logo
The Biggest Recalls In Wendy's History

The Biggest Recalls In Wendy's History

Yahoo10-05-2025
Wendy's experienced a few major problems in 2024, including a reduced net income and extensive store closures. Despite these setbacks, the chain continues to enjoy a good reputation among consumers and earned 10th place in a 2025 ScrapeHero ranking of the largest fast food chains in the U.S. based on number of locations (Subway, Starbucks, and McDonald's occupied the top three spots). In fact, Wendy's has displayed its ability to weather storms in the past, as the fast food restaurant has been mired in a few recall controversies over the years.
Issues with undeclared allergens, foreign object in food, and potential choking hazards have plagued certain Wendy's locations and put the chain's customers on high alert. And while it wasn't a recall in the traditional sense, Wendy's also experienced an E. coli outbreak in 2022 that resulted in the restaurant eliminating romaine lettuce in all affected states (we already included this incident on our list of the worst fast food recalls in history). While these incidents have long since been resolved, they do show that even huge fast food brands can experience unexpected calamities.
Read more: Popular Culver's Menu Items, Ranked Worst To Best
As Wendy's explained on X (then Twitter) in 2018, the chain once provided bagged tortilla chips to go with its Taco Salad, though the menu item now comes with chili lime tortilla strips instead. These chips were produced specifically for the restaurant, and a company called Wyandot, Inc. was responsible for manufacturing the crunchy item (it's unclear if Wendy's worked with other chip manufacturers). In 2015, both Wyandot and Wendy's, along with other brands, found themselves in hot water after the round, yellow tortilla chips distributed to the fast food establishment were said to contain an undeclared allergen.
Some consumers discovered that their tortilla chip bags also contained cheese curls, which were made with milk. According to Mayo Clinic, milk allergies are associated with symptoms like vomiting, hives, and tingling of the lips and mouth, as well as breathing issues and anaphylaxis in more serious cases. To prevent a person with a milk allergy from accidentally ingesting the ingredient, the FDA requires manufacturers to declare certain major allergens, a list that also includes eggs, tree nuts, and wheat, among others. Failure to do so can lead to recalls, and in Wyandot's case, the recall was categorized as Class II. That means consuming the recalled item may lead to unwanted health effects but is unlikely to cause significant issues.
A well-known purveyor of poultry products, Tyson Foods has experienced some major recalls during its history, including complaints from customers about finding metal pieces in the company's chicken products. The food manufacturer experienced a similar issue in 1998 when Wendy's customers found pieces of metal in chicken served at the restaurant — chicken supplied to the chain by Tyson Foods. Most of the locations affected were in the Midwest, although some New York customers were also impacted. According to Tyson Foods, the issue resulted from a broken conveyor belt, which was somehow depositing metal particles from wire mesh into the chicken.
This recall involved an estimated 160,000 pounds of chicken, but fortunately, no reports of customer harm followed. It's worth noting that foreign object contamination is an ongoing issue within the commercial food industry, and that contamination can occur at any and every step of the manufacturing and distribution process. This highlights the importance of regulatory agencies like the FDA, which is responsible for investigating food safety issues and swiftly disseminating information to the public to prevent serious illnesses and injuries.
Although you can find kids' meals at practically every fast food restaurant these days, the concept was initially invented by Burger Chef, a lesser-known establishment that closed for good in 1996. Burger Chef was the first to lure young customers with the promise of a fun toy, a practice that fast food chains continue to employ. Many kids' meal toys are inspired by beloved cartoon characters, and while he might not be as well-known today, Felix the Cat was a popular animated figure that predated the debut of Mickey Mouse. In 1997, Wendy's offered a kids' meal starring the cartoon feline, complete with coveted toys designed in his likeness. One item in the collection, however, posed a serious hazard to children and was recalled by the chain as a result.
The toy in question consisted of a plastic ball containing a small Felix the Cat figurine that rotated around a thin metal bar in the center. The ball also contained four small, colorful fish that would rattle around inside when the toy was rolled. Some consumers complained that the adhesive holding the two sections of the plastic ball together could become unglued, which gave children access to the tiny fish inside. In fact, one child did choke on the small toy but was fortunately unharmed. Concerns about subsequent choking incidents led to a recall of 800,000 toys, which Wendy's offered to replace to spare parents the headache of an extremely disgruntled child.
Read the original article on Mashed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Praxis' Epilepsy Treatment Shows Promise With Decreased Seizures
Praxis' Epilepsy Treatment Shows Promise With Decreased Seizures

