logo
FDA Issues Risk Warning Over Nationwide Butter Recall

FDA Issues Risk Warning Over Nationwide Butter Recall

Newsweek3 days ago
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A recall of butter across the United States due to a potential undeclared allergen has been issued the second-highest risk warning by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Bunge North America Inc., based in Missouri, initiated a voluntary recall of 64,800 pounds of its NH European Style Butter Blend on July 14 because milk may not have been listed on the product's label.
The FDA later issued a Class II risk classification for the recall on Thursday.
Newsweek contacted Bunge North America Inc. for comment by email outside of regular working hours.
Bunge North America Inc. initiated a voluntary recall for 64,800 pounds of butter on July 14 due to a potential undeclared allergen.
Bunge North America Inc. initiated a voluntary recall for 64,800 pounds of butter on July 14 due to a potential undeclared allergen.
CTK/AP
Why It Matters
A Class II risk classification (one of three) refers to a situation in which the "use of or exposure to a violative product may cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences or where the probability of serious adverse health consequences is remote," according to the FDA.
Milk is one of the nine major food allergens as defined in the law. The others are eggs, fish, crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, soybeans, and sesame.
Allergic reactions vary in severity from mild symptoms, such as hives and lip swelling, to life-threatening complications, such as anaphylaxis, that may include fatal respiratory problems.
What To Know
The product affected by this recall is the following:
NH European Style Butter Blend - 64,800 pounds - UPC code: 1 00 78684 73961 2 - lot code: 5064036503
The product was packaged in white paperboard cases, with 36 blocks per case.
The cases were shipped to 12 distribution centers located throughout the U.S., and one distribution center in the Dominican Republic.
What People Are Saying
The FDA, on its website: "People with food allergies should read labels and avoid the foods they are allergic to. The law requires that food labels identify the food source of all major food allergens used to make the food."
The Mayo Clinic, on its website: "Milk allergy is an atypical immune system response to milk and products containing milk. It's one of the most common food allergies in children. Cow's milk is the usual cause of milk allergy, but milk from sheep, goats, buffalo and other mammals also can cause a reaction.
"An allergic reaction usually occurs soon after you or your child consumes milk. Signs and symptoms of milk allergy range from mild to severe and can include wheezing, vomiting, hives and digestive problems. Milk allergy can also cause anaphylaxis — a severe, life-threatening reaction."
Dr. Sebastian Lighvani, director of New York Allergy & Asthma PLLC, previously told Newsweek: "Every three minutes in the United States, someone ends up in an emergency room because of an allergic reaction after accidental ingestion of food. So even when we try hard, these reactions are happening. And if you look at the incidence of anaphylaxis, it has skyrocketed in the last five, 10, 20 years. And in the U.S., there's like a 300 to 400 percent increase in the rates of anaphylaxis to foods."
What Happens Next
The recall is listed as ongoing, according to the FDA.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025
Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025

Newsweek

time30 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A newly released study by personal finance website WalletHub has revealed which states are the best and worst to have a baby—with Massachusetts, North Dakota, and Minnesota leading the nation. How It Was Calculated WalletHub ranked the best and worst states to have a baby by evaluating all 50 states and the District of Columbia across four categories—cost, health care, baby-friendliness, and family-friendliness—using 31 weighted metrics scored on a 100-point scale. Each state's overall score reflected a weighted average of those factors. The dataset used by WalletHub in its calculations ranged from hospital conventional-delivery charges to annual average infant-care costs to pediatricians per capita. What To Know Massachusetts claimed the top spot in WalletHub's overall rankings, buoyed by its first-place health care score and top-tier performance in baby- and family-friendliness. The Bay State boasts the third-lowest infant mortality rate, the eighth-lowest maternal mortality rate, and among the best neonatal hospitals in the nation for premature births or babies with health problems, the report said. It also leads the country in paid leave policy and access to Medicaid-covered parenting programs. North Dakota ranked second, driven largely by its affordability. It offers the lowest cost for conventional deliveries without complications—just $7,500 compared to as much as $27,000 in more expensive states, according to WalletHub. The Peace Garden State was also found to have the third-lowest hourly rate for babysitters, and ranked among the top ten in childcare access and mom support groups. Minnesota came in third, offering the second-lowest health insurance premiums and ranking highly for medical staff availability. With one of the lowest maternal mortality rates and a high number of pediatric professionals per capita, WalletHub said it provides ample healthcare options for new parents. Additionally, the North Star State was found to have the fourth-highest share of nationally accredited childcare centers. Rounding out the top 10 best states to have a baby include: New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Iowa, the District of Columbia. At the other end of the spectrum, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, Arkansas, New Mexico, Georgia, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, and Mississippi were ranked as the bottom 10. What People Are Saying WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report: "The best states for having a baby minimize costs while providing top-notch care for both newborns and their mothers. They also continue to be good environments for parents even long after the birth, with high-quality pediatric care, affordable and accessible child care, and a strong economic environment that makes providing for a child easier." What Happens Next? WalletHub releases its "Best & Worst States to Have a Baby" report annually. Newsweek previously mapped the states with the best—and worst—school systems based on a separate, recent report from WalletHub.

