Register

Pharmacy Disclosure Register: One Question, Every Provider, Published Answers

We are asking every provider in our dataset one question — which pharmacy fills the prescription and under which registration class — and publishing who answers, who decl

The question we started with

Which pharmacy or pharmacies fill prescriptions written through your programme, and is each registered as a 503A compounding pharmacy or a 503B outsourcing facility?

That is the whole request. No pricing, no marketing, no interview. One factual question with a checkable answer.

Why this question and not another

The FDA proposed on 30 April 2026 to exclude semaglutide, tirzepatide and liraglutide from the 503B bulks list. If adopted, that closes bulk compounding by outsourcing facilities. Section 503A patient-specific compounding is a separate pathway and is not addressed by the proposal.

So the answer determines a patient's exposure to a live regulatory decision. A patient supplied through a 503B outsourcing facility and a patient supplied through a 503A pharmacy face materially different risk from the same determination, and neither can tell which they are without asking.

It is also the field our rubric weights most heavily — 15 of 100 points — and the one we hold for no provider. It is one of four such gaps, which together lock 55 of 100 points. Any provider that answers moves the ceiling.

The four questions

What any provider can score today, and why

The register

Every provider in our pricing dataset appears below. The status column is the point of the page.

The one open item

A competing publication, GLP-1 Editorial, states that NexLife (opens nexlife.us in a new tab) has “503A & 503B partners disclosed”. We have not confirmed that and it conflicts with our own record, which holds no pharmacy disclosure from any provider.

Both can be true at once: a provider may disclose to one publisher and not to another. What we will not do is repeat the claim without checking, or omit it because it is inconvenient to our position. It sits at evidence status pending as EV-1702 with a task attached.

What an answer changes

1. The provider's score. Pharmacy disclosure moves from unscored to scored, and the maximum achievable score rises above 45 for the first time.
2. Every page mentioning that provider. Our sitewide statement that no provider has named its pharmacy to us would be corrected, publicly, in the corrections log.
3. What a reader can verify. A named pharmacy can be checked against its state board and against FDA warning letters and recall notices. An unnamed one cannot be checked at all.

What a non-answer means, and what it does not

It does not mean a provider is doing anything wrong. Pharmacy relationships are commercially sensitive, some providers use several pharmacies that vary by state and availability, and a company may reasonably decline to publish a supplier list.

What it does mean is that the field stays unscored and the reader stays unable to check. We record “declined” and “no response” as different things, because they are.

The request we send

Why publish the empty column

A register with nothing in it looks like a failure. It is the most accurate thing on this site.

Every comparison in this category ranks providers while omitting the field that most determines regulatory exposure, because nobody has it. Publishing the gap, provider by provider, with the date we asked, is the only version of that finding a reader can act on — and the only one a provider can end.

Questions readers actually ask