FDA Announces Recall on Popular Aldi Product for Undeclared Life-Threatening Allergen
Select boxes of a popular Casa Mamita product sold at Aldi stores in 13 states have been recalled, according to the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). Aldi's Casa Mamita Churro Bites Filled with Chocolate Hazelnut Cream have been recalled because they may contain an undeclared milk allergen.
Casa Mamita Churro Bites Filled with Chocolate Hazelnut Cream sold at Aldi stores in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee are impacted by this recall. The recalled product was sold in a 7.05-ounce cardboard box and has the lot number 01425 and 'Best If Used By' date of July 14, 2025, on the label.
You can find product images on the FDA's site. No other Casa Mamita or Aldi products are impacted by this recall.
The churro bites were recalled because the product contains milk, but the allergy warning for milk is not printed on the box, which the FDA requires. Camerican International, the maker of the recalled Casa Mamita product, has identified the issue as due to a 'temporary breakdown' in the processing and packaging, which has since been resolved.
If you have a milk allergy, you should not consume the product as it can cause serious or life-threatening reactions for those with milk allergies or intolerances. Instead, you can throw it away or return it to your Aldi store for a full refund.
As of this writing, there have not been any reports of allergic reactions or illnesses caused by consuming the Casa Mamita Churro Bites Filled with Chocolate Hazelnut Cream.
If you don't have a milk allergy, you do not have to do anything regarding this recall. The product was recalled due to a labeling error and not because it is inherently unsafe to eat.
For any questions regarding the recall, you can contact Camerican International directly at 1-201-587-0101 or fsqaincidents@camerican.com.
Read the original article on ALLRECIPES
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
7 hours ago
- The Hill
Food and Drug Administration staff cuts may hinder US biomedical innovation
President Trump has rightly emphasized restoring America's economic and strategic independence — from reshoring pharmaceutical production to cutting regulatory red tape. But not all reforms are created equal. Recent restructuring efforts at the Food and Drug Administration may have been well-intentioned, but they risk undermining the very innovation and domestic capacity the president seeks to promote. In March, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a sweeping reorganization of the agency, which in part included the elimination of 3,500 full-time employees at the Food and Drug Administration — many of them senior scientific staff and experienced regulators who served as institutional pillars across drug review divisions. While we all support government efficiency and the secretary's efforts to create a gold-standard regulatory agency, the loss of this institutional memory risks hobbling the expedited pathways that small biotech firms rely on to deliver therapies for rare and life-threatening diseases. Unfortunately, the impact of these cuts is not theoretical. The Wall Street Journal has reported that some biotech firms have had to delay or cancel clinical trials due to lack of timely Food and Drug Administration guidance. One California biotech firm facing unpredictable delays has even turned to European regulators to move forward with a clinical trial — effectively offshoring American capital, investment and jobs. Others have reported receiving conflicting and confusing feedback from inexperienced FDA staff or no response at all on time-sensitive requests. But such issues don't just affect companies; they hurt patients, too. Innovation in gene therapies, cancer immunotherapies, and treatments for rare diseases depend on regulatory clarity and speed. Without senior staff to help clarify agency positions, decisions are either delayed or driven by less-experienced personnel unfamiliar with long-standing scientific standards. It's no surprise then that over 200 biotech CEOs, patient advocates and investors — many of them strong supporters of FDA modernization — have expressed their concerns in a letter to Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy (R-La.). As a former member of Congress who sat on the Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the FDA, I have long supported targeted reforms to make the agency more nimble and responsive. But there is a fine line between streamlining operations and cutting the institutional capacity necessary to do the job. Removing experienced drug reviewers before an adequate backup plan can be put into place not only jeopardizes U.S. safety standards but also undermines our competitive edge. This matter is not merely a domestic problem; it's a global race. Since 2014, the number of biomedical drugs under development in China has grown twelvefold. Meanwhile, innovation in the U.S. has remained relatively flat. If trends continue, China could match or surpass the U.S. in biomedical