As I said recently, I think of expiration dates as general guidelines for when I should use food, and then, how I should prepare it. My husband, on the other hand, is more likely to follow those dates.
On Monday, I linked to an article from Slate.com about how, well, I was right, and that food is generally safe for consumption past those little stamped dates. I also emailed it to my husband. He responded with this article about using expired foods to save money may not be worth the cost of gastronomical distress.
I thought that I should share it with you, as well. You know, present the other side of the argument and all. It's true, though. I wouldn't want to risk my health to save a few bucks, because in the long run, illness would end up costing more.
I do want to highlight a small portion of the article he sent me:
Sniff tests, as well as checking for any color changes, are usually good indicators of a food's safeness.
Many expiration dates are not symbolic of when the food actually expires, but simply a date that indicates how long before the food's characteristics change. They are also used as a suggestion of "best when used by" dates, or "sell by" dates for grocery stores. -Ashley Holstrom
Felt nice to see that in print. I am a big fan of the sniff test. A caution, though, sniff and sight tests are not fool-proof, and if you are uneasy about eating something, don't.
Here's an interesting site that will tell you how safe something is to consume after the stated expiration date.