PeptideChemSF said:

They are two different exemptions from the same federal requirements and they buy different things.

I read this differently from PeptideChemSF, 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.

Dr.PeteFamMed said:

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

Beyond-use dating (BUD) for compounded supply compounded products:

Lyophilized (unreconstituted): typically 6 months from compounding date
Reconstituted with BAC water: typically 28-30 days refrigerated
Reconstituted with sterile water: typically 24 hours (no preservative!)

Always use BAC water for multi-dose vials. Sterile water has no preservative and supports bacterial growth after first puncture. This is a common and potentially dangerous mistake.

NurseKim_ATL said:

A research-chemical supplier selling lyophilised powder labelled research use only is not compounding and is not claiming to.

Price comparison for compounded supply across sources I've used:

I use the 503B option — best balance of quality, cost, and legality. The brand price is insane but insurance can help if you qualify.

One thing that is still open after josh_phd_bmore’s answer:

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.