Recall Issued for Goody King Magnetic Building Cubes Sold on Amazon
About 213,500 magnetic building cube sets are recalled following reports of parts breaking and two children requiring emergency surgery.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 18, 2026, 7:23 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 18, 2026, 7:54 p.m. ET
Two Children Require Emergency Surgery After Ingesting Goody King Magnets
Two children who ingested magnets from broken Goody King building cubes underwent emergency surgery to remove them, according to CPSC reports cited by dailymail.com. The specific dates of the incidents have not been established.
The CPSC received 27 reports of the magnetic cubes breaking or opening, allowing loose magnets to become accessible to children, dailymail.com reported. The issue affects 213,500 units of Goody King Magnetic Building Cubes and Blocks manufactured by Yi Suen Commerce of Hong Kong. Sold via Amazon.com from January 2024 through July 2026 for between $17 and $50, the product was available in sets of 45, 56, 100, 120, 150 and 300 across styles and themes including forest, galaxy, farm, castle, unicorn, woods and dinosaur.
According to dailymail.com, customers should immediately stop using the toy and contact Yi Suen for a refund.
Aug 18, 2026, 7:23 p.m. ETFirst report
Recall Issued for Goody King Magnetic Cubes Sold on Amazon
An open recall is underway for 213,500 units of Goody King Magnetic Building Cubes and Blocks, according to dailymail.com citing the CPSC. The situation remains developing. Manufactured in China by Yi Suen Commerce of Hong Kong, the items were distributed in the U.S. via Amazon.com and sold from January 2024 through July 2026 for between $17 and $50. The recall applies to Goody King Magnetic Building Cubes and Blocks sold in sets of 45, 56, 100, 120, 150 and 300 in a variety of styles and themes, including forest, galaxy, farm, castle, unicorn, woods and dinosaur. There have been 27 reports of the Goody King magnetic cubes breaking or opening, causing the magnets to become loose and accessible to children. Dailymail.com reported that two children who ingested the magnets from the broken parts had to undergo emergency surgery to remove them. As a remedy, customers should immediately stop using the toy and contact Yi Suen for a refund.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 23:56current
First published.
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 23:23current
First published.
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 23:54current
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.