innovation within the decade. We have seen this movie before — in semiconductors, in telecommunications, in clean energy. We cannot afford to let biotech go the same way. The Trump administration's tariff policy was designed to bring pharmaceutical manufacturing back to U.S. shores. But how can we expect capital to stay in the U.S. if our regulatory infrastructure cannot deliver? Delays and unpredictability at the FDA don't just slow down science — they push investors to look elsewhere. Even the user fee system — critical to funding timely drug reviews and a source of government revenue — has been impacted by the reduction in force. Staff who oversaw the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act have been laid off, raising questions about whether the agency will even be able to continue to collect user fees and whether these government cuts will actually end up costing taxpayers in the long run. Of course, Kennedy has long been a vocal advocate for health reform. His Make America Healthy Again agenda's focus on combatting chronic diseases and enhancing nutritional standards deserves attention. His focus for such reform is where his background and passion can lead to meaningful improvements. But when it comes to regulating complex biologics and therapeutics, we must be careful about taking actions that could inadvertently stymie scientific progress. President Trump's vision for American self-reliance will only succeed if it's built on a foundation of regulatory competence and stability. Swift actions should therefore be taken to restore the FDA's core functions, rehire critical staff and unfreeze the hiring of roles essential to America's leadership in biomedical science. The stakes — for patients, for innovation and for national security — are simply too high to ignore. John T. Doolittle is a former member of Congress who served on the Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, and Related Agencies subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations.
The Hill
8 hours ago
- The Hill
Thanks to imported drugs, America has lost control of its medicine cabinet
America is facing a growing crisis in its medical system — not from a lack of talent or innovation, but from a breakdown in the control, safety and supply of essential medicines. Our growing reliance on imports is now driving serious drug shortages, destabilizing supply chains and increasingly making medications unsafe. At the root of it is a hard truth: We no longer have control of the medicines we depend on every day. In 2002, America manufactured 83.7 percent of the pharmaceuticals it consumed. By 2024, that number had dropped to just 37.1 percent. Meanwhile, the U.S. pharmaceutical trade deficit has soared, reaching a record $118.3 billion in 2024. We didn't just outsource manufacturing — we outsourced the sovereignty and safety of our health care system. This means that nearly two-thirds of America's pharmaceutical supplies are now imported. Most critical medications, such as generic drugs, now come from China and India. China controls 80 to 90 percent of the global supply of active pharmaceutical ingredients — the chemical building blocks of modern medicine. Even drugs labeled 'Made in the USA' often chemically originate in China. And India, which produces about half of America's finished generic drugs, relies on China for up to 80 percent of its active pharmaceutical not a supply chain — it's a ticking time something goes wrong, American patients suffer. In 2023, the Food and Drug Administration shut down a single Indian plant responsible for 50 percent of the U.S. supply of cisplatin, a critical chemotherapy drug, after uncovering a 'cascade of failure' in safety practices and shredded documents soaked in acid. With no domestic backup, patients nationwide had their treatments delayed. That wasn't a fluke. 40 percent of U.S. generic drugs have only one FDA-approved manufacturer. Because of that single chokepoint, when one factory fails, the whole system can crack. We are now seeing widespread drug shortages across the medical system. Hospital pharmacists report an average of 301 critical drug shortages at any given time. And 85 percent say these shortages are moderately or critically affecting care. Doctors often lack crucial medicines such as antibiotics, sedatives and cancer drugs. These aren't obscure drugs. They're foundational medicines. But America no longer makes them. Even when imported drugs do arrive, they're not always safe. A 2025 study found that Indian generics are 54 percent more likely to cause serious side effects than their U.S.