Doehler Dry Ingredient Solutions, LLC Recalls Member's Mark Freeze Dried Fruit Variety Pack for Listeria monocytogenes Contamination
No illnesses have been reported to date.
Please see www.doehler.com for a full list of affected products.
The firm discovered the problem via internal testing of their products. The products were distributed between 7/1/2025-7/25/2025 and sold in Sam's Club retail stores. These products were packaged in foil pouches inside a corrugated box. The lot number and expiration date are located on the bottom of the case. Product was shipped to distribution centers in the following states: AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, PR, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WI, WV, WY. Consumers who have this product in their possession should not consume the
product. They should discard it and may visit any Sam's Club for a full refund.
Consumers with questions may contact Doehler Dry Ingredient Solutions, LLC's Customer Service at 770-387-0451, Monday-Friday 8am-5pm EST.
This recall is being made with the knowledge of the Food and Drug Administration.
Contact Information:
DOEHLER Dry Ingredient Solutions LLC
Martha Davis
1-770-383-4529
Contact via Email
https://www.doehler.com
Read the full story here: Doehler Dry Ingredient Solutions, LLC Recalls Member's Mark Freeze Dried Fruit Variety Pack for Listeria monocytogenes Contamination
Press Release Distributed by PR.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
19 minutes ago
- Medscape
Unnecessary Blood Culture Testing Persists in Pediatrics
Rates of routine blood culture (BC) testing for uncomplicated infections in children had no significant effect on length of stay, costs, return emergency department visits, or hospital readmissions, according to data from nearly 95,000 hospitalizations presented at the Pediatric Hospital Medicine (PHM) 2025. Routine BC testing has shown minimal value in the clinical management of uncomplicated community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), and urinary tract infections (UTI), according to Smit K. Shah, MD, a clinical assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, who presented the findings at the meeting. While such BC testing in an otherwise healthy pediatric population has low clinical benefit, said Shah in an interview, 'downstream harms of such testing may be leading to not just healthcare waste but patient harm.' To review the effect of BC testing patterns on outcomes, Shah and colleagues identified hospitalizations for patients aged 3 months to 18 years admitted with CAP, SSTI, or UTI from 2016 to 2023. The data on 94,524 hospitalizations across 31 hospitals came from the Pediatric Health Information System database. The researchers excluded patients with complicated infections, ICU admission, or hospital stays longer than 1 week. Hospitals were characterized as low-, moderate-, or high-BC testers (13, 10, and 8 hospitals, respectively). The primary outcomes were rates of blood culture testing by infection and hospital, annual rates of testing over 8 years, and clinical outcomes including length of hospital stay, costs, emergency department return visits, and hospital readmissions. The researchers reviewed data for 41% of CAP, 45% of SSTI, and 55% of UTI cases. BC testing rates varied widely; the widest range was from 16% to 77% for low-testing and high-testing hospitals for CAP, respectively. BC testing ranged from approximately 38% to 77% for SSTI and from approximately 22% to 77% for UTI for the low-testing and high-testing hospitals. Over the study period, seven hospitals showed significant increases, 17 showed no changes, and seven showed decreases in annual BC testing. Overall, no significant differences appeared between the high- and low-testing groups in outcome measures of adjusted length of stay, costs, emergency department return visits, hospital readmissions at 7 days, or bacteremia. The findings were limited by several factors including the use of administrative data and potential lack of generalizability to nonacademic hospitals, Shah noted. Many hospitals showed no reduction in BC testing over time, despite growing evidence of no change in outcomes, Shah said in his presentation. The results of the current study suggest that the reassessment of BC use and reduction of unnecessary testing is needed to optimize resources and improve healthcare value, Shah concluded. What Drives Disregard for Guidelines Despite guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics on the futility of BC testing in uncomplicated SSTIs, the proportion of hospitalized children with this infection undergoing testing is alarming and continues to remain high over time, Shah told Medscape Medical News . 'We need to understand drivers of unnecessary testing,' said Shah. Identifying whether unnecessary testing stems from institutional factors or lack of education about futility and downstream effects of unnecessary testing would help direct national stewardship efforts to reduce testing overuse, he said. 