claudia_zurich said:

The shortage clause is the answer to the second question and it is a subtraction rather than an addition.

All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.

Happy to go further on any of that.

TomTeleRx said:

Steady state is the thing most people miss.

Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Taking it to my next appointment.

claudia_zurich said:

The shortage clause is the answer to the second question and it is a subtraction rather than an addition.

Pushing back on claudia_zurich here. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Two things anyone can check: a state licence number for a 503A, and an FDA outsourcing-facility registration for a 503B. Both are publicly searchable, and a pharmacy unwilling to give you either has answered the question.

Worth separating that from compounded supply, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.