FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Use by date extension

Jump to newest
 

By *ungry Cat OP   Couple
over a year ago

Belfast

I closely follow many countrie's approaches to covid.

One thing recently stood out more than anything else - Lithuania decided to extend their vaccine use by dates (I will find relevant links if needed, they're not in English though).

Also it's a country which had vaccine passports in place for everyone aged 12+ for way over a year.

I wonder how is it legal to extend the dates?

How is it not world news too?

I'd there any other countries that done it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

Flagrante

I don't know the answer but if it's anything like food there's always a leeway on the dates so the manufacturers may have given it the green light. As long as it isn't going to cause any issues it would be better than throwing them away.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

Countries approval systems can do as they see fit. Manufacturers put (usually very conservative) use by dates on drugs based on their longevity tests and also put drugs forward for approval for certain medical conditions. As the drug becomes more widely used, some drugs become used "off label" and new information comes to light about use by dates etc.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *reenleavesCouple
over a year ago

North Wales

Some use-by dates apply more to the packaging than to the contents. As others have mentioned, there's a bit of leeway built into use-by dates. The product may not be 100% after this but it could be fine to use up until its 80% of perfect, for example.

Lithuania may have received research data that shows the initial UBD was very conservative.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ungry Cat OP   Couple
over a year ago

Belfast

Going by replies so far. Would you buy bacon that is past its use by date? Would you eat it?

Personally I'm comfortable with food being past use by date as I can rely on my smell, taste and touch to determine weather something is safe to eat.

Aren't we all told to never ever use medicines that are out of date though?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

Flagrante


"Going by replies so far. Would you buy bacon that is past its use by date? Would you eat it?

Personally I'm comfortable with food being past use by date as I can rely on my smell, taste and touch to determine weather something is safe to eat.

Aren't we all told to never ever use medicines that are out of date though? "

My GP once told me that medication use by dates, although useful didn't mean that the medication was harmful but would gradually reduce in efficacy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They will have only had stability data up to a certain point. Now they will have more stability data (because more time has passed) and can therefore update the shelf life to longer.

It's nothing new.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I'm so assuming that this decision isn't just an ignorant whim but will be backed by expert advice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

Having worked in the pharmaceutical industry before, I can say that the use by dates put on medication is incredibly conservative. Samples of each batch made are kept in the standard storage format for many months or years and intermittently checked for safety, efficacy etc. Most drugs remain safe for use well beyond the advertised dates. Most prescribed medication is handed out to customers, most of whom do not adhere to the advertised storage conditions and so they put very "safe" dates on. Even vaccines being used in medical settings can be mishandled.

I am confident Lithuania wouldn't be doing anything harmful to its citizens.

I have taken medication after its used by date with no issues. Comparison with food is unhelpful because the vast majority of medication doesn't develop bacterial contamination (creams and ointments CAN but even this isn't always an issue). The biggest risk with out of date medication is most often a reduction in efficacy rather than the threat of serious harm. Rancid food might give you good poisoning, by contrast.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Going by replies so far. Would you buy bacon that is past its use by date? Would you eat it?

Personally I'm comfortable with food being past use by date as I can rely on my smell, taste and touch to determine weather something is safe to eat.

Aren't we all told to never ever use medicines that are out of date though? "

What do you think?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.

According to lancs.live, we are also extending the use before date for vaccinations here, and still there could be up to 3 1/2 million having to be thrown away due to over supply.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.


"According to lancs.live, we are also extending the use before date for vaccinations here, and still there could be up to 3 1/2 million having to be thrown away due to over supply.

"

It seems to be on multiple media sources, not just lanc.live

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ondoner27Man
over a year ago

london

I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

Flagrante


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows "

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ondoner27Man
over a year ago

london


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more "

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes"

Google 'profit'.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ondoner27Man
over a year ago

london


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'. "

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words. "

It's not the pharma companies holding onto the vaccines. Governments, such as Lithuania, already bought stocks of vaccine, which is now coming to the end of it's advertised shelf life. They are choosing to extend it, not the pharma company who made it. Quite obviously, selling more vaccine to Lithuania would accrue more profit for the pharma companies, rather than Lithuania using up stocks of "out of date" vaccine they purchased ages ago.

These are simple economic facts and easy to process in your mind.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

Flagrante


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words.