'The recent blood culture vial shortage could act as a natural experiment in reducing testing,' Shah noted 'Diagnostic stewardship in regard to blood cultures is important as overuse of blood cultures when not clinically indicated has the potential to lead to false-positive results, antibiotic overuse, antibiotic resistance, and can potentially increase healthcare costs,' said Shirin Mazumder, MD, an infectious diseases specialist in Memphis, Tennessee, in an interview. 'Evaluating scenarios where blood cultures may not be clinically indicated can help to address these issues,' said Mazumder, who was not involved in the study. The fear of missing an invasive infection and changing long-standing practice habits are some barriers to reducing unnecessary BC culture testing, but they can be overcome in part by sharing available study data, said Mazumder. In addition, the development of guidelines to determine which candidates would or would not benefit from BCs would help guide clinicians in best practices, she said. This study was supported in part by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to two of the coauthors. Shah reported no financial conflicts of interest.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Doctors Explain What They Really Think of Biohacking
There are plenty of health trends that pop up and fizzle out fast, but biohacking seems to have staying power. The practice of trying to 'hack' your health for longevity is showing up on podcasts, Netflix documentaries, and all over your For You feed, making it hard to miss. But for all the chatter about biohacking, it's easy to gloss over the actual definition of this practice. What is biohacking, and is it something you should be doing? It's important to state this upfront: Biohacking is a little controversial in the medical field. 'It's using your body as an experiment,' points out Mikhail Kogan, M.D., medical director of the George Washington University Center for Integrative Medicine. While some doctors have a broad view of biohacking that includes things like eating a healthy, varied diet, others view biohacking as more focused on less-proven strategies, like loading up on certain supplements that don't have robust data to back them up. (More on that in a bit.) Meet the experts: Mikhail Kogan, M.D., medical director of the George Washington University Center for Integrative Medicine; Bert Mandelbaum, M.D., sports medicine specialist and co-director of the Regenerative Orthobiologic Center at Cedars-Sinai Orthopaedics in Los Angeles; Kanwar Kelley, M.D., physician and co-founder of Side Health in Orinda, CA; Salim Hayek, M.D., chair of internal medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Whatever your take on biohacking, it's important to at least know what's out there and what it all means. With that in mind, here's what doctors want you to know about biohacking, as well as how to decide if it's right for you. What is biohacking? Biohacking is a broad term used to describe the process of making tweaks to try to improve your health. It can involve sleep, workout routines, supplements, dietary changes, and more. 'Biohacking is essentially DIY biology—making intentional changes to your lifestyle, diet, or environment to optimize health and performance,' explains Salim Hayek, M.D., chair of internal medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch. 'It ranges from simple tweaks like tracking your sleep or trying intermittent fasting, to more extreme practices like implanting microchips.' Biohacking in the traditional sense means that it's experimental, says Dr. Kogan. 'It wouldn't be called 'biohacking' if it's scientifically proven—that would be standard of care,' he says. But some doctors look at biohacking as people simply trying to improve their health beyond what they may discuss in a routine exam with their physician. 'It's a marketing term that describes things that enhance health, healthspan, and playspan,' says Bert Mandelbaum, M.D., sports medicine specialist and co-director of the Regenerative Orthobiologic Center at Cedars-Sinai Orthopaedics in Los Angeles. 'The essential aspect is that you are what you eat, think, drink, and do. Those are all very important.' The right ways to try biohacking—according to experts Dr. Mandelbaum prefers to look at biohacking as enhancing what you've got with the help of scientifically-proven methods. Kanwar Kelley, M.D., physician and co-founder of Side Health in Orinda, CA, also suggests this approach. 'Biohacking does not need to be overly complicated or require specialized equipment,' he says. 'Adjusting your approach to diet, supplementation, and sleep can help enhance performance and overall health, leading to increased productivity and longevity.' Even meditation and incorporating foods with beneficial properties can fall into this category, he says, among other things. On the supplement front, it's important to talk to your doctor before trying anything new—and your doctor may recommend a blood test to identify if you have any deficiencies. Dr. Hayek also recommends leaning into biohacking in the sense of adding new scientifically-proven healthy behaviors to your life vs. trying whatever crosses your social media feed. 'The real benefits come from evidence-based practices,' Dr. Hayek says, such as prioritizing sleep, exercising, and managing stress. 