|
|
Further update to SMA infant formula and follow on formula recall to include batches and products possibly distributed to Ireland from the UK.
Alert Summary dated Tuesday, January 13th 2026.
Category 1: For Action
Alert Notification: 2026.01 (Update 4)
Product Identification: Please see ‘List of batches and products’ in Message section below for product details.
Batch Code: Please see ‘List of batches and products’ in Message section below for batch codes and expiry dates. Please note, batch codes can be found on the base of the tin or box for powdered formulas or the base of the outer box and on the side/top of the container for ready-to-feed formulas.
Message:
Further to FSAI Food Alert 2026.01, FSAI Food Alert 2026.01 (Update 1), FSAI Food Alert 2026.01 (Update 2), FSAI Food Alert 2026.01 (Update 3), the FSAI is notifying consumers of the possible presence of cereulide in additional SMA infant formula and follow on formula batches and products in the list below, due to possible indirect distribution to Ireland from the UK.
See Here: List of affected batches and products.
Recall notices will be displayed at point-of-sale.
Questions and answers.
Nestlé is advising its customers that have purchased any of these batches to contact them via its online form, by sharing a photo of the product and the batch code: www.nestle.co.uk/en-gb/getintouch; or by calling its careline on Tel: 1800 931 832.
Nature Of Danger:
Cereulide toxin is produced by the bacterium Bacillus cereus. The toxin may be pre-formed in a food and is extremely heat resistant. Consumption of foods containing cereulide toxin can lead to nausea and severe vomiting. Symptoms can appear within five hours. The duration of illness is usually 6 to 24 hours.
Action Required: Manufacturers, Wholesalers, Distributors, Caterers & Retailers:
Retailers: Same are requested to remove the implicated batches from sale and display recall notices at point-of-sale.
Wholesalers/Distributors: Same are requested to contact their affected customers and recall the implicated batches and provide a point-of-sale recall notice to their retailer customers.
Consumers: Parents, guardians and caregivers are advised not to feed the implicated batches to infants or young children.
From Ultra-Processed Foods To Hormone Residues: Food Safety, Public Health & Corporate Accountability Collide.
A landmark lawsuit filed by the City of San Francisco against major food and drink manufacturers has signalled a new phase in public health enforcement, one that treats diet-related harm not as an individual failing, but as a market and regulatory failure demanding immediate accountability.
San Francisco alleges that ultra-processed foods were engineered and marketed in ways that encourage over-consumption, especially among children, and that the public ultimately pays the price through higher rates of chronic disease and spiralling healthcare costs. While that case will be tested in court, its wider message is already echoing across the Atlantic: Europe is facing its own “trust test” over what we allow into our food chain, particularly under the EU–Mercosur trade agreement.
Why this matters in Europe now:
On 9 January 2026, EU member states greenlit the signature of the EU–Mercosur agreements, with the European Parliament’s consent still required before conclusion.
The European Commission states that EU rules apply equally to domestic and imported food, and that the agreement “upholds” EU food safety and animal/plant health standards.
However, confidence in “standards on paper” depends on something more basic: verifiable controls and traceability in practice.
Banned substances are not theoretical: recent Irish and EU recalls.
The EU prohibits the use of hormones for growth promotion in farm animals.
EFSA has also noted that ractopamine, a beta-agonist, is banned for use in food-producing animals in the EU and that the ban applies to meat produced in the EU and imported from third countries. Against that backdrop, Irish and EU reporting in recent weeks has documented the recall of Brazilian beef products after banned hormone residues were detected, including confirmation that a quantity entered the Irish market and was subject to official recall and follow-up.
The enforcement gap: what the EU’s own audit found.
A 2024 European Commission DG SANTE audit of Brazil’s residue controls concluded that while many aspects of residue control plans were broadly consistent with EU principles, arrangements to guarantee that cattle destined for the EU market had never been treated with oestradiol 17β were “ineffective”. The audit stated the competent authority could not guarantee the reliability of operators’ sworn statements on non-use, and was not in a position to reliably attest to compliance with the relevant EU health certificate section.
This is the crux of the Mercosur anxiety: not whether Europe has rules, but whether Europe can consistently verify compliance, when supply chains are long, oversight differs, and commercial incentives are strong.
Ultra-processed foods and “addictive design”: the parallel problem.
