Urgent recall issued for popular ice cream brand for plastic contamination fears
Nearly 18,000 cartons of ice cream and frozen yogurt have been recalled for possibly containing plastic.
Wells Enterprises has recalled 22 varieties of its three-gallon tubs of frozen desserts that went to 103 distribution centers across the US.
The company based in Le Mars, Iowa, initiated the voluntary recall on April 25. But the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is a federal agency protecting public health across the nation, on May 14 upgraded the recall to Class II, which is the second-highest level for products.
Anywhere from 17 to more than 5,000 tubs of each item are under the recall. Wells Enterprises makes ice cream for popular brands including Blue Bunny and Glenview Farms.
Many of the affected items are vanilla flavored.
The item that is most impacted is Vanilla Frozen Yogurt, which has 5,280 tubs under the recall. It is followed by Glenview Farms Artificially Flavored French Vanilla Ice Cream with 2,261 tubs recalled, BIPC Flavored Ice Cream with 1,858 tubs recalled, Glenview Farms Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream with 1,573 tubs recalled, and Gordon Choice Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream with 1,080 tubs recalled.
There are also 961 tubs of Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream, 937 tubs of Planet Smoothie ZSA Vanilla Flavored Fat Free Frozen Yogurt, 726 tubs of Scooper Hero Ice Cream, 699 Ellington Farms Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream, and 569 tubs of Keith Valley Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream recalled.
In addition, there are 359 tubs of Mocha Almond Fudge Ice Cream, 320 tubs of Vanilla Bean Ice Cream with Madagascar vanilla, 280 tubs of Quick Blend Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream, 240 tubs of Country Rich Vanilla Ice Cream, and 201 tubs of Peanut Butter 'N Fudge Ice Cream recalled.
The items with a relatively fewer number recalled were Rocky Road Flavored Ice Cream with 169 tubs affected, GFGB Vanilla Bean Flavored Ice Cream with 120 tubs, GFGB 12% Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream with 109 tubs, Johnny Rockets Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream with 100 tubs, Glenview Farms Chocolate Ice Cream with 67 tubs, Cotton Candy Flavored Ice Cream with 39 tubs, and Artificially Flavored French Vanilla Ice Cream with 17 tubs.
They have best if used by dates from March to October 2026.
The FDA defines Class II as the product possibly being able to 'cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences or where the probability of serious adverse health consequences is remote'.
Le Mars was nicknamed the 'Ice Cream Capital of the World' in 1994 just because Wells Enterprises is headquartered there. Items under the recall were produced at the company's South Ice Cream Plant located in Le Mars.
The FDA classification came days after the supermarket chain Publix recalled pouches of baby food over fears of lead contamination.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Urgent recall of macadamia nuts over E.coli contamination fears
MORE: Family 'find wrong man in loved one's casket wearing his suit'
MORE: Joe Biden's 'aggressive' cancer diagnosis: Type, treatments and prognosis
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
15 hours ago
- Reuters
Four Democratic-led US states urge FDA to remove abortion pill restrictions
NEW YORK, June 5 (Reuters) - The attorneys general of New York, California, Massachusetts and New Jersey asked the Food and Drug Administration to expand access to the abortion pill mifepristone, and remove what they view as outdated and medically unnecessary restrictions. Thursday's petition by the Democratic-led states seeks to force the FDA to acknowledge what the states view as "extensive" evidence that mifepristone is safe, notwithstanding the Trump administration's general opposition to abortion. It came after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr told Congress last month he ordered FDA Commissioner Marty Makary to review the pill, and unspecified "alarming" new data suggested the government should at least change the label. Mifepristone is the first pill, followed by the drug misoprostol, for medication abortion in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and won FDA approval in 2000. Medication abortions account for more than half of U.S. abortions, though 28 states restrict access, according to the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute, which focuses on reproductive health. The petition challenges FDA requirements that mifepristone prescribers be included in national and local abortion provider lists, patients attest in writing that they intend to end their pregnancies, and pharmacies perform a variety of recordkeeping. Citing the drug's safety record, it said those rules, part of the FDA's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program, are "no longer justified by science or law," especially in states where abortion is legal and comprehensively regulated. New York Attorney General Letitia James said the rules keep mifepristone out of reach of most primary care settings. She called that problem particularly acute in rural and other areas where getting abortions often requires lengthy travel. "There is simply no