Memorize IBQH001 Exam Braindumps questions before you go for test

Even if you go through all IBQH001 course books, the situations asked in actual tests are totally different. Our IBQH001 practice questions contains every one of the interesting inquiries and answers that are not found in the course books. Practice with IBQH001 VCE test system and you will be certain for the genuine IBQH001 test.

Exam Code: IBQH001 Practice exam 2022 by team
International Board for Quality in Healthcare
IBQH International Practice Test
Killexams : IBQH International practice test - BingNews Search results Killexams : IBQH International practice test - BingNews Killexams : How to Use practice questions to Study for the LSAT No result found, try new keyword!Likewise, it’s a bad idea to take the LSAT without first training with real practice tests. That said, very few athletes run daily marathons. Instead, they vary their training with shorter ... Tue, 01 Nov 2022 19:56:00 -0500 text/html Killexams : ASE offering free practice questions through January

LEESBURG, Va. — As the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) concludes its 50th anniversary year, the association is is offering service professionals the opportunity to take an official ASE practice test at no charge.

To receive a free practice test voucher, individuals should login or create a myASE account at From the store tab, they should click on ASE practice test Vouchers and then practice test Voucher. Check the box for practice test voucher, enter the code ASE50th and click apply to get the free voucher.

An email containing the voucher code will be sent to the email address in the participants myASE account. The deadline to request a free practice test voucher is Jan. 31.

Once an automotive service professional receives their practice test voucher, it can be redeemed at and can be used for the A1-A8, C1, G1, L1, P2, T2, T4, T6 or T8 practice tests.

Individuals have 60 days from the date they redeem a voucher code for a practice test to complete their review test. It is possible to stop at any point and return later to complete the test by entering the same code.

Tue, 06 Dec 2022 03:56:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : International Practice of Maritime Cooperation and Governance

SANYA, China, Nov. 9, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- On November 3-4, 2022, the "2022 Ocean Cooperation and Governance Forum" held by National Institute for South China Sea Studies(NISCSS) kicked off in Sanya, Hainan. Regarding global ocean governance, scholars from various countries have made suggestions from different perspectives, including policy, law, and security. Some scholars point out that the current problem of the lack of security mechanisms is a worldwide problem. Compared with other regions, the achievements in building mutual trust in maritime security in the South China Sea region over the past 30 years have been tremendous.

The Symposium on Global Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance 2022 Successfully Concluded in Sanya

In terms of rules and orders in the South China Sea, participants mostly focus on the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties (DOC), and the Code of Conduct(COC) negotiation. The DOC, signed by China and ten ASEAN countries in 2002, has played a crucial role in safeguarding the peace and stability in the South China Sea over a long period of time. With the opening of a new round of face-to-face negotiation and the gradual progress of the second reading. It is foreseeable that the COCnegotiation between China and 10 ASEAN member States will become one of the most important rules-established joint effort the region.

On the issue of cooperation to protect fishery resources, some scholars suggest that we can consider exploring and practicing how to establish international cooperation mechanisms through FAO to effectively combat illegal fishing activities. Fishery problems cannot be solved by one country, and science is needed to provide a basis for decision making, and cooperation is also needed to strengthen mutual trust.

On the issue of paying attention to biodiversity in response to climate change, countries need to change the mode of cooperation, and cooperation among sub-nationals is also needed in addition to national cooperation.

Japanese scholar introduced the Japanese government's promotion of ecological restoration of Tokyo Bay and said that it plans to achieve net zero carbon by 2050 and is currently conducting blue carbon activities.

ASEAN reaffirmed its blue commitment at the Brunei Leaders Summit, emphasizing the importance of regional cooperation. The blue economy implies sustainable management, conservation and use, and also includes coastal resources and ecological protection, which relies on cooperation with social groups. ASEAN leaders are aware of the importance of the blue economy.