It's not the pharma companies holding onto the vaccines. Governments, such as Lithuania, already bought stocks of vaccine, which is now coming to the end of it's advertised shelf life. They are choosing to extend it, not the pharma company who made it. Quite obviously, selling more vaccine to Lithuania would accrue more profit for the pharma companies, rather than Lithuania using up stocks of "out of date" vaccine they purchased ages ago.

These are simple economic facts and easy to process in your mind. "

In some minds

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *instonandLadyAstorCouple
over a year ago

Not where we seem to be...


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows "

As they're already purchased and held in stock, extending the use by date isn't going to make pharmaceutical company's more profit, they're not selling the same thing twice are they.

Winston

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"Going by replies so far. Would you buy bacon that is past its use by date? Would you eat it?

Personally I'm comfortable with food being past use by date as I can rely on my smell, taste and touch to determine weather something is safe to eat.

Aren't we all told to never ever use medicines that are out of date though? "

Did they put little yellow reduced stickers over the date?

Nothing to worry about I'm sure... I'm sure It will have been thoroughly tested using them last there inject by dates. If they haven't... Nothing to worry about. They are pretty meaningless anyway right..? I mean that's why they go to the trouble of printing them on the vials.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.

If a UK might be throwing away 3 and a half million of them, as they might go beyond the extended use before date why can't we give them now to countries where they don't have enough?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

Past its use by date... Tsk those unvaccinated folks will come up with any old excuse.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.

The*

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

As they're already purchased and held in stock, extending the use by date isn't going to make pharmaceutical company's more profit, they're not selling the same thing twice are they.

Winston"

Sometimes I think I'm on another planet!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *instonandLadyAstorCouple
over a year ago

Not where we seem to be...


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

As they're already purchased and held in stock, extending the use by date isn't going to make pharmaceutical company's more profit, they're not selling the same thing twice are they.

Winston

Sometimes I think I'm on another planet!"

Same.

Winston

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

As they're already purchased and held in stock, extending the use by date isn't going to make pharmaceutical company's more profit, they're not selling the same thing twice are they.

Winston

Sometimes I think I'm on another planet!"

Another girl another planet?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Quite common in large food production

We used to extend dates on a few items quite often

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imes_berksMan
over a year ago

Bracknell


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words. "

Pharma manufactures and sells first batch of vaccines to the government. Pharma make profit A. Government throw away out of date vaccines away and Pharma manufacture and sells second batch of vaccines to the government. Pharma make profit B. Total Pharma profit = profit A+B. If the use by date is extended by the government then Pharma profits = profit A. Seems an open and shut case of basic accounting.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *I TwoCouple
over a year ago

PDI 12-26th Nov 24

Not that most people on a swingers forum would understand pharmaceuticals, but expiry dates allow for transport and other variables. Sometimes a manufacturer will allow an extension of dates if certain variables that were factored in can be excluded from the product in question.

It's fairly common practice especially if there are shortages etc

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ungry Cat OP   Couple
over a year ago

Belfast


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words.

It's not the pharma companies holding onto the vaccines. Governments, such as Lithuania, already bought stocks of vaccine, which is now coming to the end of it's advertised shelf life. They are choosing to extend it, not the pharma company who made it. Quite obviously, selling more vaccine to Lithuania would accrue more profit for the pharma companies, rather than Lithuania using up stocks of "out of date" vaccine they purchased ages ago.

These are simple economic facts and easy to process in your mind. "

1. Why did a country purchase more doses than they would have needed to vaccinate the whole population at least twice over? (One of facts found online over a year ago, before they implemented vaccine passports.

2. Why was a country allowed to purchase so many doses in one go? Surely use by dates were on vials long before they made the purchase.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West

Countries are free to purchase what they wish from commercial companies. The questions above would be best posed to the Lithuanian Government, of which I am not a member.

Many developed countries over purchased to offset possible delays or cancellations in orders from one manufacturer.

Many Western Governments are finally donating their surplus to poorer countries, but the use by dates are approaching.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *instonandLadyAstorCouple
over a year ago

Not where we seem to be...


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words.

It's not the pharma companies holding onto the vaccines. Governments, such as Lithuania, already bought stocks of vaccine, which is now coming to the end of it's advertised shelf life. They are choosing to extend it, not the pharma company who made it. Quite obviously, selling more vaccine to Lithuania would accrue more profit for the pharma companies, rather than Lithuania using up stocks of "out of date" vaccine they purchased ages ago.

