FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety AlertsVersion 8

FDA Lists Class I Recall of D'Dioses Nuez Ice Pops Over Undeclared Allergens

The agency's enforcement record cites possible undeclared milk, pecans, pistachios, yellow #5 and red #40 in 185 cases distributed across four states.

By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 7, 2026, 9:44 a.m. ET
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's enforcement record lists a recall of D'Dioses Nuez ice pops, recall number , with a report date of July 22, 2026. The record identifies the recalling firm as , and states the recall was initiated on May 4, 2026. The product is described as "," with a quantity of distributed in New Jersey, Connecticut, New York and Pennsylvania. The status is listed as . The stated reason, according to the FDA record, is that the product is the FDA's most serious recall category, used where there is a reasonable probability that using the product will cause serious harm or death. The FDA says an undeclared allergen is an ingredient the label does not name, and that people with an allergy or severe sensitivity to it run the risk of a serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they eat the product; anyone without that allergy is not affected. The agency's database records 15 other actions by this firm, including four other recalls with the same July 22, 2026 report date and the same stated reason: D'Dioses Tamarindo ice pops (UPC 827912008593), Arroz con Leche, 4 oz (UPC 710594511843), Fresa Leche, 4 oz (UPC 710594511850), and Mango, 3.7 oz (UPC 827912008494). The database also shows 745 food recalls citing an undeclared allergen over the past two years. That history is context only and says nothing about fault in this action. Background reference material describes the product type as a single-serve frozen "paleta" in the Mexican style, in the "nuez" (nut) flavour — a cream- or milk-based frozen bar on a stick made with nuts, typically pecans or walnuts depending on the maker. Those references say creamy "de leche" paletas are built from combinations of milk, cream, Mexican crema and/or sweetened condensed milk with sugar, with the nuts blended in or added as pieces, while fruit-based "de agua" paletas are the water-based counterpart. It is a finished, ready-to-eat retail item — an individually wrapped single bar sold frozen in shops and by paleterías and street vendors — so anyone affected would be an ordinary shopper rather than another business. The reference sources do not establish where this particular branded bar is made or by whom. This account is based on the FDA enforcement record. No injuries or illnesses are described in the material available, and how the undeclared ingredients came to be in the product has not been determined.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 87 Aug 2026, 13:44current

    Repaired a garbled clause in the product-description paragraph ("flavour rozen bar") and added the source URLs to the citation list.

  2. Version 77 Aug 2026, 13:03

    Replaced the product-background paragraph's unsupported origin history with what the reference sources actually describe, and noted that they do not establish where this branded bar is made.

  3. Version 67 Aug 2026, 07:44

    Replaced unsupported recipe details in the product-background paragraph with the sourced description of paletas and how they are sold.

  4. Version 57 Aug 2026, 03:31

    Trimmed the product-background paragraph to what the cited source states, removing unsourced origin and history claims.

  5. Version 46 Aug 2026, 23:12

    Corrected the product-background paragraph to match the reference source (nuez as walnut or pecan; origin traced to Michoac\u00e1n or Mexico City in the 1940s, not Tocumbo), removed the uncited ounce conversion, and added the source URLs.

  6. Version 36 Aug 2026, 19:01

    Added the FDA's Class I and undeclared-allergen definitions, the firm's four other same-day recalls and wider recall-database context, and background on what a paleta de nuez is.

  7. Version 25 Aug 2026, 21:48

    Clarified that July 22, 2026 is the record's report date; tightened wording; no new facts available.

  8. Version 15 Aug 2026, 21:44

    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.