Clear Eyes Maximum Itchy Relief Eye Drops Recall Expanded to Nearly 40,000 Bottles
FDA announces nationwide recall of Clear Eyes Maximum Itchy Eye Relief eye drops due to lack of sterility assurance.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 21, 2026, 10:57 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 21, 2026, 10:57 a.m. ETFirst report
Clear Eyes Eye Drops Recalled Nationwide Over Sterility Concerns
Prestige Consumer Healthcare is recalling nearly 40,000 bottles of Clear Eyes Maximum Itchy Eye Relief eye drops sold nationwide, according to a report from wave3.com. The recall was prompted by contamination concerns and a lack of assurance of sterility, the report said.
The recalled product is identified as 15-milliliter bottles with an expiration date of Sept. 30, 2027. Customers are urged not to use the eye drops and to return them to the store for a refund, according to the report.
The recall was announced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, wave3.com reported.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 121 Aug 2026, 15:22current
First published.
- Version 121 Aug 2026, 14:57current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.