The FDA Says the GLP‑1 Shortage Is ‘Over.’ So Why Are Millions Still Getting ‘Semaglutide’ From Compounders—and What’s Actually in Those Vials?
The FDA’s “resolved” label is national policy—not a guarantee at your pharmacy counter. Price, insurance gatekeeping, and telehealth convenience keep compounded vials in motion, even as enforcement tightens.
By TheMurrow Editorial
April 2, 2026
Key Points
- 1Know the shift: The FDA marked semaglutide injection “resolved,” but that national status doesn’t guarantee your dose is on-shelf locally.
- 2Follow the real drivers: Insurance exclusions, prior authorization, and high self-pay costs keep patients turning to compounded vials for access.
- 3Watch the legal clock: Enforcement discretion after the shortage ended—especially for 503B facilities—tightens continuity and sourcing for telehealth pipelines.
On February 21, 2025, the FDA quietly changed a single line on a government website—and set off a louder argument than most drug-policy disputes ever produce. The agency marked the national shortage of semaglutide injection as “resolved.” For the millions who associate semaglutide with Ozempic and Wegovy, the update sounded like a promise: the scramble is over.
Yet in clinics, group chats, and telehealth portals, many patients kept ordering “semaglutide” in a very different form: compounded vials shipped to their door. The contradiction is the story. If the shortage is resolved, why does the compounded market still look like a booming workaround rather than a fading footnote?
The answer lives in the gap between a national designation and the day-to-day reality of American healthcare: insurance gatekeeping, local pharmacy backorders, and a fast-built online distribution system that trained consumers to treat GLP‑1s like a subscription product.
“A shortage can be ‘resolved’ nationally and still feel unresolved to a patient standing at the pharmacy counter.”
— — TheMurrow Editorial
At a glance
The FDA’s shortage status changes compounding’s legal “weather,” not your ZIP-code pharmacy reality.
Insurance and price barriers can keep FDA-approved semaglutide effectively out of reach.
Telehealth built a subscription-like pipeline that persists even as enforcement discretion sunsets.
Insurance and price barriers can keep FDA-approved semaglutide effectively out of reach.
Telehealth built a subscription-like pipeline that persists even as enforcement discretion sunsets.
What the FDA actually said—and what “shortage resolved” really means
The headline is straightforward: On February 21, 2025, the FDA updated its drug shortage database to show the semaglutide injection shortage as resolved. Major outlets quickly amplified the change, framing it as a turning point for Novo Nordisk’s blockbuster drugs. The agency later reinforced that position in a policy clarification page addressing how it would handle compounding as the national supply stabilized.
The phrase “shortage resolved” reads like a consumer promise, but it functions more like an administrative switch. The FDA’s shortage database is built to describe national supply conditions and guide policy decisions—especially decisions that affect what can be compounded, how, and under what rationale. It is not designed to reflect whether a specific pharmacy has a specific dose on the shelf at a specific hour.
In other words, the FDA can be technically correct while millions of patients still experience the system as constrained. That disconnect is at the heart of why compounded “semaglutide” did not evaporate the moment the database line changed.
The phrase “shortage resolved” reads like a consumer promise, but it functions more like an administrative switch. The FDA’s shortage database is built to describe national supply conditions and guide policy decisions—especially decisions that affect what can be compounded, how, and under what rationale. It is not designed to reflect whether a specific pharmacy has a specific dose on the shelf at a specific hour.
In other words, the FDA can be technically correct while millions of patients still experience the system as constrained. That disconnect is at the heart of why compounded “semaglutide” did not evaporate the moment the database line changed.
“Resolved” is a national status, not a personal guarantee
The FDA’s shortage list is a national-level tool. When a product is listed as in shortage, that status can influence what actors across the system are allowed to do—especially compounders. When the FDA declares the shortage resolved, that changes the legal and regulatory weather.
It does not mean every patient can fill every dose, in every ZIP code, on the day they need it. “Resolved” does not erase:
- Dose-specific gaps (one strength is easy to find, another lags)
- Regional distribution delays
- Pharmacy ordering limits or backorders
- Insurance barriers, which have nothing to do with manufacturing capacity
This is why a patient can hear “resolved” on the news and still hear “not available” at the counter. The supply chain, distribution cadence, and pharmacy procurement rules can all create friction that looks and feels like a shortage—without meeting the FDA’s national threshold.