-made counterparts. Indian factory violations have also been tied to at least eight U.S. patient deaths. China's record is equally disturbing. In 2008, dozens of Americans died after receiving contaminated heparin from Chinese suppliers. This isn't what the American people want. In a national survey, 85 percent of hospital pharmacists said they would pay more for safer generics. But under today's rules, price overshadows quality. Hospitals have little oversight of drug quality — and foreign producers face few consequences for cutting corners. Even the federal government is flying blind. A 2023 Department of Defense review found that 22 percent of essential military-use drugs had unknown ingredient sourcing. That's a national security April, the Trump administration took a necessary step by launching an investigation into generic pharmaceutical imports that correctly frames the issue as a national security threat. But that recognition alone isn't enough. To address this crisis, Washington should impose targeted tariffs on generic drugs from adversarial nations. It must also rebuild domestic pharmaceutical production through tax credits and long-term contracts. America urgently needs full transparency in drug labeling to disclose where drugs and their ingredients are made. The FDA must step up — with stronger enforcement abroad and a ban on imports from repeat safety violators. And to secure critical ingredients during market disruptions, Washington must pursue a long-term vision that includes a 'strategic pharmaceutical reserve.' This isn't just protectionism. It's a restoration of America's medical security. No nation can call itself sovereign if it can't produce its own medicines, and no patient is safe if their health care depends on quality control in a factory 8,000 miles decades, we were told that offshoring production would make things cheaper, smoother and more efficient. But America can no longer depend on unstable foreign suppliers. It's time to restore our pharmaceutical independence and take back control of our medicine cabinet. Andrew Rechenberg is an economist at the Coalition for a Prosperous America.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
FDA-Approved Sleeping Pill Slows Alzheimer's Tangles in Pre-Clinical Trial
A drug used to treat insomnia has protected mice against the buildup of the tau protein found to clump abnormally in neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's. This could lead to new ways to help slow the progress of these diseases. An increasing number of people are facing cognitive decline personally or in their loved ones. There are almost 10 million new cases of dementia globally each year, and despite decades of research, there are still few treatment options that provide clear benefits. So due to the links between Alzheimer's and poor sleep, Washington University neurologist Samira Parhizkar and colleagues investigated a central nervous system depressant, lemborexant, that was approved for use as a sleep aid by the FDA in December 2019. "We have shown that lemborexant improves sleep and reduces abnormal tau, which appears to be a main driver of the neurological damage that we see in Alzheimer's and several related disorders," explains Washington University neurologist David Holtzman. The role of amyloid beta proteins in Alzheimer's has been controversial, but they're not the only proteins implicated in the disease. Tau proteins normally contribute to the structure of brain cells, but past research has linked abnormal ones with the rate of brain atrophy in animal models. "The antibodies to amyloid that we now use to treat patients with early, mild Alzheimer's dementia are helpful, but they don't slow the disease down as much as we would like," says Holtzman. "We need ways to reduce the abnormal tau buildup and its accompanying inflammation, and this type of sleep aid is worth looking at further." But when the researchers compared lemborexant with another sleep aid, zolpidem, the results were unexpected. Mice receiving lemborexant retained up to 40 percent more volume in their memory-forming hippocampus than those who received zolpidem or no sleep aid at all. "What was surprising was that these effects were not seen with a standard sleep drug like zolpidem, which increases NREM sleep similarly to lemborexant," Parhizkar told Eric Dolan at PsyPost. "This suggests that the benefit is not just about more sleep, but rather how that sleep is promoted." The two sleep drugs work on different mechanisms, and that seems to be key to the protective effects. Lemborexant blocks orexin, a neuropeptide that regulates the sleep cycle, and when the team genetically knocked out orexin receptor 2 in mice, it reduced the buildup of tau in their brains. Strangely, though, the protective results of lemborexant were only seen in male mice, even though females were also tested. What's more, mouse studies don't always produce the same results in humans. Lemborexant has only been approved for short-term use in humans, so its long-term impacts as well as effectiveness in tau reduction still need to be investigated. While many questions remain to be answered, if the results seen in this study hold true, the researchers hope early intervention with a drug like lemborexant could potentially delay the progression of neurodegeneration. This research was published in Nature Neuroscience. Risk of Sleep Breathing Disorder Set to Rise 45% by End of Century Breakthrough: FDA Approves Injection to Prevent HIV Is It Gastro or Food Poisoning? Here's A Guide to Your Upset Stomach