Anbogen Receives FDA Clearance to Initiate Phase 1/2 Trial of ABT-301 Triplet Therapy for Advanced Colorectal Cancer
Anbogen Receives FDA Clearance to Initiate Phase 1/2 Trial of ABT-301 Triplet Therapy for Advanced Colorectal Cancer

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Anbogen Receives FDA Clearance to Initiate Phase 1/2 Trial of ABT-301 Triplet Therapy for Advanced Colorectal Cancer

TAIPEI, Aug. 4, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Anbogen Therapeutics today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved its Investigational New Drug (IND) application for ABT-301, enabling the initiation of a Phase 1/2 clinical trial in combination with tislelizumab and bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This open-label, multi-center international study plans to enroll 66 patients with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) or non-microsatellite instability-high (non-MSI-H) mCRC to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of the triplet therapy. Enrollment is planned in Taiwan and Australia. Tislelizumab, a PD-1 monoclonal antibody, used in this trial is provided by BeOne Medicines (formerly known as BeiGene). Further details on this collaboration were disclosed by Anbogen in a press release dated September 27, 2024. ABT-301 is an oral HDAC1/2/3 inhibitor. Preclinical studies have shown that it promotes CD8+ cytotoxic T cell infiltration and activity, enhances antigen presentation, and inhibits M-MDSCs cells, effectively modulating the tumor microenvironment and converting "cold tumors" into "hot tumors" to improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors. ABT-301 also exhibits pro-apoptotic, anti-angiogenic, and tumor metabolic regulation effects. As a single-molecule, multi-modality anti-cancer agent, ABT-301 aims to enhance tumor treatment when combined with the two antibody drugs. Notably, in a previous Phase 1 monotherapy clinical trial involving 23 participants, ABT-301 did not exhibit neutropenia or cardiac toxicity, which are commonly observed in other HDAC inhibitors—further supporting its suitability for use in combination immunotherapy. Approximately 95% of mCRC patients are pMMR or non-MSI-H types—commonly referred to as "cold tumors"—which respond poorly to current immunotherapies. Only around 5% of patients with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) "hot tumors" typically benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors. According to GlobalData, an estimated 370,000 new pMMR/non-MSI-H patients in second-line or later settings are diagnosed annually across the U.S., China, Japan, and the top five European markets (UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy), representing a potential market size of USD $9 billion. Anbogen stated that the FDA's IND approval marks a key milestone in the development of ABT-301, demonstrating the safety profile of the triplet therapy and advancing it into clinical stages. The company emphasized that the study targets the majority of patients (over 90%) with poor responses to immunotherapy, aiming to provide a novel treatment option and address this unmet clinical need. Looking ahead, Anbogen will continue to advance the clinical development of ABT-301 while pursuing global licensing and strategic partnerships to accelerate commercialization and market entry. The company is also launching its Series B fundraising to attract strategic partners committed to advancing innovative cancer therapies and global expansion. About Anbogen Therapeutics Anbogen Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company committed to developing precision oncology therapies that improve the lives of cancer patients worldwide. The company currently has two core assets: ABT-301, a HDAC1/2/3 inhibitor with immune-modulating capabilities, enhances the tumor microenvironment and boosts immune responses. It significantly improves the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), offering a new treatment pathway for the majority of patients who do not benefit from ICIs. ABT-501 is a novel Peptide Drug Conjugate (PDC) that targets LHRH-receptor tumors using a proprietary delivery system. It has shown strong efficacy and safety in triple-negative breast cancer models, with potential for broader cancer applications. For more information, please visit Anbogen's official website at View original content: SOURCE Anbogen Therapeutics

Rectal Cancer Survival Not Tied to pCR
Rectal Cancer Survival Not Tied to pCR

Medscape

time6 hours ago

  • Medscape

Rectal Cancer Survival Not Tied to pCR

TOPLINE: According to a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), pathologic complete response (pCR) was not associated with overall or disease-free survival in patients with rectal cancer, suggesting that the use of pCR as a surrogate endpoint for survival should be reexamined. METHODOLOGY: Neoadjuvant trials in rectal cancer are increasingly using pCR as a surrogate endpoint for long-term outcomes, following recommendations by the FDA in 2012. However, while some research has shown an association between pCR and improved survival in rectal cancer on the patient level, consensus on the trial-level validity of pCR as a surrogate is lacking. Researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 RCTs involving 11,882 patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapies (mostly chemo radiation) followed by surgical resection. The researchers assessed the correlation between pCR and both overall survival and disease-free survival. TAKEAWAY: Across trials that reported overall survival, weighted regression analysis revealed no correlation between pCR and overall survival (β, 0.37; 95% CI, -0.98 to 1.71; P = .57). Similarly, across trials reporting disease-free survival, there was no correlation between pCR and disease-free survival (β, -0.84; 95% CI, -2.55 to 0.87; P = .32). A sensitivity analysis conducted after excluding two studies with a high risk for bias also yielded null associations. The researchers performed subgroup analyses excluding studies that evaluated neoadjuvant radiation alone or included patients who did not receive curative resection and again found no association between pCR and either disease-free or overall survival. IN PRACTICE: 'Our trial-level analysis did not reveal a correlation between pCR and [disease-free survival] or [overall survival] in rectal cancer RCTs,' the authors of the study concluded. 'Our study's findings suggest a recommendation against using pCR as a [surrogate endpoint] for neoadjuvant therapies in rectal cancer until conclusive trial-level evidence of its association with long-term outcomes is firmly established.' SOURCE: This study, led by Kavin Sugumar, MD, Tulane University, New Orleans, and Jessica Jin Lie, MD, MPH, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, was published online in JAMA Network Open. LIMITATIONS: A subgroup analysis of total neoadjuvant therapy trials was not feasible due to insufficient sample size. Additionally, postsurgical therapies in patients without pCR may have improved outcomes, potentially diluting its association with survival. Mediation analysis was not possible due to lack of patient-level data. DISCLOSURES: The authors did not disclose any funding information. One author disclosed receiving personal fees from Novartis, consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, and grants from Eli Lilly and Company and Taiho, outside the submitted work. Another author reported receiving royalties as a coauthor on several chapters of UpToDate. No other disclosures were reported. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

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