Has anyone dealt with is it normal for the powder to not fully dissolve?

PurityPaulOR said:

Resolution therefore closed the doors unevenly, and the asymmetry follows from the bulks lists.

I read this differently from PurityPaulOR, on substance rather than tone. 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.

KarenAZ_mom said:

My pharmacy stopped supplying with three weeks notice and a letter that explained nothing, so I went and read the statute.

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.

Compounding pharmacy customer here with experience relevant to compounded supply.

I've ordered from 2 different compounding pharmacies over the past 2 years. The quality variation is real — purity ranged from 94% to 101% of label claim based on independent Janoshik testing.

My current compounder (a 503B facility) has been consistently 98-101% purity across 10 orders. I pay $141/month vs $1,271 for brand. The savings are substantial and the product is equivalent in my experience.

Re: compounded supply — this applies whether you're using brand or compounded. The clinical principles are the same.

Following on from Dr.AddMedPHL — and this may be the naive question:

Why a shortage listing created a legal pathway at all, since a shortage is a supply fact rather than a permission?

Reporting back.

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.