Pharmaceutical compounding rules, summarised from primary sources — a second dataset

An observation about Pharmaceutical compounding rules that I cannot explain and am posting anyway, on the principle that unexplained observations are more useful public than private.

Nothing in this subcategory is legal advice, and the members who work in regulated environments are the most careful to say so.

Old habit: I write down the expected answer before I calculate it.

Worth separating two things that post #14 runs together.

The reason Pharmaceutical compounding rules is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent.

Pharmaceutical compounding rules: I would want to see the raw numbers rather than the summary before agreeing. Summaries lose exactly the information that would settle this.

Good question, well framed, and I would like to see it answered properly.

Post-authorisation safety commitments are public and are one of the more useful sources for what a regulator considered uncertain at approval.

I am aware this is the third time this month I have made this point.

Primary documents matter: regulatory positions are published in official documents. Reading the regulatory agency's website directly is more reliable than reading a forum summary of it.

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

Post #21 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

The most useful reply I ever got about Pharmaceutical compounding rules was a request to state my units. It sounds like pedantry and it has saved me twice.

On post #20 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Counterpoint on Pharmaceutical compounding rules, offered without confidence: the same observation is consistent with a much duller explanation, and nobody has ruled the dull one out.

Reading rather than contributing, but this is the most useful thread I have found on it.

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.

Checked the Pharmaceutical compounding rules claim against the primary source this morning. It survives, with a narrower scope than the version quoted here. Posting the narrower scope.

Worth separating two things that post #24 runs together.

Import rules for personal quantities differ from commercial import rules and both differ by country. Establishing your own position is not something a forum can do for you.

I would rather post the uncertainty than round it away.

Picking up post #26: that is the part I would want checked first.

I read the earlier replies on Pharmaceutical compounding rules 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.

Coming back to post #28, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Pharmaceutical compounding rules came up in a thread eighteen months ago and was answered well. I cannot find it, which is itself the problem, so here is the reconstruction.