Breyers Urgently Recalls Thousands of Ice Cream Tubs—Is Your Favorite Flavor Affected?
Check your freezer ASAP. Unilever Manufacturing, Inc., has issued a recall of a popular Breyers ice cream flavor due to a packaging error resulting in an undeclared allergen, according to a report by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA).
Breyers' Rocky Road ice cream—a chocolate ice cream with marshmallow and chocolate-covered almond pieces—was mistakenly packaged in a "Chocolate Truffle" tub with a "Rocky Road" lid, triggering the recall. The FDA has classified the recall, involving 6,668 cases, as Class II, indicating that the affected product "may cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences."
The recalled ice cream was packaged in 1.5-quart cartons with a best-by date of July 10, 2026, UPC 077567457288, and lot code JUL1026GB3. The product was sold at retail locations across the U.S. The tub says the product "may contain tree nuts," while the lid says it contains almonds. Because of the carton mix-up, Breyers issued the recall.
The FDA requires that allergens, specifically nuts, be listed on the packaging. A tree nut allergy can cause a range of symptoms, from mild to severe, including skin reactions like hives and itching, digestive issues like nausea and vomiting, and respiratory symptoms like wheezing and difficulty breathing, according to the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. In severe cases, it can trigger anaphylaxis, a life-threatening condition requiring immediate medical attention.
Don't eat the recalled ice cream if you have nut allergies or sensitivities. Throw it away or return it to the place of purchase for a refund or replacement. The ice cream is safe to consume for those who do not have nut allergies or sensitivities.
Read the original article on Martha Stewart
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
There's a new blood test for Alzheimer's. Here's everything you need to know.
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently cleared a blood test that detects signs of Alzheimer's disease in the brain, according to multiple studies. This is the first-ever blood test available for this common form of dementia. Here's how the new blood test works and why it could be useful to patients. Alzheimer's disease is on the rise, in part because the age group most prone to dementia is growing larger. In the U.S., an estimated 7.2 million Americans ages 65 and older are living with Alzheimer's dementia in 2025. The percentage of affected people increases with age: About 5% of people ages 65 to 74 have Alzheimer's, compared with more than 33% of people ages 85 and older. At the point when a doctor has verified that a patient has cognitive decline, the blood test can be used in place of standard tests to see if they likely have Alzheimer's. Previously, gold-standard methods of diagnosing Alzheimer's have been more invasive and expensive, involving positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use radioactive substances; and lumbar punctures, (also called spinal taps) during which a clinician uses a needle to sample spinal fluid from the low back. Clinicians also sometimes use MRIs or CT scans to rule out other causes of cognitive decline. The new test measures the ratio of two proteins in human blood, and this ratio correlates with the presence or absence of amyloid plaques, a primary sign of Alzheimer's found in the brain. For people experiencing memory lapses that might be due to Alzheimer's, the first step is to see their primary care physician (PCP), who should do a cognitive test. If there are signs of cognitive impairment, the patient would then be referred to a neurologist for an in-depth evaluation. Both dementia specialists and PCPs will be able to order this blood test to help with diagnosis, said Dr. Gregg Day, a neurologist with the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida; Day led a study of the blood test published in June in the Journal of the Alzheimer's Association. A study published in 2024 in JAMA found that whether the test was ordered by a PCP or specialist, it was equally accurate at confirming suspected Alzheimer's diagnoses. PCPs could use the test results to decide whether to refer patients to a specialist, who could prescribe treatments such as lecanemab or donanemab, Day said. Or the PCP could personally prescribe a medicine like donepezil, which can help improve mental function in Alzheimer's. With FDA clearance, Medicare and private health insurance providers alike are expected to cover the new blood test, Day said. The test — called the "Lumipulse G pTau217/ß-Amyloid 1-42 Plasma Ratio" — is intended for people ages 55 and older who show signs and symptoms of cognitive decline that have been confirmed by a clinician. The test is designed for the early detection of amyloid plaques associated with Alzheimer's disease. (Amyloid plaques are unusual clumps found between brain cells and made up of a type of protein called beta-amyloid.) Related: Man nearly guaranteed to get early Alzheimer's is still disease-free in his 70s — how? Early detection is important, said Dr. Sayad Ausim Azizi, clinical chief of behavioral neurology and memory