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Praxis' Epilepsy Treatment Shows Promise With Decreased Seizures

Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (NASDAQ:PRAX) stock experienced a volatile trading session on Monday, after the company announced positive topline results from its Phase 2 RADIANT study evaluating vormatrigine in patients with focal onset seizures and generalized epilepsy. The stock initially surged on the news, but then reversed course and is currently trading down approximately 9%. The central nervous system (CNS) disorders-focused company said the topline results from the Phase 2 RADIANT study included data from 37 patients.'These findings build on our earlier clinical data showing a differentiated profile for vormatrigine as a fast-acting, no-titration, once-daily oral drug with no requirement to be taken with food, and a favorable DDI profile, all of which are unseen in ASMs currently in the market or in development,' said Marcio Souza, president and CEO of Praxis. In an investor presentation on the company website, Praxis noted that the trial showed a median seizure reduction of around 56.3%, with 60% of the patients achieving at least a 50% reduction in seizures. This positive outcome has encouraged the company to move forward with a Phase 2/3 trial, even though 23% of patients discontinued the study. 54% of patients achieved at least a 50% seizure reduction threshold in Week 1 and 67% in Week 8. In the last month of the dataset, 22% of the patients experienced a 100% reduction in seizure frequency. The company added that most adverse events were mild to moderate and transient. All severe and serious adverse events (AEs) were recovered and resolved. The investor presentation noted that the investigators had the option to reduce the dose of the background medication to manage AEs; when done (6 patients), no discontinuation was observed. The company said it is on track to complete the pivotal, 12-week POWER1 study in the fourth quarter of 2025 and, based on the results from RADIANT, it expects to initiate the POWER2 study shortly. On Monday, the company reported cash and investments of approximately $447 million and maintains a cash runway into 2028. In July, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Breakthrough Therapy Designation for Praxis Precision's relutrigine, a sodium channel functional state modulator for pediatric use for SCN2A and SCN8A developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs). The EMBOLD cohort 2 pivotal trial is on track for topline results in the first half of 2026, with NDA filing to follow. Praxis has recently initiated the EMERALD study investigating relutrigine broadly in DEEs. Price Action: PRAX stock is trading lower by 9.51% to $48.95 at last check Monday. Read Next:Photo via Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Praxis' Epilepsy Treatment Shows Promise With Decreased Seizures originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Ethics of Artificial Hydration and Nutrition In Dementia
Ethics of Artificial Hydration and Nutrition In Dementia

