Tracking a shortage from primary sources rather than rumour posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.
The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.
Communication from suppliers: a supplier having supply problems usually communicates them. If a supplier goes silent, that is itself information.
Coming back to post #32, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Supply interruptions: official shortage notices are published by regulatory agencies. That is the correct primary source rather than pharmacy rumors or forum discussion.
post #34 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.
Worth separating two things that post #32 runs together.
Dose hold versus tapering: if a temporary shortage forces a gap, holding your dose and resuming when supply returns is different from gradually tapering. The two are different decisions.
Compounding during shortages: some jurisdictions allow pharmacy compounding when a marketed product is in shortage. That permission is jurisdiction-specific and time-limited (usually for the duration of the shortage).
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Managing an unplanned gap: if a shortage causes a gap in treatment, the questions are how long the gap will be and how that affects your condition. Discussing with your clinician is prudent if the gap is weeks or longer.
Compounding during shortages: some jurisdictions allow pharmacy compounding when a marketed product is in shortage. That permission is jurisdiction-specific and time-limited (usually for the duration of the shortage).
On post #36 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Allocation and rationing: during severe shortages, suppliers might ration allocation to prescribers. Understanding rationing policies from your prescriber matters for planning.
Shortage predictions: regulators and suppliers issue shortage alerts before they become acute. Checking the regulatory website for shortages gives you advance notice.
Coming back to post #41, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Dose hold versus tapering: if a temporary shortage forces a gap, holding your dose and resuming when supply returns is different from gradually tapering. The two are different decisions.
Picking up post #41: that is the part I would want checked first.
Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.
Managing an unplanned gap: if a shortage causes a gap in treatment, the questions are how long the gap will be and how that affects your condition. Discussing with your clinician is prudent if the gap is weeks or longer.
Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.
The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.
This follows post #45 rather than contradicting it.
Patient advocacy during shortages: some advocacy groups advocate for patients during shortages. Knowing who they are and following their communication is useful.
Communication from suppliers: a supplier having supply problems usually communicates them. If a supplier goes silent, that is itself information.
post #49 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.
Supply interruptions: official shortage notices are published by regulatory agencies. That is the correct primary source rather than pharmacy rumors or forum discussion.
Communication from suppliers: a supplier having supply problems usually communicates them. If a supplier goes silent, that is itself information.
On post #50 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.
The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.
Dose hold versus tapering: if a temporary shortage forces a gap, holding your dose and resuming when supply returns is different from gradually tapering. The two are different decisions.
post #56 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Resuming after a gap: after a gap of days or a few weeks, most people resume at the dose they were on when they stopped. Gaps of months might require retitration discussion with a clinician.
Picking up post #56: that is the part I would want checked first.
For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.
Supply interruptions: official shortage notices are published by regulatory agencies. That is the correct primary source rather than pharmacy rumors or forum discussion.