SOURCE National Institute for South China Sea Studies, China

Tue, 08 Nov 2022 09:16:00 -0600 en-US text/html

New HUB Practice Formalizes HUB's Specialization in Professional and Executive Liability Insurance Products, Risk Solutions and Claims Services

CHICAGO, Nov. 9, 2022 /CNW/ -- Hub International Limited (HUB), a leading global insurance brokerage and financial services firm, announced today the launch of its Professional & Executive Risk (ProEx) Specialty Practice. The new practice brings together over 100 HUB specialists with executive liability, professional liability, tech/cyber, and transactional risk insurance placement capabilities, and specialized risk and claims services. Together they'll advise clients on navigating the changing risk landscape to protect their personal and organization's reputation and assets from complex insurance issues that arise from claims and litigation exposures.

Hub International Logo (PRNewsfoto/Hub International Limited)

"The HUB ProEx practice continues our strategy to provide the best resources, specialists and expertise, for public, private and nonprofit clients who are experiencing greater exposure and risk every day," said Marc Cohen, CEO and President of HUB International. "HUB's ProEx team has proven expertise in the professional, financial and executive risk areas, advising C-suite clients on their potential exposures and creating innovative insurance and risk solutions for their needs."

HUB ProEx will be led by David Garrigus who will manage the overall North American practice and growth strategy. Garrigus has nearly 20 years of experience as a broker focused on executive management and professional liability of large and complex risks. He joined HUB in 2019 as Executive Vice President and as the Regional Management Liability, Professional Liability, Cyber, and Transactional Risk Practice Leader. He will lead the practice that includes experienced former professional and executive risk attorneys to serve as a resource for HUB throughout North America.

"Today, organizations are exposed to a more complex and costly legal and regulatory environment, and the risks are only going to get more complicated," said Garrigus. "Our ProEx team has been helping these organizations delivering more comprehensive solutions that provide better placement, analytics and insights to protect them from existing and evolving threats."

HUB's ProEx practice works with clients throughout North America providing insurance, risk advice and claims advocacy, particularly in four product segments:

  • Executive Liability – Directors & Officers Liability (D&O), Fiduciary Liability, Employment Practices Liability (EPL), Crime, and Kidnap, Ransom, and Extortion

  • Professional Liability – Errors & Omissions (E&O) including Lawyers Professional, Architects & Engineers Professional, and Healthcare Professional Liability

  • Transactional Risk - Representations & Warranties, Tax Indemnity, Litigation & Contingent Risk; and

  • Cyber, Technology E&O, and Intellectual Property.

Additionally, the ProEx practice will work alongside HUB's established Specialty and industry practices to develop industry-specific placements, and advisory risk and claims guidance based on industry analytics and insights.

Learn more about the ProEx Specialty practice, here.

About HUB International

Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, Hub International Limited is a leading full-service global insurance broker and financial services firm providing risk management, insurance, employee benefits, retirement and wealth management products and services. With more than 15,000 employees in offices located throughout North America, Hub's vast network of specialists brings clarity to a changing world with tailored solutions and unrelenting advocacy, so clients are ready for tomorrow. For more information, visit Hub Media Center.

Marni Gordon
Phone: 312-279-4601
Jessica Wiltse
Phone: 312-596-7573


View original content to get multimedia:

SOURCE Hub International Limited


View original content to get multimedia:

Tue, 08 Nov 2022 23:05:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : The International Community Must Prioritize COVID Treatment and Test Access

Decades of international collaborative research, much of it funded or conducted by governments including that of the United States, enabled the rapid development of highly effective COVID mRNA vaccines. The substantial public contribution to this scientific triumph has, however, not persuaded governments to treat the vaccines as global public goods—resulting in starkly inequitable distribution that should be remembered as an epic failure for humanity.

Vaccines have been available for almost two years, yet only 20 percent of people in low-income countries have had a first shot. And almost no people in low- and middle-income countries have access to the most effective mRNA vaccines, because their production and distribution are under the monopoly control of BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna, companies to which governments have granted numerous patents and other intellectual property protections. The result has been a stark vaccine apartheid: shots and boosters of mRNA vaccines are easily available to people in wealthy nations while many people in the Global South continue to suffer the pandemic with no vaccines at all.