'The key is that most genuine benefits come from consistent, healthy lifestyle changes—not magic pills or high-tech gadgets,' he says. Some tech can be useful, though, especially in how it helps promote self-awareness: 'Use technology wisely—fitness trackers can keep you accountable, but don't become obsessed with the numbers,' Dr. Hayek says. His other tip? 'Try one change at a time so you can actually tell what's working.' Biohacking practices to avoid—according to experts There are several biohacking practices that doctors recommend taking a pass on, but Dr. Mandelbaum points out that the practice of taking several supplements without talking to a doctor first has been somewhat normalized, even though it's potentially risky. 'Those are the kinds of things you want to avoid: Things that are marketed with no scientific evidence.' Dr. Kelley also suggests being wary of techniques that are marketed as 'complete solutions' to health issues. 'While biohacking can help improve performance, no single method will solve all problems,' he says. 'Techniques should be plausible scientifically and have peer-reviewed scientific backing.' Dr. Hayek recommends avoiding biohacking treatments like "young blood" transfusions, DIY genetic engineering, and amateur implant surgeries. And of course, don't take prescription drugs that weren't prescribed to you, he says. 'Be wary of extreme diets promising miraculous results, or mega-dosing supplements,' he adds. 'If a practice could realistically land you in the hospital, think twice.' Risks of biohacking Because biohacking is such a broad category, there are plenty of potential risks involved in it, Dr. Kogan says. 'Almost anything you can think of is a risk,' he says. If used incorrectly, certain 'anti-aging' drugs may cause heart issues and even death, he points out. 'Many DIY biohacking experiments also lack regulation and safety oversight,' Dr. Hayek says. 'Misinformation is rampant online, and people might delay proven medical treatments for unproven hacks. Plus, it can become expensive and psychologically obsessive.' Does biohacking actually help you live longer and increase healthspan? 'We have no proven way to dramatically extend human lifespan through biohacking yet,' Dr. Hayek says, although who knows what the future may hold. For now: 'The best-documented longevity strategies are quite simple: Don't smoke, eat well, exercise, sleep enough, and manage stress,' he continues. 'Some biohacks that promote these behaviors can contribute to healthspan, living more years in good health. But the extreme anti-aging interventions making headlines? Most lack definitive proof and some are potentially dangerous.' Ultimately, if you want to try to enhance your healthspan and lifespan, doctors recommend sticking with the scientifically-proven basics. You Might Also Like Can Apple Cider Vinegar Lead to Weight Loss? Bobbi Brown Shares Her Top Face-Transforming Makeup Tips for Women Over 50 Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CVS Health Corporation (CVS) Is A Key Part Of Weight Loss Drug Distribution, Says Jim Cramer
We recently published . CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS) is one of the stocks Jim Cramer recently discussed. CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS) is one of the largest pharmaceutical retailers in America. The shares have gained 36% year-to-date as the firm has enjoyed tailwinds from the struggles of its rival Walgreens. CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS) has also benefited from robust earnings performance and the decision to exit its Obamacare direct sales business. Cramer's previous comments have praised CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS)'s performance in its core drug store business. This time, he pointed to the role the firm plays in the weight loss drug market: '[If market should start thinking about sectoral tariffs after Trump's latest remarks]I mean when I heard it first I said okay, so they put a tariff on Novo Nordisk. It's really good for Eli Lilly. Now that's not necessarily what we're talking about but remember this price differential right now. . CVS, Eli Lilly versus Novo. So for Wegovy versus Zepbound.' Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash In an earlier appearance, Cramer discussed CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS)'s business performance: 'Now we've got some healthcare, some issues to talk about on Thursday, that's right, and these are anything but common steady healthcare companies…. There's CVS, which is under new management, put up some really good numbers, and it's just, that's in health insurance, but also it's core drugstore business, which they've closed, all the under performers… As for CVS, the health insurers have taken it on the chin of late. UnitedHealth and Centene both missed expectations. I bet Aetna sticks it.' While we acknowledge the potential of CVS as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the . READ NEXT: 30 Stocks That Should Double in 3 Years and 11 Hidden AI Stocks to Buy Right Now. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
