We are defining the problem too narrowly. Our paradigm of pharmaceutical quality sifted long-ago. We have harmonized on a regulatory methodology for QbD (e.g., ICH Q8). However, with the prevailing ontological gaps (for example as illustrated in the continuing challenges posed with the current FDA’s Inactive Ingredient Database) - How good are the scientific explanations in regulatory submissions? Is quality risk-assessment - metaphysical or an epistemological category?