Ridiculous use-by dates

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Clive Ansell — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 09:06:38 GMT

US I think

https://zoetis.cz/news-and-media/fda-extends-in-use-shelf-life-of-convenia-from-28-to-56-days.aspx

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Aisling McGrath — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 08:53:07 GMT

I'm convinced I've worked somewhere where Convenia was 56 days.... either France or America! Don't know which!

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

bevs2251 — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 06:46:45 GMT

[quote user="Braden Collins"]

I suspect the 28-day rule is probably due to UK regulations than manufacturers - the "norm" is 6 months in Australia (with some notable exceptions such as Convenia which is 2 months).

[/quote]

Convenia in Oz has 28 day label claim once made up, reps say can use confidently for up to 6-8 weeks, even with colour change (and apparently is done so at a certain University). Most injectables not chucked out here until they reach their "use by" date.

Have seen human hospitals throw out bottles and bottles of Vancomycin (brought in once by a human nurse for us to use, if possible) - all because "expired". One of the last line antibiotics - can you imagine the cost to the taxpayer of this wastage ? Can't even off-load it to 3rd world countries via the pharmacies (tried) as was told the warlords commandeer the charity vehicles and take the lot to on-sell ! What a world !

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Thomas Johnson — Wed, 08 Aug 2018 11:28:38 GMT

[quote user="Braden Collins"]I suspect the 28-day rule is probably due to UK regulations than manufacturers - the "norm" is 6 months in Australia (with some notable exceptions such as Convenia which is 2 months).[/quote]

Are you sure about this? I've just searched on the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Website, searched for Convenia and followed this link to the datasheet:

http://websvr.infopest.com.au/LabelRouter?LabelType=L&Mode=1&ProductCode=60461

Where it says, "Reconstituted Product: Store refrigerated in original carton and use within 28 days of reconstitution."

Metacam 5mg/ml injectable also states "Discard Unused product 28 days after first broaching vial."

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Anthony Todd — Wed, 08 Aug 2018 11:14:44 GMT

There you go then.... typical of Aussie vets and regulators to foist expired, ineffective, dangerous, toxic, [ add other suitable adjectives] on the poor Aussie pet-owners and their animals.....

Haven't we got RCVS Councillors on here that could raise our obvious disquiet?

And the BVA??

Pet -owning public must think we are colluding!

Why on earth would any manufacturer complain?

They must be selling vastly more product than is used and the more they sell, used or discarded, the more and more profit they make!

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Braden Collins — Wed, 08 Aug 2018 09:58:54 GMT

I think the 28-day rule doesn't apply in human hospitals as I don't believe they can use multidose vials - it's one dose then throw the rest out.

I suspect the 28-day rule is probably due to UK regulations than manufacturers - the "norm" is 6 months in Australia (with some notable exceptions such as Convenia which is 2 months).

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 08 Aug 2018 09:52:11 GMT

[quote user="Francisco Gomez"]Am I at top of the 'Disagree' league yet Arlo Guthrie?[/quote]

Francisco Gomez laughed out loud. I don't know - haven't looked at the data yet. But it wouldn't surprise me!!

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

David Mills — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 22:11:45 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]Maybe if smaller size bottles of antibiotics were available there might be less incentive to sell out/use up the whole bottle, in this time of responsible antibiotic stewardship as well?[/quote]

I think this is a good point. The other issue is that it may subconsciously or otherwise encourage the use of inappropriate meds e.g. Convenia, smaller bottle, expensive to buy etc.

Also the cost of disposing of these medicines is considerable (for those that no longer inject into a dead stray), never mind, for those that are minded that way, the environmental impact.

I suspect the 28 day rule is not too important in a large human hospital, for instance, so a unilateral regulation would be possible.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Francisco Gomez — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 21:29:47 GMT

In the era for tracking batch numbers etc.. I would remind everyone that using the drug beyond their 28 days could potentially increase the size of a complain if things don't go well with a case.

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

Drug effectiveness is [conveniently?] tested to 30 days, and only to 30 days, so therefore and "obviously" after 30 days we, the manufacturer cannot guarantee the effectiveness of the drug.

[/quote]

28 days I believe. Wouldn't 30 days carry the unnecessary risk of having to go to the lab on a Sunday to check the product?

Am I at top of the 'Disagree' league yet Arlo Guthrie?

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Rob Loxley — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 21:13:39 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]nobody seems too concerned about a stupid regulation[/quote]

I think a regulation that you need to test the stability, efficacy, safety etc of the product you sell, out to the broached shelf life you claim, is entirely sensible. I think the market (us/our representative bodies) needs to put pressure on manufacturers to test out to a longer date (as can be done, see recently with Prevomax (which is a reason to move to it, from Cerenia), Zycortal, Alfaxan etc) and also to sell smaller bottles (as recently done with one of the ketamines) and maybe pressure on the VMD to address whether excessive relicensing costs do stop companies from doing the latter. Maybe if smaller size bottles of antibiotics were available there might be less incentive to sell out/use up the whole bottle, in this time of responsible antibiotic stewardship as well?

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 19:22:24 GMT

It's not that nobody is concerned, Anthony. I loathe this wicked waste, and I wasn't too happy about the abuse I got from a certain ferret owner, either. It's just that some battles are already lost, and there's not much one can do if none of our professional bodies will take it up.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Anthony Todd — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 18:43:17 GMT

Disappointing that nobody seems too concerned about a stupid regulation, and the waste, and the cost to clients who think it's vets' gouging again......

