Dr.ObesityMed said:Resolution therefore closed the doors unevenly, and the asymmetry follows from the bulks lists.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. A research-chemical supplier selling lyophilised powder labelled research use only is not compounding and is not claiming to. It is a different legal universe with no pharmacy oversight, no patient relationship and no content guarantee, and conflating the two in these threads helps nobody.
sophie_paris said:Two pharmacies quoted me last year, one describing itself as 503A and one as 503B, and I assumed 503B just meant bigger until both stopped within…
Compounded has been just as effective for me. If compounded supply is the concern, the COA from my 503B pharmacy shows 99.1% purity. Verified by Janoshik.
SarahChen_PharmD said:A research-chemical supplier selling lyophilised powder labelled research use only is not compounding and is not claiming to.
I have been on both brand and compounded, and in the context of compounded supply, my experience has been equivalent with both. The key is finding a reliable 503B pharmacy with independent testing.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from GenomicsKate — and this may be the naive question:
What actually distinguishes 503A from 503B, in terms of what each may make and from what starting material?
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
The bulks-list asymmetry was the piece I had missed entirely. It explains why one of my two pharmacies is still arguing it can supply and the other simply stopped.