These are simple economic facts and easy to process in your mind.

1. Why did a country purchase more doses than they would have needed to vaccinate the whole population at least twice over? (One of facts found online over a year ago, before they implemented vaccine passports.

2. Why was a country allowed to purchase so many doses in one go? Surely use by dates were on vials long before they made the purchase. "

1. Better to have too much than too little.

2. If someone orders 300 widgets I'll sell them 300 widgets.

Winston

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lik and PaulCouple
over a year ago

Flagrante


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows

If they wanted to make more money they would say it can't be used and then sell some more

You can roll your eyes all you like. It costs more to make more right? Wouldn’t it be better to sell what you’ve already made? Wouldn’t that make you more money?! But ok roll those eyes

Google 'profit'.

So you think more profit is made by creating new doses than selling ones that they have already created? If so, there are no words.

It's not the pharma companies holding onto the vaccines. Governments, such as Lithuania, already bought stocks of vaccine, which is now coming to the end of it's advertised shelf life. They are choosing to extend it, not the pharma company who made it. Quite obviously, selling more vaccine to Lithuania would accrue more profit for the pharma companies, rather than Lithuania using up stocks of "out of date" vaccine they purchased ages ago.

These are simple economic facts and easy to process in your mind.

1. Why did a country purchase more doses than they would have needed to vaccinate the whole population at least twice over? (One of facts found online over a year ago, before they implemented vaccine passports.

2. Why was a country allowed to purchase so many doses in one go? Surely use by dates were on vials long before they made the purchase. "

Lithuania's vaccination rate is under 70% of the population. Maybe they bought the right amount.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.

If the use before date can be extended or would it not make sense just to put the longest possible use before date on on the vaccines in the first place?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West


"If the use before date can be extended or would it not make sense just to put the longest possible use before date on on the vaccines in the first place?"

Pharma companies put conservative dates on for a reason...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xelciscoMan
over a year ago

Reading/bracknell


"I closely follow many countrie's approaches to covid.

One thing recently stood out more than anything else - Lithuania decided to extend their vaccine use by dates (I will find relevant links if needed, they're not in English though).

Also it's a country which had vaccine passports in place for everyone aged 12+ for way over a year.

I wonder how is it legal to extend the dates?

How is it not world news too?

I'd there any other countries that done it? "

Manufacturers are obliged to submit degradation and shelf life data as part of the licensing process. The regulators may dispute the data etc. It is unusual for them to extend shelf life unless they asked/received from the company new data on the stability, or the initial recommended range was very conservative. This can happen with new biotechnology products. Obviously, there is a sensible limit too.. most products can survive several months beyond the shelf life date so long they have been stored carefully but vaccines are more sensitive to degradation so it is rarer for the them.

Here, they probably want to avoid wastage of bought stocks in the light of another of vaccination which would happen soonish. There had been a 3 month extension (only!) for biontech/Pfizer in the EU granted last year (in frozen state). It is legal, but has to be supported by data.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ob198XaMan
over a year ago

teleford


"I think as long as it makes pharmaceutical companies money it won’t raise any eyebrows "

That works the other way around if the doses have already been bought...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *imes_berksMan
over a year ago

Bracknell


"I closely follow many countrie's approaches to covid.

One thing recently stood out more than anything else - Lithuania decided to extend their vaccine use by dates (I will find relevant links if needed, they're not in English though).

Also it's a country which had vaccine passports in place for everyone aged 12+ for way over a year.

I wonder how is it legal to extend the dates?

How is it not world news too?

I'd there any other countries that done it?

Manufacturers are obliged to submit degradation and shelf life data as part of the licensing process. The regulators may dispute the data etc. It is unusual for them to extend shelf life unless they asked/received from the company new data on the stability, or the initial recommended range was very conservative. This can happen with new biotechnology products. Obviously, there is a sensible limit too.. most products can survive several months beyond the shelf life date so long they have been stored carefully but vaccines are more sensitive to degradation so it is rarer for the them.

Here, they probably want to avoid wastage of bought stocks in the light of another of vaccination which would happen soonish. There had been a 3 month extension (only!) for biontech/Pfizer in the EU granted last year (in frozen state). It is legal, but has to be supported by data."

I would have thought storage stability data would have been provided as evidence. Additionally the Pfizer vaccine has been stored at -80 oC.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top