Filing a mild objection to the consensus on Pharmacy supply. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit.
9 likes 15mo
Regional · UK & Ireland · continued
Second pass at: Pharmacy supply in the UK and the questions you will be asked posts 31–54
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Pharmacy supply was covered in the wiki last year and the page has a review date on it, which is a better starting point than my memory of a thread.
20 likes 15mo
d.achebe, post #2: On Pharmacy supply I would separate what is worth knowing from what is worth acting on. The first list is long and the second is short, and conflating them is how threads get heated. Go to post
Post #32 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Occupational health screening: some UK occupations require medical checks. Disclosure of weight-loss medication might be relevant to employment screening; understand your obligations.
Written in the hope of being told what I have missed.
I read post #30 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
What I would check first on Pharmacy supply is whether the thing being measured moved or whether the way of measuring it moved. Those look identical in a graph.
0 likes 15mo
Practical experience of Pharmacy supply, offered as one case with the conditions stated, not as a general finding. Conditions first, because they are what make it interpretable.
5 likes 15mo
formulary_notes, post #29: I had written a reply contradicting post #25 and deleted it. Here is what survived. Adding a small correction to the Pharmacy supply summary above rather than a disagreement with it. The substance holds; one of the figures is out by a factor that matters. Go to post
On post #34 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Supply and shortage resilience: both UK and Ireland sourced primarily from European suppliers until recent disruptions. Domestic availability and pricing changed.
A weak preference rather than a position.
Building on post #36 rather than restating it.
An observation about Pharmacy supply that I cannot explain and am posting anyway, on the principle that unexplained observations are more useful public than private.
19 likes 14mo
Post hidden by community flags
Staff rationale: Hidden by community flags. The claim about a named supplier was not accompanied by a batch, a date, a method or a document, which R6 requires.
Pharmacy supply: I would want to see the raw numbers rather than the summary before agreeing. Summaries lose exactly the information that would settle this.
The corresponding entry is in the public moderation log. Hidden posts are never deleted.
p.novak, post #41: Where I part company with post #39, and it is a narrow parting. Nothing in this subcategory is medical or legal advice, and prescribers reading here consistently say so themselves. Go to post
Pharmacy practice varies between pharmacies and is not deducible from the regulatory position. Two people can honestly report opposite experiences.
Not disagreeing with anyone above, just adding the bit I keep having to look up.
ms_holloway, post #23: Everything in post #21 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have. Supply and shortage resilience: both UK and Ireland sourced primarily from European suppliers until recent disruptions. Domestic availability and pricing changed. Go to post
Practical note on Pharmacy supply: write down what you expect before you look. The number of times I have found what I went looking for is higher than chance would allow.
Confirming post #43 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Shortage positions have moved several times and any statement about supply here should carry a date on the face of it.
0 likes 13mo
Source for the Pharmacy supply figure, since it was asked for. It is in the discussion rather than the abstract, which is why the version circulating is stronger than the paper is.
Reading the surrounding paragraph is worth the two minutes. The authors are more careful than their summarisers.
14 likes 13mo
The most useful contribution is a link to the current official page with the date you accessed it. That survives; a paraphrase does not.
This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again.
5 likes 13mo
s.girard, post #40: Pharmacy supply: I would want to see the raw numbers rather than the summary before agreeing. Summaries lose exactly the information that would settle this. Go to post
Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it.
The question underneath Pharmacy supply is usually "how would I tell?" rather than "what is true?", and that one has a method attached to it.
Write down what you would expect to see under each hypothesis before you collect anything. If they predict the same observation, collecting it will not help.
29 likes 13mo
c.kuusela, post #6: Post #5 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different. I read the earlier replies on Pharmacy supply twice before writing this, because I had assumed the opposite and wanted to be sure I was disagreeing with what was said rather than what I expected. Go to post
Picking up post #50: that is the part I would want checked first.
Members outside these two jurisdictions reading this thread should note that none of it transfers, including the parts that sound general.
KForsberg, post #17: The version of Pharmacy supply 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. Go to post
This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.
Reporting rather than recommending, on Pharmacy supply. What happened is above. Whether it should have is a different question and not one I am qualified to answer.
0 likes 13mo
Availability through a private route and availability through the public system are separate questions and both change independently.
3 likes 12mo
Moved from North America by j.mwangi. Category placement is not obvious from outside and getting it wrong is expected. This topic will get better answers here. The move is recorded in the public log citing R7.
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Private prescribing in the UK: what is actually involved
On the subject in the title: Private prescribing in the UK: what is actually involved Working notes rather than a conclusion. The question about private prescribing that I actually want answered is the second…
|
+66 | 76 | 46k | 14h |
|
UK access routes, dated and sourced — a second dataset
Posting this under the heading it deserves: UK access routes, dated and sourced — a second dataset Everything below is what sits behind that. Regional question, dated January 2026, because everything in this…
|
+76 | 82 | 25k | 14mo |
|
About the UK & Ireland category
MHRA positions, NHS pathways, private prescriptions, and Irish differences. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a…
|
+3 | 7 | 357 | 3mo |
|
Follow-up: UK access routes, dated and sourced
On the subject in the title: UK access routes, dated and sourced Working notes rather than a conclusion. Regional question, dated March 2026, because everything in this category expires. The position differs…
|
+10 | 14 | 27k | 2d |
|
Coming back to: Private prescribing in the UK: what is actually involved
Private prescribing in the UK: what is actually involved Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I would like to know what people here actually do about Private…
|
+62 | 67 | 2.1k | 6mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags personal import, MHRA, NHS
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
EMA product information as a primary source — does this still hold?
The question in the title: EMA product information as a primary source — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Something about EMA product information does…
|
+127 | 150 | 41k | 20mo |
|
MHRA statements, read directly — the long version
On the subject in the title: MHRA statements, read directly — the long version Working notes rather than a conclusion. Asking about MHRA statements directly, because I have read four threads on it and each…
|
2 | 44k | 22mo | |
|
Labelling requirements for research chemicals
Labelling requirements for research chemicals — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. The question about labelling requirements for research chemicals that I actually want…
|
+5 | 9 | 45k | 4mo |
|
About the UK & Ireland category
MHRA positions, NHS pathways, private prescriptions, and Irish differences. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a…
|
+3 | 7 | 357 | 3mo |
|
NHS criteria and how they are applied in practice
NHS criteria and how they are applied in practice — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I was wrong about NHS criteria in a thread last spring and I would like to correct it…
|
+37 | 42 | 31k | 2d |