[Discussion] the MHRA advice in here is 3 years out of date
the MHRA advice in here is 3 years out of date. Not a hot take, just something I have not seen said plainly here.
Hard numbers: 3 years. Anything softer than that is flagged as an impression.
Why the monthly pricing tracker works, and the rule that makes it work.
Members post the pharmacy, the product, the month and the price they actually paid — not an advertised offer, not a first-month discount. No links of any kind are permitted, which removes the entire incentive to post anything other than what happened.
The result is that the spread between pharmacies in a given month is visible, and it is consistently larger than people expect. That single table has saved members here more money than every other thread on the board combined, and it survives only because the no-links rule is enforced without exception.
Discharge at goal, which nobody warns people about.
Specialist services in England are commissioned to deliver a defined intervention. Reaching goal is a successful outcome and it typically ends with discharge back to primary care. Whether prescribing continues after that is a local decision that varies, and plenty of members here have discovered it at the point of discharge rather than at the start.
The useful thing to do is ask early: what happens when I finish, and does prescribing continue in primary care in this area. Ask it in writing, keep the answer, and you will at least know which conversation you are heading for.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use and nothing here should be read as a recommendation to use it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Discharge from a specialist service at goal is a normal end point of that pathway. Whether prescribing continues in primary care afterwards is a local decision and is worth asking about at the start rather than at the end.
Which pharmacy, and what did they quote for the month rather than the first month?
GP said no in the spring, specialist said yes eighteen months later. Same person, same numbers.
Agreed. The ICB variation is the thing that makes national advice useless here.
Referral link removed and the post left up. No links of any kind here, and that rule is not negotiable.
The online consultation asked me three questions, none of them about my history. I did not go ahead.
That is the first-month offer price, not the ongoing monthly cost. The tracker records the second one.
Disagree. That is the pathway in one ICB and it does not generalise even to the next one over.
Disagree.
This is why national advice does not work here. It is commissioned locally and it varies.
tier 3 waiting lists are measured in years, not months
That is Scotland’s arrangement and the post is asking about England.
the price difference between pharmacies this month is genuinely large
Two years and four months on a tier 3 list. Referral date and every letter kept, which turned out to matter when the service reorganised.
Small fix — that is the Scottish pathway. The post is asking about England and the answer is different.
the ICB decides the threshold and they are not the same across England