[Discussion] the packaging advice in here is 2 years out of date
the packaging advice in here is 2 years out of date — a position I have arrived at slowly and would like tested. Numbers, in the order they matter: 2 years. Wrote the reconstitution date on the vial for the first time last year. Have never once since wondered how old a solution is. Asked GGPeps which lines they hold…
Gel packs are designed for a duty cycle. A liquid pack at the end of a longer-than-expected transit is a pack behaving as specified, not evidence of an excursion in the vial.
Left up and added to the lane table. Origin, destination and month were all included, which is all we ask.
a summer lane and a winter lane are different lanes
A transit temperature logger records a distribution, and time above a threshold matters as much as peak temperature. That is the argument for logging rather than guessing.
Yes — reconstitution date on the vial. It is the number you will want and cannot reconstruct.
A transit temperature logger records a distribution, and time above a threshold matters as much as peak temperature.
nils_ferreira is right that the pack failing is not the material failing. Two separate claims.
Careful. "The cold chain failed" is a strong claim and the evidence you have is a warm box.
A stability statement is only meaningful with its conditions attached: temperature, duration, light exposure, and whether it covers powder or solution. Ask which.
That is a lane problem rather than a packaging problem, and the fixes are different.
the door shelf is the worst place in the fridge