Governments are eager to be done with COVID, but continued outbreaks around the world—including in regions where populations of immune-suppressed people with HIV can harbor extended infections—mean a more deadly global variant could be just a few mutations away.

Access to vaccines remains crucial, but for a variety of reasons such as exact SARS-CoV2 variants’ ability to evade vaccines, attention has shifted to testing and treatment. Global policy makers need to radically change their approach to how they control the intellectual property regime not only for vaccines but also for COVID treatments and diagnostic tests. Otherwise, the moral and epidemiological failures that led to vaccine apartheid will occur again in treating and diagnosing COVID.

Consider that in clinical trials, Paxlovid reduced COVID mortality by 89 percent, and that the treatment is effective among high-risk groups, including people who are unvaccinated. A new report from the Veterans Administration health system found that treatment with Paxlovid was associated with reduced risk of long COVID regardless of vaccination status. In the United States, anyone who needs it can quickly get Paxlovid. President Biden, Anthony Fauci and many others have benefited from the drug. But if governments uphold intellectual property rules surrounding this and other antiviral treatments, hundreds of thousands of people will die unnecessarily, and multiples of that number will be severely affected by lengthy and damaging infections, hospitalization and lasting side effects. With Omicron variants that evade vaccine-induced immunity, even vaccinated people face repeated breakthrough infections.

Keeping infected people alive and out of hospitals is not only a moral imperative—it’s an economic one. Treatments and vaccines are critical for the livelihoods of billions of people in the developing world, where COVID has created increased income inequality. In these countries, people (and their families) who do not work, do not eat. It’s that simple. And there are global economic implications, of course. The spread of the new variants to China has worsened supply chain problems, exacerbating inflation around the world.

So what can be done to ensure global access to COVID treatments and tests? To start with, we cannot repeat the mistakes that fostered vaccine apartheid. To recap, a temporary waiver of the WTO’s Agreement on TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, a pact that requires governments to ensure holders of patents and other intellectual property grants have monopoly control over production of protected products) was vital for saving lives. Despite this request at the beginning of the pandemic by South Africa, India and 100 other WTO member nations, as well as support from a global coalition of religious leaders, nonprofits and public intellectuals, the European Union, U.K. and Switzerland blocked it.

And in the case of vaccines, compulsory licenses—a critical tool permitted by the WTO and intended to make sure that critical medicines are available in the midst of an epidemic—proved ineffective. (In contrast to a “voluntary license,” which is issued by a company, a compulsory license comes from a government. It means that a patent holder will be compensated by other firms that produce its patented medicine, but it cannot block more production by denying licensing in order to limit supply and keep prices high.) COVID vaccines, especially the cutting-edge mRNA vaccines, have too many intellectual-property barriers—dozens of patents, copyrights, industrial-design and trade-secret monopolies and too-complex international supply chains—to be made in a timely fashion using compulsory licenses. For instance, the lipids that are a key component are made in just a few locations and are locked behind a web of IP protections, as are other elements of these complex biologic drugs.

Had there been an IP waiver for vaccine production, there is considerable evidence that, in spite of these complexities, some producers around the world would have entered. (The opposition to the waiver, that it would be ineffective because no one could produce the drugs, is ironic: If that were the case, there would be no downside for the drug companies. Moreover, governments that provided so much money for the development of the vaccine, and holding key patents, could have pressured the companies to transfer critical technology.) Remarkably, in spite of the evidence of supply shortages and vaccine apartheid, a WTO ministerial declaration issued in June failed to waive any IP barriers.

Avoiding Treatment Apartheid

There is however the possibility that even without a full waiver, using compulsory licenses for effective treatments like Paxlovid and the many other antivirals now in the pipeline can avoid the kind of discrimination that marked vaccine availability. Paxlovid has many fewer IP barriers than vaccines do. It is also simpler to make, so technology transfer from Pfizer is not necessary. Hundreds of generic manufacturers worldwide could make it.

Since the TRIPS agreement already has a provision allowing compulsory licenses, what’s the problem? Not surprisingly, the pharmaceutical companies never liked the idea of compulsory licenses, and so are doing everything they can to make them ineffective.