It does not mean every patient can fill every dose, in every ZIP code, on the day they need it. “Resolved” does not erase:
- Dose-specific gaps (one strength is easy to find, another lags)
- Regional distribution delays
- Pharmacy ordering limits or backorders
- Insurance barriers, which have nothing to do with manufacturing capacity
This is why a patient can hear “resolved” on the news and still hear “not available” at the counter. The supply chain, distribution cadence, and pharmacy procurement rules can all create friction that looks and feels like a shortage—without meeting the FDA’s national threshold.
“The FDA’s shortage list is a policy lever, not a delivery guarantee.”
— — TheMurrow Editorial
Semaglutide wasn’t the only GLP‑1 in the headlines
A second detail shaped public perception: GLP‑1 “shortage” stories often blend multiple drugs into one narrative. Tirzepatide injection (sold as Mounjaro/Zepbound) was also reported as able to meet demand and removed from shortage status earlier, in late 2024. That created the impression that the broader GLP‑1 supply crisis was definitively ending.
The FDA’s message was narrower and more technical: semaglutide injection products were no longer considered nationally short. That single fact cascaded into a much bigger question—what happens to the massive compounding ecosystem that grew during the shortage era?
Once semaglutide was no longer officially scarce, the policy rationale that had helped justify widespread compounding became harder to defend. But public behavior doesn’t shift at the speed of regulatory language—especially when the underlying drivers were never only about factory output.
The FDA’s message was narrower and more technical: semaglutide injection products were no longer considered nationally short. That single fact cascaded into a much bigger question—what happens to the massive compounding ecosystem that grew during the shortage era?
Once semaglutide was no longer officially scarce, the policy rationale that had helped justify widespread compounding became harder to defend. But public behavior doesn’t shift at the speed of regulatory language—especially when the underlying drivers were never only about factory output.
Why compounded “semaglutide” didn’t disappear when supply improved
If you only tracked factory output and national supply metrics, you might expect compounded semaglutide demand to collapse once the shortage ended. That isn’t what happened. The market persisted because the pressures that sent people to compounders were never only about supply.
During the shortage years, compounding became familiar to consumers—not as an obscure corner of pharmacy practice, but as a mainstream channel promoted through modern marketing and telehealth logistics. By the time the FDA changed the shortage listing, many patients had already formed a habit: if the traditional route is slow, uncertain, and expensive, a shipped vial can feel like the more reliable choice.
So “resolved” can be true in one sense while compounding remains attractive in another. The persistence is not necessarily a referendum on manufacturing; it’s a referendum on how patients experience access.
During the shortage years, compounding became familiar to consumers—not as an obscure corner of pharmacy practice, but as a mainstream channel promoted through modern marketing and telehealth logistics. By the time the FDA changed the shortage listing, many patients had already formed a habit: if the traditional route is slow, uncertain, and expensive, a shipped vial can feel like the more reliable choice.
So “resolved” can be true in one sense while compounding remains attractive in another. The persistence is not necessarily a referendum on manufacturing; it’s a referendum on how patients experience access.
Price, coverage exclusions, and the reality of the American checkout line
For many patients, the defining barrier is affordability. Insurance plans may exclude anti-obesity medications, require prior authorization, impose step therapy, or leave patients exposed to high out-of-pocket costs. Those obstacles can remain intact even if every warehouse is fully stocked.
Compounded versions are widely marketed as a cheaper alternative to branded pens. The appeal is obvious: for a patient who cannot get coverage, “available” might still be “unreachable.”
Novo Nordisk’s own investor materials underline how central pricing has become. In its annual report, the company describes expanding access through self-pay offers—including a self-pay introductory offer and a lower “standard monthly self-pay” price after March 2026. The specifics are less important than what they signal: manufacturers recognize that demand is throttled not just by supply, but by who can afford the drug.
Compounded versions are widely marketed as a cheaper alternative to branded pens. The appeal is obvious: for a patient who cannot get coverage, “available” might still be “unreachable.”
Novo Nordisk’s own investor materials underline how central pricing has become. In its annual report, the company describes expanding access through self-pay offers—including a self-pay introductory offer and a lower “standard monthly self-pay” price after March 2026. The specifics are less important than what they signal: manufacturers recognize that demand is throttled not just by supply, but by who can afford the drug.
