Under-sevens should not drink ‘slushies', food safety watchdog warns
The popular summer treat should also be limited to no more than 350ml – roughly the amount of a fizzy drink can – a day for children aged seven to 10, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) said.
'Very high' levels of exposure to glycerol – which typically occurs when a child consumes several slushies in a short space of time – can cause shock, very low blood sugar levels and loss of consciousness, the watchdog said.
It advised parents and caregivers to ask sellers if drinks contain glycerol and review product labels or signage at the point of sale.
The FSA said consumers should avoid products if they are unsure about ingredients and seek medical advice if a child develops symptoms.
If a child becomes unwell with headaches, nausea or vomiting soon after consuming slush ice drinks, the caregiver should immediately give them drinks or food containing sugar and call 111 for medical advice.
Urgent medical attention should be sought by calling 999 if a child becomes drowsy or confused.
The advice also applies to ready-to-drink slush ice drinks with glycerol in pouches and home kits containing glycerol slush concentrates.
The FSA has asked retailers to support its advice by not offering free refills to children aged under 10.
It has also reminded manufacturers of slush ice drink concentrates to use only the minimum amount of glycerol necessary to achieve the frozen effect.
The FSA issued the revised guidance ahead of an expected seasonal spike in slush ice drink sales at children's indoor play areas, leisure facilities and outdoor events over the summer holidays.
FSA chief scientific adviser Professor Robin May said: 'As we head into the summer holidays, we want parents to be aware of the potential risks associated with slush ice drinks containing glycerol.
'While these drinks may seem harmless and side-effects are generally mild, they can, especially when consumed in large quantities over a short time, pose serious health risks to young children.
'That's why we're recommending that children under seven should not consume these drinks at all, and children aged seven to 10 should have no more than one 350ml serving.
'We're working closely with industry to ensure appropriate warnings are in place wherever these drinks are sold, but in the meantime we are asking parents and carers to take extra care when buying drinks for young children, particularly during warmer months when consumption of 'slushies' typically increases.'
There have been nine confirmed cases of glycerol intoxication in young children requiring hospitalisation over the past three years in the UK, with seven additional potential cases reported in the media.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Hospital worker arrested over assault of patient in Northampton
A member of staff at a psychiatric hospital has been arrested in connection with an alleged assault on a Police said a woman, from Northampton, was arrested on suspicion of assault and ill-treatment or wilful neglect following an incident on 29 June and has been released on bail. St Andrew's Healthcare in Northampton, which is used by the NHS, said it had suspended a number of staff and launched an investigation into the hospital said it was "taking urgent steps to reinforce high-quality care across all wards" after NHS England restricted new referrals to the hospital. A Northamptonshire Police spokesman said: "Detectives are investigating a report of an assault which is alleged to have taken place at St Andrew's Hospital, Northampton, on 29 June.""Due to the vulnerability of the victim in this case, officers conducting inquiries as part of this investigation have been in contact with the CQC and local safeguarding leads," they added. St Andrew's Healthcare is a charity that cares for people with complex mental health hospital cares for about 600 patients and employs more than 4,000 people across four locations. Restricted referrals The CQC said it had carried out an inspection of inpatient services at the hospital on 11 July. A spokesman for the regulator said: "As a result, CQC took action requiring [St Andrew's Healthcare] to make immediate, specific improvements around safety. "They are being monitored closely to make sure this happens, and a report containing the full findings from the inspection will be published on CQC's website when the usual quality assurance processes have been completed," they added. NHS England said St Andrew's Healthcare looked after patients with "very complex mental health needs from all over the UK". "The safety of patients is our first priority and commissioners working together with the CQC have restricted referrals to St Andrew's Northampton site," it England said it had "taken immediate action together with St Andrew's to ensure the charity keeps patients safe, meets contractual obligations, and prioritises a targeted programme of support which operates in line with CQC requirements". Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Resident doctors' strike undermines union movement, Wes Streeting says
A strike by resident doctors 'enormously undermines the entire trade union movement', Wes Streeting has argued, urging them not to join industrial action on Friday morning. In an article for the Guardian, the health secretary says the decision by the British Medical Association (BMA) to push for new strikes in England immediately after receiving a pay rise of 22% to cover 2023-24 and 2024-25 is unreasonable and unprecedented. Taking aim squarely at the leadership of the BMA, which represents the medics formerly known as junior doctors, Streeting condemns their demand for a fresh 29% rise over the next few years. He says that while there was 90% backing for the strike, it was on a turnout of just over 55% of members. Streeting says the move to strike after the offer of a 5.4% pay rise for 2025-26, was rushed into and is 'bitterly disappointing' amid efforts to improve NHS services. 'There was a deal here to be done,' he writes. 'Instead, the BMA leadership's decision to not even consider postponing these strikes will place an enormous burden on their colleagues, and hit the recovery we can all see our health service is making. 'Not only that, it enormously undermines the entire trade union movement. No trade union in British history has seen its members receive a such a steep pay rise only to immediately respond with strikes – even when a majority of their members didn't even vote to strike. This action is unprecedented, and it is unreasonable.' The BMA argues that resident doctors have seen their pay fall by a much greater amount in real terms since 2008-09 than the rest of the population. 