S
Sam
New member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2025
- Messages
- 4
- Points
- 3
Please explain validation vs verification!
plus how often to do it. thanks.
plus how often to do it. thanks.
-
Welcome to our Product Safety & STC Forum
A dynamic community dedicated to sharing knowledge and fostering discussions on all aspects of food and related products safety. Here, you can connect with experts and enthusiasts alike to exchange ideas, ask questions, and find valuable insights on maintaining the highest standards in food safety practices. While our forum is a great place for initial advice and information, more comprehensive guidance is available through our specialised training programs and our expert sister consultancy services, QTC. We invite you to explore the wealth of resources and expertise that our community and professional services have to offer.
Cathy Gladwin
Administrator
Staff member
@Sam - of course. Often the problem isn't mixing up the words - it's sites doing solid verification (the daily checks) and then having nothing on file for the initial validation because the kit was installed ages ago and nobody documented it then.
We've started recommending sites do a "validation audit" of their critical kit when they take over a site or change a process - basically going back and asking, what evidence do we actually have that this metal detector / cook step does what we say it does? Sometimes the manufacturer data is enough, sometimes it really isn't. So doing validation now on existing product/ process or equipment can be called a "retrospective validation" and you can certainly incorporate the years of verification data you've got already to show capability.
On re-validation timing, the trigger is change. Either a deliberate change - or look for "drift" in key parameters over time (hence the value of trending data wherever possible.
There are excellent discussions elsewhere in this forum on the topic - please do search for the terms to see other threads.
We've started recommending sites do a "validation audit" of their critical kit when they take over a site or change a process - basically going back and asking, what evidence do we actually have that this metal detector / cook step does what we say it does? Sometimes the manufacturer data is enough, sometimes it really isn't. So doing validation now on existing product/ process or equipment can be called a "retrospective validation" and you can certainly incorporate the years of verification data you've got already to show capability.
On re-validation timing, the trigger is change. Either a deliberate change - or look for "drift" in key parameters over time (hence the value of trending data wherever possible.
There are excellent discussions elsewhere in this forum on the topic - please do search for the terms to see other threads.