Convenience became a business model
During the shortage, telehealth and “online wellness” platforms built a frictionless pipeline:
- advertising that targets weight-loss intent
- quick virtual intake
- a shipped vial, often marketed as compounded semaglutide
By the time the FDA marked the shortage resolved in February 2025, reporting noted hundreds of thousands of monthly prescriptions for non-Novo “semaglutide” being filled. That number matters because it shows scale: compounding had moved beyond a niche service into a consumer-facing industry.
Patients didn’t only buy a molecule. They bought speed, simplicity, and predictability—qualities the traditional pharmacy-and-insurance route often fails to provide.
- advertising that targets weight-loss intent
- quick virtual intake
- a shipped vial, often marketed as compounded semaglutide
By the time the FDA marked the shortage resolved in February 2025, reporting noted hundreds of thousands of monthly prescriptions for non-Novo “semaglutide” being filled. That number matters because it shows scale: compounding had moved beyond a niche service into a consumer-facing industry.
Patients didn’t only buy a molecule. They bought speed, simplicity, and predictability—qualities the traditional pharmacy-and-insurance route often fails to provide.
Hundreds of thousands
Reporting cited hundreds of thousands of monthly prescriptions for non-Novo “semaglutide” around the time the shortage was marked resolved.
“For many patients, compounding didn’t feel like an alternative. It felt like the only route that worked.”
— — TheMurrow Editorial
The regulatory fault line: compounding vs. copying
Compounding occupies a strange place in American medicine: essential in some cases, controversial in others. The core idea is legitimate—custom preparation of medication for patients whose needs cannot be met by an FDA-approved product. The conflict begins when compounding starts to look like mass production of a near-identical substitute.
That tension sharpened during the GLP‑1 boom. As branded products became difficult to obtain or financially out of reach, compounding grew—sometimes as individualized care, sometimes as a scaled alternative that resembled copying. The shortage designation mattered because it affected how regulators viewed that activity.
When the FDA declared semaglutide injection “resolved,” it didn’t just announce a supply milestone. It altered the legal terrain that had allowed a large, visible compounding market to flourish under shortage-era conditions.
That tension sharpened during the GLP‑1 boom. As branded products became difficult to obtain or financially out of reach, compounding grew—sometimes as individualized care, sometimes as a scaled alternative that resembled copying. The shortage designation mattered because it affected how regulators viewed that activity.
When the FDA declared semaglutide injection “resolved,” it didn’t just announce a supply milestone. It altered the legal terrain that had allowed a large, visible compounding market to flourish under shortage-era conditions.
The two common pathways: 503A and 503B (and why shortages matter)
In broad terms, U.S. compounding is often discussed through two channels:
- 503A pharmacies, typically compounding patient-specific prescriptions
- 503B outsourcing facilities, which can produce larger batches under specific rules
Shortage status has been crucial because it can provide a rationale for compounding a drug that would otherwise be considered too close to copying an FDA-approved product. When the FDA says the shortage is over, that shortage-based rationale weakens dramatically.
This is why a database update can ripple outward into business models, prescribing pipelines, and patient options. If a platform’s supply chain was built around shortage-dependent permissions, the end of the shortage label is not symbolic—it is structural.
- 503A pharmacies, typically compounding patient-specific prescriptions
- 503B outsourcing facilities, which can produce larger batches under specific rules
Shortage status has been crucial because it can provide a rationale for compounding a drug that would otherwise be considered too close to copying an FDA-approved product. When the FDA says the shortage is over, that shortage-based rationale weakens dramatically.
This is why a database update can ripple outward into business models, prescribing pipelines, and patient options. If a platform’s supply chain was built around shortage-dependent permissions, the end of the shortage label is not symbolic—it is structural.
The FDA’s “transition period” and enforcement discretion
After declaring the semaglutide injection shortage resolved, the FDA published a policy clarification explaining how it would approach enforcement during the transition. The key concept was time-limited enforcement discretion—a temporary window during which the agency indicated it did not intend to take action against certain compounding activities that had relied on shortage status.
One specific deadline illustrates the point. The FDA said it did not intend to take action against 503B outsourcing facilities for certain shortage-dependent violations until May 22, 2025. That date isn’t just bureaucratic trivia. It marks the moment the federal government signaled: the shortage-era flexibility is ending.
For patients, the implication is practical: availability through compounded channels may become less stable, depending on how platforms and pharmacies respond when the legal justification narrows.
