria for my indication rather than asking. Twenty minutes, and it answered everything I had been guessing at.
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.
What did the pharmacy quote for the private price?
Australia and New Zealand have different regulators, different funding bodies and different arrangements. An answer for one is not evidence about the other.
Compounded supply arrangements have changed materially in recent years. Advice predating that change describes a situation that no longer applies.
[deleted]
Careful, personal importation provisions are narrow and specific and the general version circulating here is wrong.
the shortage listing has an expected resolution date on it
Rang three pharmacies for a private price and got three different numbers, all in the same city.
Disagree — that is registration status, and the question was about subsidy. Different decisions, different bodies.
Assumed the New Zealand position applied here. It does not, and someone corrected me politely with the actual source.
the price you pay depends on the listing status of your indication
Push back: the compounded arrangements changed and the advice you are quoting predates the change.
Kept the script and the receipt for a private health claim and both were requested.
That is a pharmacy-level stock issue rather than a national supply issue. They feel identical and are not.
keep the script and the receipt for private health claims
- 1Flagged as describing the superseded compounded arrangements — left up with…7 comments in this branch · started by u/nz_unfunded