disorders at the Yale School of Medicine. That's because the Alzheimer's brain is like a rusty engine — the plaque is like rust settling onto the engine, interfering with the wheels' ability to turn, Azizi told Live Science. There are FDA-approved treatments that act like oil, helping the wheels to turn, but the medication does not remove the rust itself, he said. Available therapies can slow down the degradation of the brain by about 30% to 40%, studies show, so the patient can retain function for longer. "If you're driving now and living independently and you don't take the medicine, it's likely in five years you won't be able to do all these things," Azizi said, providing a hypothetical example. "If you take the medicine, the five years are extended to eight." If adopted as intended, the new blood test could help more people access these treatments sooner. The test is not recommended for the purposes of screening the general population. It is intended only for people who have been found by a doctor to exhibit signs of Alzheimer's disease, Day and Azizi emphasized. Some amount of amyloid is present in the brain during healthy aging, so its presence doesn't guarantee someone will later have Alzheimer's. If the test detects signs of amyloid plaques 20 years before any cognitive symptoms surface, Azizi explained, it would not make sense to treat the patient at that time. "The treatments are not 100% benign," he added. To receive lecanemab, for example, patients must be able to receive an infusion every two weeks at first and every four weeks later on; donanemab is given every four weeks. Both medications can come with infusion-related reactions, such as headache, nausea and vomiting. Rarely, the treatment donanemab can cause life-threatening allergic reactions, and both lecanemab and donanemab have been tied to rare cases of brain swelling or bleeding in the brain. These latter side effects are related to "amyloid-related imaging abnormalities," which are structural abnormalities that appear on brain scans. The new test can give false positives, meaning a person can potentially test positive when they don't actually have Alzheimer's. That's because the signs of amyloid that the tests look for can be tied to other conditions. For instance, amyloid buildup in the brain could be a sign the kidneys are not functioning optimally, Day said, so he recommends also doing a blood test for kidney function when ordering the Alzheimer's blood test. The Mayo Clinic study included about 510 people, 246 of whom showed cognitive decline; the blood test confirmed 95% of those with cognitive symptoms had Alzheimer's. About 5.3% of cases showed a false negative on the blood test, while 17.6% of cases gave a false positive, Day said. Most of the false-positive patients still had Alzheimer's-like changes in their brains, but their symptoms were ultimately attributed to other diseases, such as Lewy body dementia, Day said. The Mayo study found that the blood test helped doctors distinguish Alzheimer's from these other forms of dementia. As is true of many clinical trials, evaluations of the test have primarily included populations that are healthier than average, Day said. These individuals are not only healthier at baseline, but are more likely to have health insurance and be white and non-Hispanic. So when the blood test is used in a broader population, there may be people with sleep apnea or kidney disease who test positive despite not having Alzheimer's, Day said. Some people with these health problems may also experience memory issues or cognitive impairment that's not caused by Alzheimer's disease. If the blood test points to amyloid buildup, doctors could order additional tests and ask patients about their sleep to help rule out these other possibilities. RELATED STORIES —Could vaccines prevent and treat Alzheimer's disease? —Study unravels whole new layer of Alzheimer's disease —Alzheimer's comes in at least 5 distinct forms, study reveals The test will give researchers a more precise idea of how a patient's clinical symptoms relate to the findings on their blood test, Azizi said. "It's a great way of using a biomarker [measurable sign of disease] in the blood to make an earlier diagnosis to give a drug" to slow disease progression, he said. Azizi added that this blood test could help track whether a treatment for Alzheimer's disease is working, which would be useful both for patients receiving approved medicines and those in trials of new drugs. Looking forward, researchers will also be able to evaluate how well blood-based testing works in more diverse populations, Day noted. This article is for informational purposes only and is not meant to offer medical advice.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Your Favorite Herb Could Soon Become a Key Treatment for Alzheimer's