The San Francisco case centres on claims of deceptive marketing and products engineered to drive consumption.
Meanwhile, the health evidence base around UPFs continues to expand. A major BMJ umbrella review reported that greater UPF exposure is associated with higher risk of adverse health outcomes, particularly cardiometabolic outcomes, across many studies.
Controlled research has also shown that ultra-processed diets can increase calorie intake and weight gain compared with minimally processed diets under tightly controlled conditions.
The common thread is accountability: when products (or supply chains) are designed to maximise throughput and profit, public health cannot rely on consumer vigilance alone.
Calls to action
Tipperary is now calling for a joined-up response that protects consumers, supports credible producers, and restores trust in our food chain:
(1) A tougher “trust-but-verify” regime on imports).
Full use of the EU’s Official Controls framework to ensure import compliance is proven through audits, sampling, and enforceable consequences, not assurances alone.
(2) Mandatory transparency on audit findings and corrective action plans.
Where EU audits identify weaknesses in residue controls or traceability, the public must see timelines, milestones and proof of remediation.
(3) Stronger protections for children in the food environment.
Restrictions on marketing tactics that normalise high-sugar, high-salt, heavily engineered foods to children—mirroring the direction of the San Francisco action.
(4) Clearer front-of-pack information and health claims enforcement.
Consumers should not need a chemistry degree to understand what they are buying, or whether “healthy” claims stand up.
(5) A level playing field for farmers and processors meeting EU rules.
Irish and EU producers operating under strict bans and controls must not be undercut by imports where verification is demonstrably weaker.
San Francisco has drawn a line under the era of ‘hands off’ regulation when public health harms are foreseeable and widespread. Europe is now at a similar crossroads. The EU–Mercosur debate cannot be reduced to tariffs and quotas: it is also about trust, enforcement and the credibility of our bans on hormones and other restricted substances. Public health must not be negotiated away, nor should consumers be asked to carry the risk.
127 Enforcement Orders served on food businesses in 2025.
The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) today stated that 127 Enforcement Orders were served on food businesses for breaches of food safety legislation in 2025, a decrease of 4.5% on the 132 that were served in 2024.
Between 1st January and 31st December 2025, 102 Closure Orders, 23 Prohibition Orders and 2 Improvement Orders were issued by Environmental Health Officers in the Health Service Executive, sea-fisheries protection officers in the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, and by officers of the FSAI on food businesses throughout the country.
Commenting on the annual figures, Mr Greg Dempsey, Chief Executive, FSAI, said: “While the total number of Enforcement Orders in 2025 decreased slightly compared to 2024, it is disappointing that we continue to see enforcement action being necessary due to fundamental breaches, such as pest infestations, poor hygiene, unsafe storage of food, inadequate staff training and the absence of food safety management systems. Additionally, we have found instances of unregistered food businesses operating illegally without notifying the competent authority, therefore bypassing essential food safety controls and putting consumers health at risk.”
The FSAI also reported that eight Closure Orders and one Prohibition Order was served on food businesses during the month of December 2025 for breaches of food safety legislation, pursuant to the FSAI Act, 1998 and the European Union (Official Controls in Relation to Food Legislation) Regulations, 2020. The Enforcement Orders were issued by Environmental Health Officers in the Health Service Executive and officers of the FSAI.
One Prohibition Order was served under the European Union (Official Controls in Relation to Food Legislation) Regulations, 2020 on:
Dublin Herbalists (Food Supplements), Carrick Street, Mullinahone, Thurles, Co. Tipperary.
Seven Closure Orders were served under the European Union (Official Controls in Relation to Food Legislation) Regulations, 2020 on:
Centra (Closed area: Deli area), Main Street, Killenaule, Thurles, Co. Tipperary.
Taha Butchers (Closed area: the food and food equipment storage facility at the rear of the premises), 13 Railway Street, Navan, Meath.