There are two problems. First, TRIPS did not adequately provide for compulsory licenses to be used to produce generic medicines that can be exported for use in other countries. So South Africa, Argentina, Chile and other countries that can produce do not have sufficient demand at home to gear up production just for domestic use while small countries like Botswana, Costa Rica or Jamaica are denied generic imports. And secondly, developing-country governments and drug companies have a long history of threatening governments that issue compulsory licenses.

The June WTO ministerial decision had one meaningful provision. Article 8 of the text makes it easier to export generic vaccines—but just vaccines—if only they could be produced using compulsory licenses. Extending that permission to export to treatments and tests could make a real difference in increasing access worldwide .

Just as happened when COVID vaccines emerged, wealthy countries pre-purchased the entire supply of Paxlovid. Under the current pharmaceutical IP regime, the same will likely occur with whatever effective COVID treatment surfaces next. Limited supplies and high costs restrict the flow of COVID-19 antivirals to low- and middle-income regions. In other words, there is great need for treatments in poor countries, but “demand” in the form of orders for Paxlovid has been crushed by a lack of supply and unaffordable pricing.

Consider the effect of Pfizer’s monopoly control over production of Paxlovid: Pfizer made a deal with the UN Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) to voluntarily license 35 firms in 12 countries to make generic Paxlovid that can be sold in 96 nations. But the company has barred sales of those generics in the other 100 countries of the world with 47 percent of the world’s population and the highest COVID infection rates where the firm may think profitable sales are possible.

In some instances, Pfizer has even barred sales in a country where it has issued a license. A Dominican Republic generics firm has a license, but cannot sell doses at home. Pfizer’s deal with all 35 licensees only allows sales in the poorest countries. In the Americas, that means only Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Most African, Middle Eastern and Asian nations that are not Least Developing Countries are likewise excluded. That’s why it’s critical for companies all over the world to be able to make the treatment using a compulsory license and then export it easily.

Disappointingly, the U.S. played a negative role in the June WTO meeting: Over the opposition of most other WTO nations, the U.S. insisted the June WTO COVID deal only cover vaccines. Countries seeking a full waiver successfully pushed for the June Declaration to include a six-month timeline to decide whether to extend the export permission to treatments and disagnostic tests. Today South Africa, Indonesia, Egypt and other countries are pushing for the extension. Only a few countries flacking for Big Pharma, like Switzerland, specifically oppose it.

Immediate U.S. support will be the deciding factor. Recently, a large coalition of U.S. health, faith, consumer, human rights and labor organizations called on President Biden to support broadening the WTO deal to treatments and tests and to publicly declare that no country using compulsory licenses to produce COVID medical supplies will face U.S. threats, political attacks, or trade sanctions. Ironically, the U.S. government issued the most COVID-related compulsory licenses. Yet historically, the U.S. government has systematically attacked countries around the world that employ this WTO-authorized mechanism to Excellerate access to affordable medicine.

The Biden administration should also work with the partners of the dozens of U.S. free trade agreements and bilateral investment treaties to suspend the terms of these pacts that empower corporations to skirt domestic courts and sue governments before a panel of three corporate lawyers—often rife with conflicts of interests and serving on an ad hoc tribunal—if they believe their property rights have been violated. Through this investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, the lawyers can award the corporations unlimited sums to be paid by the country’s taxpayers, including for the loss of expected future profits. A pharmaceutical corporation need only convince the lawyers that a compulsory license or related policy violates some purported investor right granted in one of these pacts. The lawyers’ decisions are not subject to appeal and the amount awarded has no limit. ISDS tribunals have ordered governments to pay corporations more than a billion dollars in compensation.

This is not a hypothetical threat. Today in the Americas, applications for Paxlovid compulsory licenses have been filed in the Dominican Republic, Chile, Colombia and Peru, which each have free trade agreements with the U.S. that have ISDS enforcement. Pfizer, which holds the monopoly patents on the treatment, is fighting to preserve its monopoly and pricing, including by saying compulsory licenses would violate these trade agreements.