scientific or medical reason to subject it to such extraordinary restrictions," James said, referring to mifepristone. "The FDA must follow the science." A spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services said FDA Commissioner Makary "will ensure gold standard science is used while incorporating practical, common-sense considerations to its regulatory processes." Many states, primarily Republican-led or leaning, have restricted or substantially eliminated abortions in the three years since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized the procedure nationwide. Last June, the Supreme Court preserved broad access to mifepristone, unanimously ruling that a group of anti-abortion organizations and doctors lacked legal standing to challenge the FDA's approval of the pill. Despite largely siding with abortion opponents, Republican President Donald Trump said during his 2024 campaign he did not plan to limit access to mifepristone. Last month, the administration asked a federal judge to dismiss, on procedural grounds, a lawsuit by three generally Republican states seeking to narrow such access. That lawsuit began during the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden, who generally supported abortion access. Seventeen other Democratic-led or -leaning states plus Washington, D.C., are separately suing the FDA in Spokane, Washington, to loosen restrictions on mifepristone. They said doctors and pharmacies should be able to dispense the pill, as with most drugs, without special certifications. On May 30, the Trump administration urged a dismissal, saying the states didn't show the FDA's policy was flawed or the agency ignored important evidence. The states filed Thursday's petition after a short delay, with the filing having been expected earlier in the morning.
Daily Mail
16 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Shocking reason your protein powder could be TOXIC
Protein powders have become a wellness staple - the go-to answer for everything from building muscle to 'getting enough protein.' But despite their popularity, these powdered supplements may not be as healthy or safe as we think. In fact, one medical expert says they could be doing more harm than good - and in some cases, manufacturers don't even know what's in them. 'I can tell you for a fact that advertised vs. actual amounts varied wildly,' Dr. Khameinei Ali, an MD who also happens to be an MBA (Cambridge), MPH (Harvard), President of the Westchester County Medical Society, and a board certified clinical informaticist, told Before medical school, he even worked as an analytical chemist for the Department of Defense, analyzing over-the-counter supplements for accuracy. His biggest concern? That protein powder labels aren't telling the full story - and the regulations in place aren't strong enough to protect consumers. 'The main issue with protein powders is that we don't know what's in them or if they contain the advertised amounts,' Dr. Ali said. 'Most importantly, the manufacturers may not know what's in them.' Unlike prescription medications or even standard food products, protein powders fall into a legal gray zone. Dr. Ali explained that these protein powders are regulated mostly by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and only partly by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA). Plus, they get inspected under much less stringent standards than food and drugs. 'This opens them up to all sorts of misleading labeling and extremely poor industry standards,' Dr. Ali said. Translation: That expensive, vanilla-flavored powder you picked up because it said 'clean' or 'lab-tested'? There's a good chance it was neither. 'There is very little to any independent laboratory verification of contents and authenticity of claims,' he added. 'Unfortunately, that means they could contain all sorts of toxic chemicals and byproducts.' Beyond the risk of inaccurate protein counts, powders derived from whey, soy, or hemp often include extra ingredients you probably didn't sign up for. 'These powders… frequently contain hidden additives, added sugars, and even toxins like heavy metals and BPA - up to 25 times the safe limit according to independent tests,' he said. This raises concerns about long-term safety. If that sounds terrifying, it's because it is - and the lax oversight doesn't help. 'Again, the FDA doesn't regulate them closely, leaving consumers in the dark about what's really in each scoop,' he emphasized. In most cases, it's probably a good idea to ditch the protein powder - especially if you're generally healthy and using protein powder to meet vague fitness goals. The expert advises against using them unless a medical professional tells you to. 'Unless medically supervised - such as for post-surgical healing, cancer recovery, or advanced frailty - I advise sticking to whole food sources like eggs, dairy, legumes, and lean meats in most cases,' Dr. Ali said. And if you have underlying conditions, like kidney disease, the stakes are even higher. 'Toxins aside, people with kidney disease have to monitor their protein intake to prevent further damage,' he said. Until tighter regulations are in place and independent testing becomes standard, your safest bet is to stick with real food. Whole eggs and chicken breast may not come in chocolate flavor, but at least you know what's in them.