Ruby’s Cakes (Manufacturer), Durhamstown Castle, Bohermeen, Navan, Meath
EB Food Essentials, Unregistered establishment trading at Coolanagh, Ballickmoyler, Laois
Quack N Wok (Takeaway), Unit 3A, Gandon House, Custom House Square I.F.S.C, Mayor Street Lower, Dublin 1
Sasaki Sushi (Service Sector), 3 Stoneybatter, Dublin 7
Selera Space, Unregistered premises at an apartment at Sandyford Central, Sandyford Business Park, Dublin 18
One Closure Order was served under the FSAI Act, 1998 on:
Crosfield (Wholesaler/ Distributor), Unit 4 Bymac Centre, Northwest Business Park, Ballycoolin, Dublin 15
Some of the reasons for the Closure Orders in December include: failure to notify the competent authority of the establishment of a food business; active mouse infestation evidenced by droppings throughout food storage and preparation areas; defective drainage and sewage systems, with foul water leaking and backing up from sanitary facilities and contaminating kitchen floors and food preparation surfaces where ready-to-eat foods were handled; unsuitable and unhygienic food and equipment storage facilities; extremely poor hygiene standards, including heavily contaminated food contact surfaces, equipment and utensils; a lack of effective cleaning and disinfection procedures; absence of a food safety management system based on HACCP principles; unsafe food transport practices, including the use of an unrefrigerated vehicle for transporting meat with no controls in place to maintain the cold food chain.
Commenting on the December 2025 figures, Mr Greg Dempsey, Chief Executive, FSAI, added: “Two of the seven Closure Orders in December were for businesses where they had failed to notify the competent authority of the establishment of a food business. It is unacceptable that some food businesses are choosing to operate outside of the law. All food business owners, big or small, whether trading from a business premises, in the home, from a mobile unit, food truck and/or online, must be aware of food hygiene and food safety legislation. Maintaining high food safety standards protects consumers and supports the long-term success of businesses, and enforcement action is taken where necessary to ensure compliance,” said Mr Dempsey.
Details of the food businesses served with Enforcement Orders are published on the FSAI’s website. Closure Orders and Improvement Orders will remain listed in the enforcement reports on the website for a period of three months from the date of when a premises is adjudged to have corrected its food safety issue, with Prohibition Orders being listed for a period of one month.
Undeclared milk and egg in specific batches of Dunnes Stores Moroccan Style Topped Houmous.
Alert Summary dated Friday, January 9th 2026
Allergy Alert Notification: 2026.A02.
Allergens: milk; egg.
Product Identification: Dunnes Stores Moroccan Style Topped Houmous.
Batch Code: Best before date: 30/01/26.
Message:
Specific batches of Dunnes Stores Moroccan Style Topped Houmous contains milk and egg which is not declared on the ingredients list on the affected batches.
This may make the implicated batches unsafe for consumers who are allergic to or intolerant to milk or egg. Therefore, these consumers should not eat the implicated batches.
Affected products can be returned to Dunnes Stores where a full refund will be given.
A previous update to recall of specific batches of SMA.
Category 1: For Action.
Alert Notification: 2026.01 (Update 3).
Product Identification: SMA Advanced Follow-On Milk; pack size: 800g.
Batch Code: 51890742F2; expiry date: Jul-27.
Message: Further to FSAI food alert 2026.01, FSAI food alert 2026.01 (Update 1) and FSAI food alert 2026.01 (Update 2), the correct expiry date for the above batch of SMA Advanced Follow-On Milk is July-27th.
Recall notices will be displayed at point-of-sale.
Questions and answers.
Nestlé is advising its customers that have purchased any of these batches to contact them:
Via its online form, sharing a photo of the product and the batch code: www.nestle.co.uk/en-gb/getintouch by calling its careline Tel: 1800 931 832.
Nature Of Danger:
Cereulide toxin is produced by the bacterium Bacillus cereus. The toxin may be pre-formed in a food and is extremely heat resistant. Consumption of foods containing cereulide toxin can lead to nausea and severe vomiting. Symptoms can appear within five hours. The duration of illness is usually 6 to 24 hours.
Action Required: Manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, caterers & retailers:
Retailers: Same are requested to remove the implicated batches from sale and display recall notices at point-of-sale.
Wholesalers/distributors: are requested to contact their affected customers and recall the implicated batches and provide a point-of-sale recall notice to their retailer customers.
Consumers: Parents, guardians and caregivers are advised not to feed the implicated batches to infants or young children.
|
Support Us Help keep Thurles.info online by donating below. Thank you.
Total Donated 2026: €40.00
Thank You!
Daily Thurles Mass Livestream
|
Recent Comments