As the world pivots from vaccines to testing and treatment, there is a moment of hope and of frustration. But the “apartheid” that marked the era of vaccines will be avoided if and only if the international community insists on a WTO deal to ease exports of compulsorily licensed medicines that goes beyond vaccines and if the U.S. and other countries suspend the ability of the drug companies to sue under these noxious ISDS provisions. Without U.S. support, it won’t happen. And the U.S. can lead the way in agreeing to a trade “ceasefire” of not threatening countries that issue compulsory licenses.  The many countries and companies that will be able to produce treatments and tests must be able to sell them to the myriad of countries that can’t get adequate supplies or can’t afford Pfizer’s monopoly prices.

The lives and livelihood of millions depend on it. And so does the moral authority of the West. During the pandemic, global democracies put profits over lives, in contrast to authoritarian regimes, which showed greater solidarity to people in the Third World. We now have a chance to redeem ourselves.

This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Sun, 13 Nov 2022 22:02:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : You Can Still Get Free COVID-19 Tests Through Insurance

November 21, 2022 4:12 PM EST

Planning to gather with loved ones over the holidays? Here’s a timely reminder that every member of your family enrolled in health insurance is eligible for eight free rapid at-home COVID-19 tests every month. That goes for whatever insurance you have—whether it’s through Medicare, the Affordable Care Act marketplace, Medicaid, or your employer—because rapid-test reimbursement is still required by the federal government.

There are two main ways to purchase these tests. The first is to pick them up at a pharmacy or store that your plan designates as “in-network.” If you’re on Medicare, there’s also a partial list of the pharmacies offering over-the-counter tests here. In many cases, the advantage is that you won’t have to pay for the tests; they’ll be immediately covered. Some pharmacies, including Walgreens and CVS, also offer online programs where you can locate tests, enter your insurance information, and then pick them up in person. However, insurance companies sometimes require people to purchase tests themselves and then apply to be reimbursed.

However, insurance companies sometimes require people to purchase tests themselves—online, at a pharmacy, or from other retailers—and then apply to be reimbursed. Your plan is required to reimburse you up to $12 per test (or $24 for a box of two). Before buying, you should check your individual insurer’s requirements for reimbursement—and plan to hang on to your receipt. There are some contexts in which insurers are not required to reimburse for testing. For example, they are not legally bound to pay for ongoing tests demanded by an employer as a condition of employment.

At this point in the pandemic, at-home rapid COVID-19 tests are indispensable tools. Experts recommend taking them before gathering with other people, especially if they’re at high risk of severe disease (including those over age 65) or are not up-to-date on their vaccines. You should also test whenever you have COVID-19 symptoms, like a fever, sore throat, or runny nose, or after coming into contact with someone who has had COVID-19 in the last five days.

More Must-Reads From TIME

Contact us at

Mon, 21 Nov 2022 10:34:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : Do Covid-19 tests expire? Here’s the truth about the home kits

If you stocked up on at-home Covid-19 rapid antigen testing kits during one of the Omicron-variant surges, you could be in for a surprise when you bust them out for a pre-holiday test: an expiration date months in the past. According to the Food and Drug Administration, most at-home Covid-19 tests list an expiration date between four and six months from when they were manufactured.

Does that mean those expired tests no longer work? Here’s why the expiration date printed on the box isn’t as straightforward as you might expect.

When does my at-home, rapid test Covid test expire?

The reason the answer to “when does my at-home Covid test expire?” isn’t as straightforward as, say, when the yogurt in your fridge expires has to do with the tests’ relative novelty. The tests have only been approved for two years, and crucially, the testing they underwent before hitting the market happened in just one year. If the FDA wanted to determine the maximum length of time the test was effective before putting it on the market, it would have had to delay those tests for years.

What it did instead is take a more conservative approach: authorizing a shelf-life of four to six months and then extending the expiration date as real-world data was compiled.

In an email, a spokesperson for the California Department of Public Health told Inverse that “since initial approval, most tests have had specific extensions issued by the FDA because test companies have presented information to the FDA showing the tests work well for a longer period of time.”