NBC News
17 hours ago
- NBC News
Four states petition the FDA to lift abortion pill restrictions
Four states petitioned the Food and Drug Administration on Thursday to lift its lingering restrictions on abortion pills. The attorneys general of California, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York argue in the petition that the FDA's current regulations make it difficult to prescribe mifepristone — one of two pills involved in a medication abortion — in primary care settings, despite evidence that it's safe to do so. 'Given mifepristone's 25-year safety record, there is simply no scientific or medical reason to subject it to such extraordinary restrictions,' New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. 'The FDA must follow the science and lift these unnecessary barriers that put patients at risk and push providers out of care.' The drug is a central flash point in the abortion debate. Many anti-abortion groups see restricting who can get mifepristone or rescinding its approval as one of the most effective ways to limit abortion access nationwide. The petition comes just days after FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said he was committed to conducting a safety review of mifepristone. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., each requested the review following the release of a paper, which was neither peer-reviewed nor published in a medical journal, that claimed to find a high rate of serious adverse events in women who recently took the medication. Researchers who study reproductive health said the report amounts to junk science and exaggerates the risks of mifepristone. They note that it does not meet basic research standards, relying on overly broad definitions and failing to disclose which database it used. The report was released by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank that served on the advisory board of Project 2025, a right-wing policy initiative that called for the FDA to walk back its approval of mifepristone. The attorneys general said Thursday that the FDA should use the safety review as an opportunity to remove barriers to accessing mifepristone nationwide — or, at minimum, in the four states involved in the petition. The FDA regulates certain medications with serious safety concerns via a drug safety program called Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). Mifepristone is currently part of that program, though a wealth of research has shown that less than 0.5% of women who take it have serious adverse reactions. Studies have also demonstrated that prescribing mifepristone through telehealth is as safe and effective as administering it in person. As part of the REMS program, mifepristone is subject to a few restrictions: People who prescribe the pills must be certified health care providers, and pharmacies must obtain certifications to dispense the medication. Patients who receive mifepristone must also sign a form attesting that they intend to end their pregnancy. The attorneys general said in their petition that those restrictions are burdensome and unnecessary. They claim that many primary care and family medicine physicians aren't able or willing to take on the administrative burden of getting certified to prescribe the pills, or are worried about being added to a list of national or local abortion providers. The FDA has already lifted several restrictions on mifepristone over the last decade. In 2016, it extended the window in which mifepristone could be used to terminate pregnancies from seven weeks' gestation to 10 weeks. In 2019, it approved a generic form of the medication, which increased supply. And in 2021, it eliminated a requirement to dispense mifepristone in person, allowing the drug to be prescribed via telehealth and sent by mail. Anti-abortion groups have called on the FDA to reinstate those restrictions, often pointing to misleading studies that suggest the medication has harmful effects. The April report that launched the FDA safety review, for instance, claims to find a 22-times higher rate of serious complications from mifepristone than reported by the agency. In their petition Thursday, the four attorneys general denounced recent attempts to challenge mifepristone's safety, which they said rely on methodologically flawed research. A coalition of anti-abortion groups sued the FDA in 2022 over its approval of mifepristone, citing two studies from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a group that opposes abortion, that claimed to show severe complications from the drug. The lawsuit was ultimately thrown out by the Supreme Court and the studies were later retracted by a medical publisher. The Charlotte Lozier Institute released another paper last month claiming that a growing number of emergency room visits after abortions are incorrectly attributed to miscarriages, thereby masking abortion complications. Rachel Jones, a principal research scientist at the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion access, said the data only captures a small portion of abortions and is skewed in favor of those that are potentially higher risk. Some of the same data was used in the retracted studies, she said. Jones added that the timing of the new reports from anti-abortion groups is not coincidental. 'The anti-choice people are really going after medication abortion and doing whatever they can to get the FDA under the Trump administration to revisit the availability of the drug,' she said.
