the TGA question that gets asked weekly, answered properly
the TGA question that gets asked weekly, answered properly, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it.
Subsidy criteria and authority requirements are published. For eligibility questions those documents are authoritative and this board is not.
Assumed the New Zealand position applied here. It does not, and someone corrected me politely with the actual source.
Rang three pharmacies for a private price and got three different numbers, all in the same city.
Ask me anything specific. Anything general I will probably get wrong.
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.
Someone posted US advice in an Australian thread and it took four replies to untangle it. Say your country.
Correction: that is the registration decision, not the subsidy listing. They are made by different bodies.
Australia and New Zealand have different regulators, different funding bodies and different arrangements. An answer for one is not evidence about the other.
Australia and New Zealand have different regulators, different funding bodies and different arrangements.
Disagreeing with this bit: that advice predates the change in compounded arrangements.
a streamlined authority code is not the same as a general listing
the Medsafe position in New Zealand is its own thing entirely
the TGA shortage database is public and it is the source, not the news
I would not treat one pharmacy’s quote as the national price. Variation between them is substantial.
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.
Cosigning on asking the pharmacy to check the wholesaler. It converts speculation into a fact in one phone call.
private script pricing varies by pharmacy here too
Disagree — that is registration status, and the question was about subsidy. Different decisions, different bodies.
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.
Have you checked the shortage database directly?
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.
[removed by moderator]
Australia and New Zealand are separate systems and get conflated weekly
Australia and New Zealand are separate systems and get conflated weekly
Agreed — the database rather than the coverage, every time.
Small fix — that is the New Zealand arrangement, and the question is about Australia.
the price you pay depends on the listing status of your indication
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.
That is a pharmacy-level stock issue rather than a national supply issue. They feel identical and are not.
Same. Private pricing varies here as much as anywhere and people assume it is fixed.
do not import US advice into an Australian thread
PBS listing and TGA registration are two different questions
Is this about registration or about subsidy?
Pharmacy staff name removed; the pharmacy itself can stay in a pricing post.
Pharmacy staff name removed; the pharmacy itself can stay in a pricing post.
This is the distinction that makes the rest of the board legible.
- 1Disagree — that is registration status, and the question was about subsidy.…10 comments in this branch · started by u/lipid_panel_larry