Scientists have engineered diAcCA, a stable oral drug derived from carnosic acid in rosemary, intended to combat Alzheimer's by reducing inflammation and oxidative stress in the brain. In preclinical mouse studies, diAcCA has restored memory function, increased synaptic density, and reduced key Alzheimer's biomarkers, including amyloid-β and phosphorylated-tau proteins. The drug activates solely in inflamed brain areas and uses a compound already deemed safe by the FDA, potentially streamlining the path to human clinical trials and allowing for combination use with existing research shows that rosemary has more benefits than just enhancing the aroma and flavor of your next roast. It turns out that it may also serve as a secret ingredient in the fight against Alzheimer's disease, too. In February, researchers from The Scripps Research Institute published findings from their study on a new compound called diAcCA, which they designed as an oral medication that could one day hopefully help treat Alzheimer's disease. As the researchers explain, diAcCA is derived from carnosic acid (CA), a natural antioxidant found in rosemary and sage, which is already known to reduce inflammation and oxidative stress—two factors strongly linked to Alzheimer's progression in previous studies. The authors explained in a statement that carnosic acid works by activating enzymes in the body's "natural defense system." In its purest state, this acid is too unstable to serve as a viable drug therapy. However, they managed to create a stable form known as diAcCA, which they noted, once consumed, converts to carnosic acid in the gut and is then absorbed into the bloodstream. Their work, published in the journal Antioxidants, demonstrated that in mouse models, diAcCA could deliver therapeutic doses of carnosic acid to the brain, resulting in improved "memory and synaptic density." Their analysis also revealed a significant decrease in inflammation in the brain following treatment. 'By combating inflammation and oxidative stress with this diAcCA compound, we actually increased the number of synapses in the brain,' Stuart Lipton, MD, PhD, senior author and professor at Scripps, shared. 'We also took down other misfolded or aggregated proteins such as phosphorylated-tau and amyloid-β, which are thought to trigger Alzheimer's disease and serve as biomarkers of the disease process.' And perhaps most compelling of all, the scientists noted that the drug is activated solely by the inflammation it targets, making it active only in areas of the brain that combat inflammatory damage, thereby limiting side effects. Related: Regularly Eating Breakfast Could Shield You Against Age-Related Brain Changes, Study Finds 'We did multiple different tests of memory, and they were all improved with the drug,' Lipton added. 'And it didn't just slow down the decline; it improved virtually back to normal.' There's also more good news for these researchers. They noted that carnosic acid is already listed on the US Food and Drug Administration's 'generally regarded as safe' (GRAS) list, which could make clinical trials involving humans easier to conduct, as the ingredient itself wouldn't require additional FDA approval. According to Lipton, DiAcCA has the potential to work well in tandem with other Alzheimer's treatments, adding that 'it could make existing amyloid antibody treatments work better by taking away or limiting their side effects." He is not stopping at Alzheimer's, though. Lipton hopes to explore its use for other inflammatory disorders, including type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and Parkinson's disease in the future as well. Read the original article on Food & Wine
Boston Globe
4 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants health agencies to use a lot more AI. After the MAHA report, experts have some concerns
Advertisement And with the apparent inclusion of material imagined by AI, referred to as hallucinations, in the 'Make America Healthy Again' report, they see an ominous sign for the administration's ability to deploy it safely. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'If they were proceeding more apace, and I'm not talking about glacial government pace, I'm talking about responsible pace, this wouldn't happen,' said Oren Etzioni, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington and entrepreneur who studies AI. 'The presence of these embarrassing missteps just shows that it's amateur hour.' Kennedy has expressed ambitious but vague plans, usually in the context of cutting costs. He has outlined his vision during several congressional hearings, including one to replace the use of animals in experimental testing and some steps in clinical trials. 'We're phasing out most animal studies . . . because we can accomplish a lot of those goals on safety and efficacy with AI technology,' Kennedy said. Advertisement He also mentioned using AI to analyze data that HHS and other agencies have collected on patients, such as people on Medicare and Medicaid. He said they've recruited experts to 'transform our agency for a central hub for AI.' So far, the Food and Drug Administration has announced computer and AI modeling. 'In the long-term (3-5 years), FDA will aim to make animal studies the exception rather than the norm for pre-clinical safety/toxicity testing,' the FDA said in its road map. But the mistakes in the 'Make America Healthy Again' report have experts skeptical of HHS's ability to use AI correctly. The report cited sources that do not exist and had garbled footnotes, The agency declined to answer definitively whether AI was used on the report and why it contained nonexistent citations, but rather only highlighted the substance of the report. It also did not offer specifics about protocols for responsible AI use. 