One specific deadline illustrates the point. The FDA said it did not intend to take action against 503B outsourcing facilities for certain shortage-dependent violations until May 22, 2025. That date isn’t just bureaucratic trivia. It marks the moment the federal government signaled: the shortage-era flexibility is ending.
For patients, the implication is practical: availability through compounded channels may become less stable, depending on how platforms and pharmacies respond when the legal justification narrows.
May 22, 2025
The FDA said it did not intend to take action against 503B outsourcing facilities for certain shortage-dependent violations until May 22, 2025.
Key Insight
When shortage-based discretion expires, the question isn’t only “Can you get it?”—it’s “Can your supplier legally keep offering it the same way?”
The safety debate: dosing errors, “personalization,” and what the FDA warns about
The most emotional arguments in this space—on both sides—are about safety. Critics of widespread compounding warn of inconsistent quality and dosing mistakes. Defenders point to access, affordability, and the long history of compounding in U.S. care.
The FDA’s own messaging tries to draw a line: compounding has a role, but it should not replace approved products when those products can meet a patient’s medical needs.
That balance is especially fraught with GLP‑1s because the delivery method changes the user experience. The branded drugs are commonly dispensed in pens that are designed to reduce user error. Many compounded products are dispensed in multi-dose vials. The medication may be “semaglutide,” but the handling is fundamentally different—and that difference can show up as real-world risk.
The FDA’s own messaging tries to draw a line: compounding has a role, but it should not replace approved products when those products can meet a patient’s medical needs.
That balance is especially fraught with GLP‑1s because the delivery method changes the user experience. The branded drugs are commonly dispensed in pens that are designed to reduce user error. Many compounded products are dispensed in multi-dose vials. The medication may be “semaglutide,” but the handling is fundamentally different—and that difference can show up as real-world risk.
What the FDA has flagged
The FDA has specifically warned about dosing errors associated with compounded semaglutide, issuing alerts to health care providers, compounders, and patients. Those warnings matter because compounded products often come as multi-dose vials with instructions that require a patient to measure and inject a volume—very different from branded pens designed to reduce user error.
A patient may be switching from a pre-set pen to a syringe-and-vial system, sometimes with minimal training. That increases the risk of mistakes, particularly during titration.
A patient may be switching from a pre-set pen to a syringe-and-vial system, sometimes with minimal training. That increases the risk of mistakes, particularly during titration.
“Personalized” can be real—or it can be marketing
Compounding can be clinically appropriate when a patient has a need an FDA-approved drug cannot meet, such as:
- an allergy to an inactive ingredient
- a required dosage form not otherwise available
- a medically necessary titration approach that cannot be replicated with approved products
The problem is that many products marketed as “customized” are effectively standardized vials sold at scale. The personalization claim becomes less about medicine and more about positioning.
Readers should treat “personalized” as a question, not a guarantee: personalized how, exactly—and why couldn’t an approved product meet the need?
- an allergy to an inactive ingredient
- a required dosage form not otherwise available
- a medically necessary titration approach that cannot be replicated with approved products
The problem is that many products marketed as “customized” are effectively standardized vials sold at scale. The personalization claim becomes less about medicine and more about positioning.
Readers should treat “personalized” as a question, not a guarantee: personalized how, exactly—and why couldn’t an approved product meet the need?
Questions to ask when you hear “personalized”
- ✓Personalized how—ingredient changes, dosage form, or dosing schedule?
- ✓What medical need is being met that an FDA-approved product cannot meet?
- ✓What training and follow-up are provided to reduce dosing and titration errors?
Why “resolved” can still feel like scarcity: spot shortages and dose-level friction
Even if national supply is adequate, individual patients can still hit walls. That’s not a conspiracy; it’s how distribution works in a complex supply chain.
GLP‑1 therapy is often continuous and time-sensitive. The drug isn’t simply “nice to have” on a random day; it’s commonly taken on a schedule. That means small delays can feel enormous. A dose that is “back next week” is not a neutral inconvenience for someone trying to maintain a weekly regimen.
This is how national resolution and personal scarcity coexist: the national system has enough product in aggregate, but not always in the right place, in the right strength, at the right time.
GLP‑1 therapy is often continuous and time-sensitive. The drug isn’t simply “nice to have” on a random day; it’s commonly taken on a schedule. That means small delays can feel enormous. A dose that is “back next week” is not a neutral inconvenience for someone trying to maintain a weekly regimen.