'Doctors are not worth less than they were 17 years ago, when austerity policies began driving wages down. We're simply asking for that value to be restored,' it said. Streeting says resident doctors have privately contacted him to express their dismay at the decision to strike, saying they 'feel the BMA's leaders are out of lockstep with not just patients but most resident doctors themselves'. The health secretary urges doctors to defy their union and not join in the strike, which runs until 7am next Wednesday. 'I am urging resident doctors to not follow the BMA leadership, who I do not believe are representing the best interests of their members, any further down this path as strikes begin on Friday at 7am,' he writes. The public have been urged to keep coming forward for NHS care during the strike, and NHS England has urged hospital chief executives to keep routine operations and appointments and only reschedule if there is a risk to patient safety. A Department of Health and Social Care blog noted that the NHS was 'taking a different approach' after learning lessons from previous strikes, and would avoid cancelling planned appointments for illnesses such as cancer because this posed 'a risk to patients too'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion On Wednesday, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges urged the BMA to suspend its guidance to resident doctors that they do not have to share their intentions to strike with their employers – as is their entitlement under employment law – to enable hospitals to better plan. It is understood that in previous strikes, healthcare leaders filled rota gaps of unknown size by overstaffing and cancelling procedures, with the result that there was insufficient work for some highly paid consultants. Fewer resident doctors are expected to go on strike on Friday than in the previous round of industrial action that started in 2023 after the BMA achieved a smaller mandate in the strike ballot. Of 48,000 members, 55% voted, of whom 90% supported industrial action – representing less than half of members – compared with a turnout of 71.25% in 2023, of whom 43,440 (or 98.37%) voted to go on strike. The numbers of striking doctors is expected to vary between hospitals and trusts, with anticipated staff rota gaps filled locally by consultants, agency doctors and other NHS staff. Hospital leaders will monitor demand and if they are overwhelmed with patients they will have contingency plans in place, for example cancelling some appointments to prioritise urgent and emergency care, calling in extra bank or agency staff, or requesting derogations – where resident doctors are called in to work – with the BMA. The Health Service Journal (HSJ) reported that the NHS England chief, Sir Jim Mackey, had told trust leaders to crack down on resident doctors' ability to earn money during the strike by working locum shifts.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
This unnecessary doctors' strike will hurt patients, the NHS and doctors themselves. Pull back: don't do it
Over the past 15 years, NHS staff have had a torrid time: they have been overstretched, buffeted by constant chaos and a chronic lack of investment. This government inherited a situation in which too many staff were burnt out, demoralised and simply done in. It's why one of my first acts as health and social care secretary was to get round the table, end the last resident doctor strikes and provide above inflation pay rises for all NHS staff, including a 22.3% rise for resident doctors (plus another 5.4% this year) – the biggest pay hike across the whole public sector. Since then, I've worked closely with NHS staff to deliver record investment and much-needed reforms to the NHS. From getting waiting lists down to hiring 2,000 more GPs, from bringing in new tech and equipment to making staff's lives easier, to starting the shift from sickness to prevention – we are making real progress. When the prime minister launched our 10-year health plan earlier this month, NHS staff celebrated it. I knew from the hundreds of staff that were part of our engagement process – from doctors to nurses, health visitors to consultants, porters to midwives – that they were hungry for change. But their optimism, energy and ambition showed just how much we will be able to achieve if we work together, and the exciting future we can build. That is why the decision by the British Medical Association's resident doctors committee to rush into completely unnecessary strikes is so bitterly disappointing. Not only have we started turning the NHS around, we did it hand-in-hand. The government proposed a range of measures to massively improve the working conditions doctors face – from tackling the costs of mandatory exams, to dealing with exhausting rotations that involve doctors pinging from hospital to hospital, to tackling bottlenecks by bringing in more specialist training places. There was a deal here to be done. Instead, the BMA leadership's decision to not even consider postponing these strikes will place an enormous burden on their colleagues, and hit the recovery we can all see our health service is making. Not only that, it enormously undermines the entire trade union movement. No trade union in British history has seen its members receive such a steep pay rise only to immediately respond with strikes – even when a majority of their members didn't even vote to strike. This action is unprecedented, and it is unreasonable. My focus now is on doing everything to minimise harm to patients. This government is doing all it can to minimise the impact on patients from this strike, including trying to keep as much scheduled care as we can on track, as well as urgent and emergency care. The BMA leadership would rather we just cancel those appointments because they don't recognise that someone with cancer, for example, who has a scheduled operation could end up in a far worse place if surgery is postponed. It is not for them to determine whether they think the bar for patient pain is high enough. This government will prioritise patients and do everything we can to protect them. All the same, these actions won't just cause disruption, anxiety and patient harm. They are likely to cost a huge amount of money, which the NHS simply can't afford. Instead of working with us on their conditions to put money back into the pockets of resident doctors, the BMA committee put their fingers in their ears and rushed out to strike. I know from the many resident doctors who have reached out to me, and those I've met since I became health and social care secretary, that they feel the BMA's leaders are out of step not just with patients, but most resident doctors themselves. It is hardly surprising a majority of resident doctors did not vote for this strike. So I am urging resident doctors to not follow the BMA leadership, who I do not believe are representing the best interests of their members, any further down this path as strikes begin on Friday at 7am. Wes Streeting is secretary of state for health and social care