How can you tell if your test still works? In January of this year, the FDA released a list of updated expiration dates for different at-home rapid Covid-19 tests.

For example, BinaxNOW rapid Covid-19 tests manufactured by Abbott have been given an updated shelf life of 15 months, as have iHealth rapid tests. FlowFlex rapid tests manufactured by ACON Laboratories have been given a shelf life of 19 months. You can find a full chart of the FDA’s updated shelf-life and expiration dates for different rapid tests here.

California’s Department of Public Health has gone even further, authorizing the use of at-home rapid tests past the FDA’s extended expiration date. Their guidance now says you can use the tests as long as the control line is “both easily visible and the color specified by the specific test instructions” after the 15-minute test-development window. In other words, if you take an expired test and the control line shows up clearly, you can consider that result as valid as an at-home rapid test that isn’t expired.

How to prolong the shelf-life of your at-home rapid Covid-19 test

A longer than initially anticipated shelf life of at-home Covid tests doesn’t mean your tests will necessarily last that long. Like medication, proper storage of Covid tests will prolong their shelf life.

If the test is exposed to very hot or cold temperatures, it will degrade faster than if it’s kept at more stable temperatures. According to the FDA, “test performance may be impacted if the test is used while it is still cold, such as being used outdoors in freezing temperatures or being used immediately after being brought inside from freezing temperatures, or in a hotter than expected environment, such as outside in the summer.”

To perform as expected, manufacturers assume the test is being performed in an environment that is roughly between 59 and 86 degrees Fahrenheit. If the test is delivered to you when it’s very hot or cold outside, the FDA advises bringing the test inside and leaving it at room temperature for at least two hours before using it.

If you’re not sure if the test is still good, the FDA suggests taking the test. “As long as the test line(s) appear as described in the instructions, you can be confident that the test is performing as it should. If the line(s) do not appear in the correct location(s) and within the correct time as shown in the test instructions when you perform the test, then the results may not be accurate, and a new test is needed to get an accurate result,” the FDA explains.

How rapid tests work and what goes bad when an at-home Covid-19 test degrades

Nate Hafer is the director of operations for the University of Massachusetts Center for Clinical and Translational Science and an assistant professor in molecular medicine at UMass Chan Medical School. He tells Inverse that the extended expiration dates make sense to him, especially in light of how the tests work.

After you swab your nostrils, you put the swab in a solution that breaks apart the sample so different proteins in the sample can be detected. In the case of rapid antigen tests, the protein they’re looking for is called the nucleocapsid protein, which is “one of the most abundant proteins in the SARS-CoV-2 virus,” Hafer says.

Once the solution has broken apart the genetic material, you put a few drops of the solution on the test strip. The strip has been painted with antibodies that, if they come into contact with the nucleocapsid protein, will change color. As the solution moves down the paper, the control line will appear regardless of whether it detects the nucleocapsid protein or not.

The various substances used in the test are fairly stable, Hafer says, which is why the tests last past the expiration date if stored properly. If they are exposed to prolonged heat or cold, Hafer says both the solution and the antibodies on the test paper could degrade.

“I would guess that the antibodies on the strip of paper are one of the more sensitive things that could be damaged by extreme heat or cold, but the solution probably has some chemicals in it that could also be influenced by extreme temperatures,” he says.

So if you come across an expired at-home test, don’t immediately throw it away. Hang on to it and the next time you need to test, make sure the control line shows up as it should. If it does, go ahead and treat it like a non-expired test. If that line looks funky, head to the store for a new one.

Mon, 14 Nov 2022 01:47:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : Stool tests like Cologuard are gaining popularity over colonoscopy. Which should you get? cannot provide a good user experience to your browser. To use this site and continue to benefit from our journalism and site features, please upgrade to the latest version of Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.

Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:05:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : Garage 56 testing at Virginia International Raceway No result found, try new keyword!Mike Rockenfeller rounds the Oak Tree Turn during Monday afternoon testing of the Garage 56 Le Mans test car at Virginia International Raceway. The event marked the second test for the Next Gen ... Tue, 15 Nov 2022 01:03:00 -0600 en-US text/html Killexams : Do Expired COVID Tests Work? Here’s the Deal, According to Experts

We’ve gotten to the point in the COVID-19 pandemic where you’re probably not stressed every single day about getting the virus—the wide availability of COVID-19 vaccines and effective treatments have thankfully made that possible. And, with that, you likely have some tests around your place for the just-in-case that may have been sitting there for a while. Here’s the thing, though: They can expire. Yep, there is a COVID test expiration date printed on your package that you may not even realize is there.

Many COVID-19 tests last for just a year or so, but the odds are high that you’ll need to use your at some point. That may or may not be before the expiration date stamped on your package passes. So…do expired COVID tests work, or do you need to toss what you thought was a perfectly good test? It’s actually a little complicated. Here’s what you need to know.

So, do expired COVID tests work?

Yes and no. To fully understand that, it’s important to explain how COVID-19 tests get an expiration date in the first place. “When tests are developed, the company will assess the test over time to make sure it’s performing with the quality standards intended,” says Thomas Russo, M.D., a professor and the chief of infectious diseases at the University at Buffalo in New York. “Whatever time frame they assess it for is the expiration date that will go on that test.”

This “doesn’t necessarily mean that the test won’t perform for a longer period of time,” Dr. Russo says—it’s just the amount of time that the test has been assessed for and what is authorized or approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Older tests are more likely to have shorter expiration dates because there were time pressures to get tests out earlier in the pandemic, when they were first developed, and only so much time since they had been created to test how long they were good for, Dr. Russo says. “However, companies kept assessing the tests over time,” he says.

As a result, “many manufacturers have received shelf life extensions by the FDA,” says infectious disease expert Amesh A. Adalja, M.D., a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

The FDA has a list online of authorized home COVID-19 tests, along with links to “updated expiration dates” so you can check to see if your test’s expiration date has been extended.

“If you have a test and it’s ‘expired’ based on what the package says, it may or may not be the most correct expiration date,” Dr. Russo says.

What happens if you use an expired test?

Again, the expiration dates are a reflection of how long the company that manufactured the test found that it was good for—or the period of time in which they were able to assess the test. With that, there’s a chance that your test will still be good beyond the expiration date listed. “Most tests will still perform past their expiration date for several weeks,” Dr. Adalja says.

If the test has truly expired “you are more likely to get a false negative,” says Jamie Alan, Ph.D., associate professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Michigan State University. “The test might be negative because the reagents or ‘ingredients’ are past their shelf life and are not working as they should,” she explains. “They are likely good past their expiration date, although how long I cannot say with any degree of certainty.”

If you have symptoms of COVID-19 and the only test you have at home is expired, Alan says you could try it. “If you get a positive, you are probably positive,” she says. “If you get a negative, it would be good to follow up with another test, either a PCR test or another rapid at-home test.”

Why do COVID tests expire?

COVID tests contain specific reagents (aka ingredients) that react with the virus, or lack thereof, from your swab, Alan explains. “These ingredients do not work forever,” she says. “This is true for medications, lab materials, and food.”

How do I know if my BinaxNOW is expired?

BinaxNOW is one of the most popular home tests out there, and it typically has an expiration date stamped on the back of the box. But, again, that may not be the most up-to-date expiration date for your test.

If you have a test with an expired date on the package, check out the FDA’s list of updated expiration dates for BinaxNOW tests to see if it’s been extended. Just keep in mind that you’ll need to have your box’s lot number handy.

But, if your test is expired—both on the box and per the FDA’s updated dating—and you want to be sure you’re getting an accurate reading, Dr. Russo says it’s “probably best to not use that test.”

This article is accurate as of press time. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic rapidly evolves and the scientific community’s understanding of the novel coronavirus develops, some of the information may have changed since it was last updated. While we aim to keep all of our stories up to date, please visit online resources provided by the CDC, WHO, and your local public health department to stay informed on the latest news. Always talk to your doctor for professional medical advice.

Tue, 06 Dec 2022 14:44:00 -0600 en-us text/html
IBQH001 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List