This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Answering the question post #29 raises rather than the one it answers.
Customs practice varies between entry points within the same country, which is why two people in the same jurisdiction report different experiences honestly.
I came in to disagree and I am leaving without a disagreement.
What I would tell a new member reading about availability for the first time: the confident posts are not the reliable ones, and the reliable ones are longer.
Everything in post #33 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
Summaries lag badly in this area. Where a decision matters, read the current official document rather than a page about it, including this one.
That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct.
Narrowing post #33, because the general version has more than one answer.
Regional stock in your own country removes the border question entirely, which is the reason it changes the calculation rather than just the timing.
This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.
Post #40 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
Import rules for personal use: what you can import for personal use depends on your country's rules, not on where it is sold. Checking your country's rules before ordering is prudent.
The claim about availability upthread is stronger than its source supports. I have read the source. The source says "associated with" and the post says "causes".
My understanding of availability is a few years old and may have been superseded. If it has been, I would genuinely like to know rather than keep repeating it.
Picking up post #42: that is the part I would want checked first.
Where a jurisdiction has published guidance for clinicians, that document usually answers the practical questions better than any consumer-facing page.
Insurance and coverage: coverage decisions are national. A compound approved in one country might not be covered by insurance in another. Checking both approval and coverage is necessary.
It cost nothing to check and would have cost something not to.
Practical experience of availability, offered as one case with the conditions stated, not as a general finding. Conditions first, because they are what make it interpretable.
I would be cautious about generalising from the availability example above. It is a good example. It is one example.
Worth separating two things that post #47 runs together.
Regional practice around what a pharmacy will and will not do varies enormously and is not deducible from the regulatory position.
This follows post #51 rather than contradicting it.
Adding a reference point for availability. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.
Genuine question rather than a rhetorical one: has anyone here actually observed availability, as opposed to read about it? The thread is long and I cannot tell.
Customs practice varies between entry points within the same country, which is why two people in the same jurisdiction report different experiences honestly.
One of those cases where knowing the mechanism does not help the decision.
Quietly grateful for the plain phrasing. Not every thread gets that.
Taking post #54 at face value and following it one step further.
Regional stock in your own country removes the border question entirely, which is the reason it changes the calculation rather than just the timing.
Availability is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.
Where a compound is approved under a different trade name in another market, searching the local name finds documents the English name does not.
Not a strong opinion, just a consistent one.
Counterpoint on availability, offered without confidence: the same observation is consistent with a much duller explanation, and nobody has ruled the dull one out.