'HHS is addressing the risk of AI-generated errors through rigorous validation, human oversight, and strict quality controls,' a spokesperson said in a statement. 'AI tools are designed to support — not replace — expert judgment.' Advertisement Experts say the specifics of how AI is implemented will bethe true measure of whether the efforts at HHS will succeed or end up being harmful. 'I'm actually deeply optimistic about what [AI] can do in a lot of areas, including the ones that the secretary mentioned,' said Ziad Obermeyer, a physician and researcher at the University of California Berkeley who studies AI in biomedicine. 'What my research has shown is that it actually comes down to some of the really boring details that make the difference between a good, powerful algorithm that helps people, and one that really messes things up.' Republicans who work on AI issues in the Senate supported Kennedy's goals but also agreed on the importance of rolling it out with the right protections. 'This is going to be the future,' said Indiana Senator Todd Young. 'I mean, we'd be doing something wrong if, if the head of our health agency wasn't talking about using AI.' The two general use cases that Kennedy has mentioned, replacing steps in clinical trials and analyzing patient data, have some potential issues in common, including that AI can generate false information. But they also have risks unique to each case. Privacy, for example, is a serious concern with patient data. If not properly stripped of identifying factors, even supposedly anonymized data can be re-identified, as has happened in some cases. 'The most secret private information that people have is their health care data, and so AI should not be used in any way that does not have the strongest possible safeguards,' said Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, a Democrat. 'We could have an absolute privacy catastrophe.' Advertisement Harvard Law School professor I. Glenn Cohen, who studies medical ethics and AI, said that the idea holds great potential, but that the administration would need to be very transparent about how it is protecting data and would be wise to run smaller pilot studies first. 'The 'move fast and break things' ethos of Silicon Valley may be appropriate in some parts of life — I don't really care if you're doing it for the order of Instagram postings," Cohen said. 'But it's not a philosophy we advocate for physicians or an attitude I think most people want health care to take.' The key limitation of AI is that it is only as good as the dataset used to build it. In specific areas where scientific data is really good and outcomes are predictable, such as in the structure of proteins, scientists have built powerful AI tools. AI can also help doctors and patients assess symptoms. But those are different from the discovery of new information, experts say, which is what a lot of science and clinical trials for novel treatments are designed to explore. Allison Coffin is a researcher at Creighton University who studies hearing loss, including that caused by certain medicines. She uses mostly zebra fish in her work, but also rodents. She says her lab is working on AI tools to help identify potential toxins in order to conduct more targeted research. But, she said, AI would always be used as an idea generator for testing in animals, not to replace them. 'That's an excellent case for AI, because AI can rapidly assess millions of potential drug structures. But you would still want to test their efficacy for new therapies in an animal,' Coffin said. 'I would never want to take a medication that hadn't been given to a living creature before, and I would think most people wouldn't. Do we want to be the first to take medication because a computer model says that it's safe?' Advertisement Other scientists questioned the ability of the government to do the cutting-edge research necessary after the administration's deep cuts to research funding and staff. 'Honestly I'm struggling for what to say,' wrote Sean Eddy, a Harvard scientist who works on building computer models for biology and genomic research. 'I just don't see how it makes sense for HHS to talk about delivering innovative technological breakthroughs while they're destabilizing and belittling the US scientific research enterprise. . . . Every lab at Harvard that does this kind of research, including my own, has had all their federal funding terminated.' Experts also question whether Kennedy understands where AI technology actually is today versus its potential capacities. Many cited cautionary tales of much lower-stakes AI deployment gone wrong, such as companies that 'Doing things like simulating an entire body in order to save clinical trials is just grossly unrealistic where we sit right now,' said Gary Marcus, a professor emeritus at New York University and critic of AI enthusiasm. 'If we're lucky, we can do it in 40 [years], but we certainly can't now. That's just a pipe dream.' Advertisement Tal Kopan can be reached at