Medscape

time12 minutes ago

  • Medscape

Ethics of Artificial Hydration and Nutrition In Dementia

This transcript has been edited for clarity. Hi. I'm Art Caplan. I'm at the Division of Medical Ethics at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine. I had a difficult case brought to me recently by someone who was trying to decide what to do with a patient with very bad dementia in terms of feeding. It's not the first time I've had this kind of case brought to me by physicians, and it probably won't be the last, but it remains a thorny, tough ethics quandary. I think everybody understands that there is a right — and we've had this affirmed since cases like Terri Schiavo or Nancy Cruzan — to not force artificial feeding (meaning by tube, in the nose, or in the stomach) or artificial hydration upon someone who doesn't want it. If you have the right to refuse treatment, it's been established — certainly in American law, and I would say by standards of care within the medical profession — that hydration and feeding, when they're done by mechanical means, tubes, or using artificial substances to supply nutrition, are medicine. As a medical intervention or a medical therapy, just like other interventions, such as dialysis or even refusing an amputation for a diabetic patient, the patient ultimately, if they're competent, has the right to refuse it. The challenge comes in the case that was presented to me. A woman, let's call her Mary Taylor, some years ago knew that she was at risk of getting Alzheimer's disease. She filled out her living will and discussed with her family that when she became demented, if she was unable to care for herself, if she couldn't recognize her family and friends, she did not want any medical interventions, including specifically hydration and nutrition. Sadly, she went through the course of declining and ended up at a nursing home. At the nursing home, the doctor who was treating her noticed that nurses were offering Mary food on a spoon and liquid on a spoon, that she was opening her mouth when the spoon was presented, and she was, if you will, eating and drinking. The physician, knowing that the family remembered this advance directive living will and knowing that they were the designated decision-makers, basically said stop the spoon-feeding. The nurses did not want to do it. They said it's ordinary care. It's not medical. It's just what you do as part of what one human being deserves from another human being — to offer them ordinary ways to drink water or to eat something. The case basically raises two tough ethics questions. Is feeding by spoon the same as medical intervention with artificial forms of hydration and nutrition? I believe it is. I believe that when you say 'no more food and nutrition,' it isn't just the equipment. I'll put it simply: It's who's on the end of the spoon. If nurses or doctors are feeding, it's medical. It's professional care, and you should be able to say no to that. Secondly, I do think if someone says 'I don't want to eat or drink anymore,' their intent and their values are clear. You could certainly rediscuss it with the family and say she seems to be accepting food and swallowing, and ask if that changes their mind or makes them think she might have decided differently. However, I think the wishes of the competent person, when they made the living will, are what should drive care if the person loses competency. They thought about it, they knew where they were headed, and I do think that's the value that ought to dominate thinking about whether we have to continue to try food and water for nutrition. Does that mean that you can't offer ice, lip balm, or other comfort means if someone is suffering because they're getting dehydrated and so on? Absolutely not. That isn't the same as feeding them. Here are some lessons to consider. It's important to pay attention when someone says they don't want food and water. Are nurses or anyone in a hospital or a nursing home trying to feed them anyway because they don't think of spoon-feeding as an artificial or medical intervention? I think they need education about that, and I think it's important to make sure that does not happen if that's what they said in their advance directives. I also believe advance directives and conversations with people, when they're competent or facing the potential loss of competency, should include discussions about whether they really mean everything, such as spoon-feeding or somebody offering you a glass of water. Is that included in what you are saying you do not want? We have to be thorough and comprehensive in making sure that we're clear so there really aren't disputes of what people did say no to and might say yes to if they no longer are able to tell us directly. I'm Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine. Thank you for watching.

Three FDA-Approved Obesity Drugs That Aren't GLP-1s
Three FDA-Approved Obesity Drugs That Aren't GLP-1s

Medscape

time12 minutes ago

  • Medscape

Three FDA-Approved Obesity Drugs That Aren't GLP-1s

This transcript has been edited for clarity. There are currently three FDA-approved oral medications for the long-term treatment of obesity that are not GLP-1 based. Alli or Xenical (generic name orlistat) was approved by the FDA in 1999. It works by inhibiting intestinal lipase and it reduces absorption of dietary fat by up to 30%. Common side effects are gastrointestinal and include fatty or oily stool, fecal urgency, and incontinence. The average placebo-subtracted weight loss is about 3.8%. Alli is the only FDA-approved medication available over the counter. Qsymia is a combination of phentermine and topiramate and was approved by the FDA in 2012. Phentermine is a sympathomimetic, and topiramate is a neurostabilizer that enhances GABA activity. Clinically, the combination pill enhances satiety, decreases appetite, and reduces binge eating behaviors. Common side effects are paresthesias, altered taste, tachycardia, irritability, hypertension, insomnia, and dry mouth. It is currently one of the most effective oral medications, with an average placebo-subtracted weight loss of 8.6%. Contrave is a combination pill of bupropion and naltrexone and was approved by the FDA in 2014. Bupropion is a norepinephrine and dopamine reuptake inhibitor, and naltrexone is a mu opioid receptor antagonist. Clinically, it decreases appetite and cravings. The common side effects are nausea, vomiting, insomnia, constipation, dry mouth, diarrhea, and dizziness. The average placebo-subtracted weight loss is 4.8%.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store