FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety AlertsVersion 3

Oma's Pride Recalls Woof Complete Dog Food Over Possible Metal Contamination

One lot of frozen raw dog food is recalled due to possible metal contamination, according to the FDA.

3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 15, 2026, 8:25 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 14, 2026, 9:27 p.m. ETUpdated Aug 23, 2026, 7:53 p.m. ET
Oma's Pride has recalled , according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The recall was initiated on August 21, 2026, due to . The recalled product has lot number BB012729, SKU number F-WOOFC-6, UPC 8 7938400145 9, and was manufactured on January 27, 2026, with a best-by date of January 27, 2029. It was .

Earlier reports

  1. Aug 18, 2026, 9:28 p.m. ET

    Oma's Pride Recalls One Lot of Woof Complete Canine Chicken Recipe Over Possible Salmonella Contamination

    Oma's Pride of Avon, CT, is recalling one lot of Woof Complete Canine Chicken Recipe dog food in 6-pound bags because of possible salmonella contamination, according to recall information attributed to the FDA and reported on August 14, 2026. About 639 bags were affected.

    The product is sold under the Oma's Pride brand, also styled Oma’s Pride, and carries the Woof Complete name.

    The affected bags were manufactured on January 27, 2026 and carry a best-by date of January 27, 2029. Owners can identify the recalled lot by the codes on the package, reproduced here exactly as the recall information gives them:

    • Lot number: BB012729
    • Item / SKU: F-WOOFC-6
    • UPC: 8 7938400145 9
    • Manufacturing Date: 1/27/2026
    • Expiration / Best-by: 1/27/2029
    • Distribution Dates: 2/12/2026–5/15/2026

    The bags were distributed between February 12 and May 15 in 11 states: Arizona, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia.

    Anyone with an affected bag should stop feeding its contents to their dog and contact Oma's Pride for a refund, according to the recall.

    The recall information available for this report does not include a count of reported illnesses or injuries, and it does not describe the hazard beyond the possible salmonella contamination cited as the reason for the recall. It also does not say how the possible contamination was identified.

  2. Aug 15, 2026, 8:25 p.m. ETFirst report

    Dog Food Recalled Over Possible Salmonella Contamination

    In a developing situation, about 639 bags of one lot of Woof Complete Canine Chicken Recipe in 6-pound bags have been recalled due to possible salmonella contamination, according to reporting from kwtx.com, kwch.com, and kmvt.com citing the FDA. The affected product carries the identifying code BB012729 and brand names Woof Complete, Oma’s Pride, and Oma's Pride. Distribution occurred in Arizona, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Reports differ on the punctuation of the firm name and remedy contact: kmvt.com and kwtx.com name the firm as Oma’s Pride, while kwch.com names it as Oma's Pride. Regarding the remedy, kwtx.com and kwch.com report that customers should stop feeding its contents to their dog and contact Oma's Pride for a refund, whereas kmvt.com reports that customers should stop feeding its contents to their dog and contact Oma’s Pride for a refund.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 619 Aug 2026, 01:28current

    Updated to include report date, reported illness numbers, hazard details, product codes, and specific source remedies.

  2. Version 517 Aug 2026, 20:23

    Updated story to include competing details and figures reported by biztoc.com.

  3. Version 416 Aug 2026, 22:41

    Added missing attributions for alaskasnewssource.com across the story and added its URL to sources cited.

  4. Version 316 Aug 2026, 05:09

    Updated attributions and sources cited to include wave3.com.

  5. Version 323 Aug 2026, 23:53current

    Added explicit statement that the notice lists 12 codes and the story prints three, with the rest in the notice. Removed any single remedy instruction; instead reported the range of advice from sources and noted the notice does not specify a remedy.

  6. Version 216 Aug 2026, 01:45

    Updated story to include 29news.com reporting, explicit firm name spelling differences, and complete attribution.

  7. Version 223 Aug 2026, 23:50

    Added SKU number F-WOOFC-6 to the identifying codes, bringing the printed count to three, and noted that the notice lists 12 codes with the rest carried there. Removed the direct instruction to stop feeding and contact for refund, replacing it with a statement that sources differ and the official notice does not specify a remedy.

  8. Version 123 Aug 2026, 23:45

    First published.

  9. Version 116 Aug 2026, 00:55

    First published.

  10. Version 116 Aug 2026, 00:25current

    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.