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Alison Clare Hickman — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:34:40 GMT

Martin Atkinson - hahaha, sadly not your goodself but it was for a very old-school 'vitniry' whom I observed deploying many of their (this is a gender neutral post) 'tried and tested tricks of the trade' such as twatting dogs on the nose if they misbehaved... "Aahve nivver bin bit, me, lass"

Oh boy oh boy oh boy. I have lived a life!

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Wren — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:30:44 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]We actually had a locum who went round the shelves and chucked stuff that had been opened for more than 28 days or wasn't marked.[/quote]

My husband once threw out all the meat in the freezer that was past its sell-by date. I had to explain to him the whole point of freezing stuff...

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Martin Atkinson — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:16:50 GMT

[quote user="Toadster"]

[/quote]I didn't know you'd worked for me Toadster!!

We actually had a locum who went round the shelves and chucked stuff that had been opened for more than 28 days or wasn't marked. Strictly speaking correct but hardly his place to do so. He was not invited back.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Alison Clare Hickman — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:05:27 GMT

Heheh - this thread reminds me of a practice I worked at (remaining wholly nameless for reasons of incrimination...) that had a box on a shelf marked "Out of Date but Still Useful". Quite a cornucopia of miscellany in there. When I asked about it all I was told to do was "hide it when we have an inspection". Cough. I actually got a day-off freebie and paid for when we did get an inspection as I was told "you'll tell the truth and we can't have that can we?" AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!

#thegoodoldbadolddays

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Lucy Fleming — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:19:09 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]PS I used "black" oxytet within it's use by date and it seemed to work[/quote]

I had to make my dog vomit a while back, and I used the open vial of Apometic (this was before they hiked the price and reduced the strength, we wouldn't have as much leftover now!) that had balanced on the top of the sharps container until it went a bit yellow been open for a while and it worked fine (despite the colour change!)

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Martin Atkinson — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:54:24 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]Memory may be fading but I seem to remember that it was in the data sheet that the colour change did not affect safety or efficacy.[/quote]Similar to Convenia. I had a locum who refused to use a bottle that was within 28 days from opening because the colour had changed to dark orange. The Zoetis rep assured me that the problem would be if it didn't change colour!

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 01:07:16 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]PS I used "black" oxytet within it's use by date and it seemed to work [about the only injection that cattle noticed, black or light-brown when given I/M].....[/quote]

Memory may be fading but I seem to remember that it was in the data sheet that the colour change did not affect safety or efficacy.

By the way, for the last thirty years I've only used the upmarket oxytetracyclines ( )and they don't seem to change colour.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Anthony Todd — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:46:37 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]I don't think I'd want injecting with something that had sat open for a year on a shelf.[/quote]

Of course not, but as I tried to explain the regulation has been copied and pasted from the human "snapule" open topped vials, or single use rubber capped bottles [human depomed] with no preservative and open, and sensible.

But this doesn't bear transfer to rubber capped, with preservative, as all the vet injectables used to be.

This formulation was used by vets for years without problems world-wide until they formed the VMD and found something else which really didn't need any regulation at all!

To add insult to illogicallity they did this with absolutely no evidence of any sort that there was a need for the new regulations!

And the veterinary powers that be and voices of influence did absolutely nothing, not even a murmur, as far as I know.

PS I used "black" oxytet within it's use by date and it seemed to work [about the only injection that cattle noticed, black or light-brown when given I/M].....

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:24:48 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Bit of pressure on guilty manufacturers to set up a <5 ml ish line might reap dividends?

What are the most wasted drugs and bottle volumes these days?[/quote]

We waste very little. In terms of small animals we don't stock Delvosterone, Tardak or Lorabolin any more. I'd offer to order in and charge a full vial but too expensive. Used to see quite a few ferrets and havn't seen once since the change in rules. The hardest bit is large animal drugs where we'd previously have 5 bottles of selenium open (4 inc cars and 1 in the surgery) where we now move them around or try and sell full bottles.

If you look at what happens to a bottle of oxytet that's been open 1 month (yellow to black) I do dread to think what happens to these drugs sat on shelves. I'm not sure it's such a daft rule really. I don't think I'd want injecting with something that had sat open for a year on a shelf.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Anthony Todd — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:16:12 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]If you're bored you can google VICH[/quote]

So I did of course and there's a lot of worthy speak and then i got to this:

Quality by design

Email
Print
Help
Share

Regulatory information in this area is identical for veterinary and human medicines.

Please refer to the content in the human regulatory section:

Quality by design

As it rang bells I stopped......

More examples of "worthy speak" or regulation for the sake of regulation and 'cos it's our job, if you wish.

So I kept digging and the closest I got was this:

The CVMP's assessments are based on a comprehensive scientific evaluation of data. They determine whether the medicine meets the necessary quality, safety and efficacy requirements and that is has a positive risk-benefit balance in favour of the animal population they are intended for.

Don't know who decided on broach by date; no mention at all.......

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Sarah Keir — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 21:43:49 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Lots of medication would be stocked and used more in smaller containers. I suspect it just costs too much to change packaging.

[/quote]

I believe that the packing forms part of the licensing so if they want to change the packaging it needs to partly go through licensing again at huge cost.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 16:16:24 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]Presumably folk charge per vial for the likes of Alizin, Tardak, and Delvosterone (which I think is single use anyway) etc ? [/quote]The dose of Alizin is so high that even a small dog is likely to use near to a whole bottle so it is not an issue. Tardak to a lesser extent and you're right about Delvosterone (I confess to not being aware of that rule) which would end up being prohibitively expensive to charge per bottle for a small dog, cat or ferret.

RE: Ridiculous use-by dates

Clive Ansell — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 15:47:48 GMT

what amounts and values of drugs are actually wasted?

Presumably folk charge per vial for the likes of Alizin, Tardak, and Delvosterone (which I think is single use anyway) etc ?