3 ms·
I think they were referring to saying that a product is "not bad after" it's expiration date.
by zip6 7y ago
I think they were referring to saying that a product is "not bad after" it's expiration date.
- thaumasiotes 7y agoA vendor could be sued for that in the US, but not a manufacturer. Expiration dates have no legal meaning for manufacturers. (A manufacturer actually was sued when, after encountering production issues, they recovered by simply relabeling the expiration dates on existing product. But the manufacturer won that suit decisively.)
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kwhitefoot 7y agoLabelling here, Norway, distinguishes between a 'best before' (best før), and a 'last edible date' (siste forbruksdato). The second typically appears only on fresh produce, such as a sliced ham, that becomes dangerous as it gets older, in contrast to products like milk, yoghurt, vegetables, etc., which typically simply decline in quality but are not dangerous even weeks or even months past the best before date.