FirstAlerts

Sprouts of Minneapolis Expands Recall of Robust Radish Sprout Mix Over E. coli, Salmonella Concerns

The FDA announced an ongoing recall of 5-ounce cups of Robust Radish Sprout Mix sold under the Everything Sprouts brand in Minnesota and Wisconsin.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 1, 2026, 10:00 a.m. ETWritten Sep 1, 2026, 10:47 a.m. ET
is recalling its , sold under the Everything Sprouts brand, due to potential contamination with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli or Salmonella, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as reported by Medical Daily. The recall covers products distributed in and includes identifying codes 087906000075 and lot numbers 223, 226, 230, and 233. The FDA advises consumers to throw the product away or return it, and to clean and sanitize any surface or container it touched. No illnesses have been linked to the radish mix, and the recall is .

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 11 Sept 2026, 14:47current

    First published.

  2. Version 11 Sept 2026, 14:52

    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.