Not checking use-by dates and consuming foods past the use-by dates

Eating food past the use-by date presents a significant risk of foodborne illnesses to consumers(footnote 1). While it was challenging to observe whether use-by dates were checked by participants in the Kitchen Life 2 (KL2) study, the use of interviews and survey data, in combination with observations, indicates adherence to use-by dates were limited in households and, to a lesser extent, food business operators (FBOs). In the survey, most household participants (53 out of 70) claimed to eat foods past the use-by date with ‘occasional consumption’ being the most common self-reported behaviour. In terms of adherence to use-by dates, 6 participants said they ‘always’ ate food they bought by the use-by date and 7 said they ‘always’ froze food prior to the use-by date. For FBOs, survey data was not collected concerning adherence to use-by dates. In interviews, FBOs generally claimed to use or manage food in advance of a use-by date and therefore regarded consuming food past a use-by date less of a relevant issue(footnote 2). However, while infrequent, in interviews FBOs also mentioned that they would occasionally serve foods to customers, including meat, that had past the use-by date, provided a chef had judged it as safe to eat(footnote 3). Not checking and/or consuming foods past the use-by date were driven by a wide variety of factors. In households, these were: poor understanding that use-by dates alone indicate food is no longer safe to eat. Some participants thought that best-before labels also indicated this. This enabled the consumption of food past a use-by date (psychological capability). overcrowding in the fridge making it hard to see food items, and the label legibility, both of which were barriers to checking use-by dates (physical opportunity). These were reinforced by the following contextual factors(footnote 4): beliefs about the risks of foodborne illness resulting from eating food past the use-by date, which could be a barrier or enabler to the consumption of food past a use-by date (reflective motivation). social norms and values concerning food waste, such as wasting money or the environmental impact, which enabled the consumption of foods past the use-by date (social opportunity). affective processes triggered through the smell, appearance, and taste of spoiled foods, that were often used in preference to use-by dates, and which could enable the consumption of food past a use-by date (automatic motivation). Most FBOs said they checked use-by dates, but a variety of other factors influenced whether foods were consumed past the use-by date. These were: social opportunity and a culture of deference to chefs, who had the main say on whether foods were safe to consume, which could enable the consumption of food past a use-by date (social opportunity). mixed understanding of the difference between use-by and best before dates (psychological capability). This was reinforced by the following contextual factors(footnote 5): beliefs about the effectiveness of different methods, such as smell, look and taste, to judge whether food is safe to eat, which could enable the consumption of food past a use-by date (reflective motivation). affective processes triggered through the smell, appearance, and taste of spoiled foods, together with trusting a ‘chef’s intuition’, which could enable the consumption of food past a use-by date (automatic motivation). Behaviours to target for potential interventions: for households and FBOs, the desired behaviour was to use, cook or freeze all foods in advance of their use-by date. For households, interventions could also focus on meal planning (for example, batch cooking and freezing foods), as this is in line with FSA guidance and some KL2 participants preferred to do this rather than waste food or eat food past the use-by date. Interventions could also focus on not using sensorial cues (such as sight or smell) to judge if food is safe to eat, as this was a common practice. This was often based on the belief that sensorial cues are better than the use-by date and beliefs around the likelihood of getting ill.