Availability by country, dated, with primary sources — one year on

Availability by country, dated, with primary sources — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.

Documenting an access outcome, dated, because everything in this category expires.

As of January 2026, in my region, the position is as described below. I have linked the primary source rather than a summary of it, because the summaries are consistently a year behind.

If anyone can confirm or contradict this for their own region, please date your answer. An undated claim in this category is worse than no claim.

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.

That matches what I have seen, for whatever a single anecdote is worth.

Regional stock in your own country removes the border question entirely, which is the reason it changes the calculation rather than just the timing.

Speaking for myself and not for anyone else who has posted here.

Summaries lag badly in this area. Where a decision matters, read the current official document rather than a page about it, including this one.

Not the whole picture, but the part of it I can speak to.

Availability, approval and reimbursement are three separate questions and a country can be in a different state on each.

That matches what I was told, which is not the same as knowing it.

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.

A weak preference rather than a position.

That is clearer than the version I had in my head. Thank you.

Date your answer and name your region. A position that is true in one jurisdiction and stated without either is the commonest source of confusion here.

Adding the caveat now so it does not have to be extracted later.

Customs practice varies between entry points within the same country, which is why two people in the same jurisdiction report different experiences honestly.

Happy to be the one who is wrong here if it settles the question.

A first-hand dated account for a region with thin coverage is worth more here than any summary, and the regions with thin coverage are most of them.

Caveat: everything above assumes the paperwork is what it says it is.

I read post #10 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Adding the boring version of Availability, because the interesting version keeps getting posted and the boring one is usually right.

Check the ordinary explanations, in order, and stop when one of them accounts for what you are seeing. Most of the time the second one does.