This is how national resolution and personal scarcity coexist: the national system has enough product in aggregate, but not always in the right place, in the right strength, at the right time.
The difference between manufacturing capacity and on-shelf reality
A drug can be available in the national sense while still being intermittently hard to obtain in practice. Several forces can create this feeling:
- dose-specific demand spikes (patients move up titration schedules unevenly)
- regional distribution imbalances
- pharmacy ordering constraints
- short-term backorders that are resolved quickly—but not quickly enough for a patient due for the next injection
Observers have continued to describe spot shortages and dose-specific gaps in the post-shortage environment. That matters because GLP‑1 therapy is often continuous; interruptions can be discouraging, medically disruptive, or both. A patient who has spent months getting results may not tolerate “check back next week.”
- dose-specific demand spikes (patients move up titration schedules unevenly)
- regional distribution imbalances
- pharmacy ordering constraints
- short-term backorders that are resolved quickly—but not quickly enough for a patient due for the next injection
Observers have continued to describe spot shortages and dose-specific gaps in the post-shortage environment. That matters because GLP‑1 therapy is often continuous; interruptions can be discouraging, medically disruptive, or both. A patient who has spent months getting results may not tolerate “check back next week.”
A real-world scenario patients recognize
Consider a common case: a patient is stable on a particular dose and is due for the next weekly injection. The local pharmacy can’t get that pen strength for several days. The patient has already fought through prior authorization once and doesn’t want to risk a lapse.
A compounded alternative offers speed and continuity. Even if it isn’t the first choice medically, it becomes the easiest choice logistically. Multiply that decision across thousands of patients and you get a market that persists long after the official shortage label disappears.
A compounded alternative offers speed and continuity. Even if it isn’t the first choice medically, it becomes the easiest choice logistically. Multiply that decision across thousands of patients and you get a market that persists long after the official shortage label disappears.
The legal pushback: compounders challenge the post-shortage rules
When the FDA ended the semaglutide shortage designation, compounding interests didn’t simply comply and move on. They challenged the decision in court—evidence of how economically significant the compounded GLP‑1 market had become.
Reporting indicates a federal judge in Texas upheld the FDA’s removal of Ozempic/Wegovy from the shortage list (the public fight referenced in coverage of the dispute). The broader takeaway is not courtroom drama; it’s policy reality. Once the FDA says “resolved,” the agency gains ground to tighten enforcement, and compounders lose the protective umbrella that shortage status can provide.
This doesn’t automatically end compounding activity. It does, however, increase uncertainty—especially for business models built around high-volume distribution that resembles a parallel retail channel.
Reporting indicates a federal judge in Texas upheld the FDA’s removal of Ozempic/Wegovy from the shortage list (the public fight referenced in coverage of the dispute). The broader takeaway is not courtroom drama; it’s policy reality. Once the FDA says “resolved,” the agency gains ground to tighten enforcement, and compounders lose the protective umbrella that shortage status can provide.
This doesn’t automatically end compounding activity. It does, however, increase uncertainty—especially for business models built around high-volume distribution that resembles a parallel retail channel.
What this means for telehealth platforms and patients
If compounded semaglutide was accessed through a subscription-like online model, patients may experience:
- tighter availability as platforms change sourcing
- changes in product form or dosing instructions
- potential discontinuation of offerings that depend on shortage-era discretion
None of that guarantees compounded products disappear. It does mean the market becomes more legally and operationally fragile.
- tighter availability as platforms change sourcing
- changes in product form or dosing instructions
- potential discontinuation of offerings that depend on shortage-era discretion
None of that guarantees compounded products disappear. It does mean the market becomes more legally and operationally fragile.
Editor’s Note
A post-shortage market can still be large—but it can also be volatile, especially when enforcement timelines and sourcing change.
Practical takeaways: what readers should do with all of this
The semaglutide shortage being “resolved” is real—at the level the FDA measures it. The persistent compounded market is also real—at the level patients live it. Readers deciding how to access GLP‑1 therapy should focus less on internet certainty and more on practical, verifiable safeguards.
The most useful posture is neither panic nor complacency. It’s specificity: what exactly are you being prescribed, how is it being prepared, what instructions are you being given, and what happens if the rules or supply channels shift?
