Second pass at: A reconstituted vial's beyond-use date and the reasoning behind common figures

Second pass at: A reconstituted vial's beyond-use date and the reasoning behind common figures Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did.

Something changed and I would like to know whether it should have.

Same compound, same supplier, same technique, 3 weeks apart, and the experience is not the same. I have ruled out the obvious differences and I am left with the ones I cannot rule out from here.

Before anyone suggests it: yes, I have the dates written down, and yes, I checked them rather than remembering them.

Adding the measurement that the opening post says would settle it.

A beyond-use date on a home preparation is an inference rather than a measurement. It can be a reasonable inference and it should be described as one.

Anyone with a larger sample, please post it.

Temperature excursions: if a vial sat at room temperature for a time, the question is whether the excursion was long enough to cause damage. Hours at room temperature is usually low risk. Days to weeks raises the risk. If you are unsure, contacting the supplier is more informative than guessing.

I read post #5 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Light protection is easy and cheap. The original carton exists for a reason and a vial stored in it is protected without anybody having to think about it again.