If you can confirm or contradict a position for your own region, please date the answer. An undated regional claim is the least useful thing in this category.
29 likes 13mo
Topic summary
Research-use-only labelling: what it means and what it does not
This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 111, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
Everything in post #9 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
The version of research-use-only labelling that circulates here is a simplification of a simplification. It is not wrong, but it has lost the conditions under which it holds, and those conditions are where the interesting cases live.
29 likes 12mo
Post #26 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
Where a claim about legality is made here, the useful follow-up is which instrument it rests on. Most such claims turn out to rest on a forum post.
I would rather be precise about what I do not know than vague about what I do.
27 likes 11mo
ambient_draft, post #28: Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it. Go to post
Post #39 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use anywhere. That is a statement about the material's regulatory category rather than about its quality.
Worth checking against a second source before it gets quoted onward.
Coming back to post #46, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
What I can speak to on research-use-only labelling is narrow, so I will keep it narrow rather than generalising from it. Beyond that boundary I do not know.
30 likes 9mo
l.wikstrom, post #33: Research-use-only material is not approved for human use anywhere. That is a statement about the material's regulatory category rather than about its quality. Go to post
Research-use-only labelling sits at the boundary between what this community can usefully discuss and what it cannot, and I think it falls on the discussable side, narrowly.
Nothing in this subcategory is legal advice, and the members who work in regulated environments are the most careful to say so.
It is the sort of thing that seems obvious in retrospect and was not at the time.
28 likes 8mo
o.nyberg, post #69: This follows post #66 rather than contradicting it. An update on my earlier research-use-only labelling post: the pattern held for another six weeks and then stopped, which I did not predict and cannot explain. Go to post
Worth separating two things that post #68 runs together.
Research-use-only status is a legal classification, not a safety classification. It means the compound is sold for laboratory use and not for human consumption. The label does not establish whether the molecule is safe, efficacious, or toxic.
A label change is a regulatory event with a date and a document. Citing the document is what makes a claim about labelling checkable.
The disagreement above is smaller than it looks once the terms are fixed.
29 likes 6mo
Read the full topic (111 posts)
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Pharmaceutical compounding rules, summarised from primary sources
Pharmaceutical compounding rules, summarised from primary sources — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking what a regulator's document actually says, since the summaries of…
|
+135 | 163 | 46k | 17mo |
|
Prescription requirements and telehealth models — a second dataset
On the subject in the title: Prescription requirements and telehealth models — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting a small dataset on Prescription requirements and telehealth…
|
+87 | 94 | 1.1k | 21d |
|
Enforcement priorities versus written rules — does this still hold?
Enforcement priorities versus written rules — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Asking what a regulator's document actually says,…
|
+36 | 40 | 37k | 11mo |
|
Reading a regulatory notice rather than an article about it
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Reading a regulatory notice rather than an article about it Everything below is what sits behind that. Posting a small dataset on reading a regulatory notice. It is…
|
2 | 2.9k | 5mo | |
|
Revisiting: Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess
On the subject in the title: Revisiting: Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess Working notes rather than a conclusion. I would like to know what people here actually do…
|
+76 | 82 | 52k | 11mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags compounding, research use only, EMA
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Second pass at: Manufacturer assistance programmes and their eligibility rules
Second pass at: Manufacturer assistance programmes and their eligibility rules — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on…
|
+13 | 17 | 1.8k | 16mo |
|
Coming back to: Cost per delivered dose, which is the number that matters
On the subject in the title: Cost per delivered dose, which is the number that matters Working notes rather than a conclusion. Documenting an access outcome, dated, because everything in this category…
|
+6 | 10 | 2.5k | 19mo |
|
Second pass at: Why chargeback is not the safety net people assume
Second pass at: Why chargeback is not the safety net people assume Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Asking about the record rather than the transfer. Every…
|
2 | 25k | 3mo | |
|
Official shortage notices and what they authorise
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Official shortage notices and what they authorise Everything below is what sits behind that. Trying to work out what would count as evidence on official shortage…
|
+106 | 119 | 18k | 1mo |
|
US compounding rules and how they changed
US compounding rules and how they changed — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Reporting a regional experience with the date and the jurisdiction attached, because an undated…
|
+62 | 68 | 1.4k | 20mo |