Because the next phase is not simply “shortage vs. no shortage.” It is about affordability, enforcement, and whether a chronic-disease medication can be accessed without constant administrative turbulence.
The most useful posture is neither panic nor complacency. It’s specificity: what exactly are you being prescribed, how is it being prepared, what instructions are you being given, and what happens if the rules or supply channels shift?
Because the next phase is not simply “shortage vs. no shortage.” It is about affordability, enforcement, and whether a chronic-disease medication can be accessed without constant administrative turbulence.
If you are considering compounded semaglutide, press for specifics
Ask direct questions, and expect direct answers:
- Which compounding pathway is being used (503A vs 503B)?
- What are the exact dosing instructions—and how are dosing errors prevented?
- What clinical follow-up is offered during titration?
- If supply changes after the FDA’s enforcement deadlines, what happens to your continuity of care?
- Which compounding pathway is being used (503A vs 503B)?
- What are the exact dosing instructions—and how are dosing errors prevented?
- What clinical follow-up is offered during titration?
- If supply changes after the FDA’s enforcement deadlines, what happens to your continuity of care?
A quick diligence script (use it verbatim)
- 1.1) “Is this dispensed from a 503A pharmacy or a 503B outsourcing facility?”
- 2.2) “What concentration is in the vial, and what syringe/units correspond to my weekly dose?”
- 3.3) “Who do I contact during titration if I’m nauseated, miss a dose, or think I dosed incorrectly?”
- 4.4) “If your sourcing changes after enforcement deadlines, what is my plan to avoid an interruption?”
If you are trying to access the FDA-approved product, target the real bottlenecks
Availability alone doesn’t get you the medication if insurance blocks it. Patients often make more progress by addressing:
- prior authorization paperwork (and resubmissions)
- coverage criteria and exclusions
- pharmacy-to-pharmacy transfers when one location has stock
None of these steps are glamorous. They are, however, the steps that determine whether “resolved” becomes real in your household.
- prior authorization paperwork (and resubmissions)
- coverage criteria and exclusions
- pharmacy-to-pharmacy transfers when one location has stock
None of these steps are glamorous. They are, however, the steps that determine whether “resolved” becomes real in your household.
A measured perspective for a heated topic
Compounding is neither a miracle nor a menace by default. It is a medical practice with rules, tradeoffs, and a clear intended purpose. The post-shortage phase will test whether the GLP‑1 compounding boom was a temporary bridge—or a permanent parallel supply chain driven by price and convenience.
The FDA’s update closed one chapter. The next one is about affordability, enforcement, and whether the U.S. system can treat chronic disease with something other than bureaucratic whiplash.
The FDA’s update closed one chapter. The next one is about affordability, enforcement, and whether the U.S. system can treat chronic disease with something other than bureaucratic whiplash.
Feb 21, 2025
The FDA updated its drug shortage database to show the semaglutide injection shortage as resolved on this date.
200 words/min
Reading time estimate is based on ~200 words per minute and the article’s full preserved text.
T
About the Author
TheMurrow Editorial is a writer for TheMurrow covering health & wellness.
Frequently Asked Questions
When did the FDA say the semaglutide injection shortage was resolved?
The FDA updated its drug shortage information to show the semaglutide injection shortage as resolved on February 21, 2025, then published a clarification on compounding enforcement during a transition period.
Does “shortage resolved” mean I can definitely fill my prescription today?
No. “Resolved” is a national designation. Patients can still face regional gaps, dose-specific backorders, pharmacy ordering limits, and insurance barriers like prior authorization or step therapy.
Why are people still using compounded semaglutide if the shortage is over?
Price and access are major drivers—many patients face insurance denials or high out-of-pocket costs. Convenience also matters: telehealth platforms built fast intake-to-shipping models.
What did the FDA say about compounding after the shortage was resolved?
The FDA described time-limited enforcement discretion during a transition. It said it did not intend to take action against 503B outsourcing facilities for certain shortage-dependent violations until May 22, 2025.
What safety issues has the FDA raised about compounded semaglutide?
The FDA warned about dosing errors with compounded semaglutide, particularly when patients use multi-dose vials and syringes instead of prefilled pens, increasing measurement and titration risks.
Will compounded semaglutide go away now that the shortage is resolved?
Not necessarily, but availability may become less predictable as enforcement discretion windows close and platforms adjust sourcing, product forms, or discontinue shortage-dependent offerings.
