Waitrose has issued a recall for its No1 Deeside Mineral Water and No1 Deeside Sparkling Water due to concerns that some 750ml bottles may contain fragments of glass. The recall affects specific batch codes with best-before dates in November and December 2027, including NOV 2027 28, DEC 2027 01, DEC 2027 02, DEC 2027 10, DEC 2027 11, and DEC 2027 16 for still water; and DEC 2027 01, DEC 2027 03, DEC 2027 12, DEC 2027 15, and DEC 2027 25 for sparkling water.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has warned that consuming these products could pose a risk of injury. Customers are advised not to drink the affected waters and to return any purchased bottles to their nearest Waitrose store for a full refund. Notices regarding the recall will be displayed at all Waitrose locations selling these products.

Waitrose has expressed regret over the inconvenience caused by this precautionary measure. This incident follows other recent recalls involving various food items due to safety concerns related to contamination risks.

Original Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (recall) (entitlement)

The article provides actionable information regarding a product recall, which is valuable for consumers who may have purchased the affected Waitrose No1 Deeside Mineral and Sparkling waters. It clearly outlines the steps customers should take: do not consume the product and return it to the store for a full refund. This guidance is straightforward and practical, allowing readers to act immediately if they are in possession of the recalled items.

In terms of educational depth, while the article mentions that glass pieces may be present in some bottles, it does not delve into how this situation arose or what specific measures are being taken by Waitrose to prevent future occurrences. The lack of detailed explanation about safety protocols or manufacturing processes limits its educational value.

The relevance of this information is significant for anyone who shops at Waitrose or consumes bottled water. The potential health risks associated with consuming glass fragments make this recall a matter of personal safety. Therefore, it affects individuals directly and meaningfully.

The public service function is evident as the article serves to inform consumers about a safety issue that could lead to injury. By providing details on how to respond to the recall, it encourages responsible consumer behavior.

Regarding practical advice, while there are clear instructions on returning products for refunds, there could be additional tips on checking other products for recalls or verifying batch codes before purchase. However, what is provided is realistic and easy for most people to follow.

In terms of long-term impact, this article focuses primarily on an immediate issue without offering broader insights into consumer safety practices or how one might stay informed about future recalls. It addresses a specific event rather than helping readers develop habits that would enhance their overall awareness regarding food safety.

Emotionally, while there may be an element of concern due to potential injury from glass in beverages, the article maintains a calm tone by emphasizing customer safety and providing clear steps for resolution. It does not sensationalize but rather informs responsibly.

There are no indications of clickbait language; instead, it presents factual information relevant to public health without exaggeration.

Missed opportunities include providing more context about how such recalls occur or suggesting ways consumers can stay informed about similar issues in general—such as regularly checking food safety websites or subscribing to recall alerts from retailers.

To add real value beyond what was provided in the article: consumers should develop habits such as regularly checking product labels before consumption and staying updated on food recalls through reliable sources like government health agencies or consumer advocacy groups. Additionally, when purchasing bottled products in general—look out for any signs of damage or tampering with packaging before buying them. This proactive approach can help mitigate risks associated with food safety issues moving forward.

The text uses the phrase "due to concerns that some bottles may contain pieces of glass." This wording creates a sense of fear and urgency. It suggests a serious risk without confirming that any injuries have occurred. This choice of words can lead readers to feel more alarmed than if it simply stated there was confirmed contamination.

The statement "this recall is being implemented as a precautionary measure" softens the impact of the recall. By using "precautionary measure," it implies that the situation is under control and not as severe as it might be. This can downplay the seriousness of potentially dangerous products being on store shelves, which could mislead customers about the actual risk involved.

When Waitrose expresses "regret for any inconvenience caused by this recall," it shifts focus from the potential danger to customer inconvenience. This language can make it seem like the main issue is customer annoyance rather than health risks from glass in drinks. It minimizes accountability for safety issues, which could lead readers to overlook who is truly responsible for ensuring product safety.

The phrase "the presence of glass could lead to injury" uses conditional language, suggesting an uncertain outcome rather than stating a fact. This wording allows for ambiguity about how serious the threat really is, making it seem less urgent or alarming than if it stated that injuries had already occurred or were likely. It creates doubt about how immediate and severe the danger might be.

The text mentions customers should return bottles for a full refund but does not specify how they will ensure safe disposal or prevent further sales of affected products. By focusing only on refunds, this may give readers a false sense that returning items resolves all issues related to safety concerns. It leaves out important details about what steps are taken after recalls, which affects public perception regarding corporate responsibility in food safety.

In saying "the recall will remain in effect until June 30, 2026," there’s an implication that this issue will persist over time without resolution. The specific date gives an impression that problems are ongoing rather than resolved quickly or effectively by Waitrose. This can create anxiety among consumers about long-term safety when purchasing similar products in the future.

When mentioning “customers who have purchased these products,” there’s no acknowledgment of other stakeholders like suppliers or manufacturers involved in this situation. By focusing solely on customers, it overlooks broader implications regarding supply chain accountability and transparency within food production processes. This omission could mislead readers into thinking only consumers bear responsibility for addressing product safety issues instead of recognizing systemic factors at play.

The text conveys several meaningful emotions, primarily centered around concern for safety and regret. The most prominent emotion is fear, which arises from the mention of potential injury due to pieces of glass in the bottled water. Phrases like "concerns that some bottles may contain pieces of glass" and "the presence of glass could lead to injury" evoke a sense of danger that is likely to alarm readers. This fear serves to emphasize the seriousness of the situation, prompting customers to take immediate action by not consuming the product.

Another significant emotion expressed is regret, particularly through the spokesperson's statement about feeling sorry for any inconvenience caused by the recall. This expression of regret softens the impact of the recall and aims to foster empathy among customers. It suggests that Waitrose values its customers' experiences and feelings, thereby building trust in their commitment to safety.

The text also encourages a sense of responsibility among consumers through its advisory tone. By instructing customers not to consume the affected products and return them for a full refund, it inspires action while reinforcing customer safety as a priority. The use of phrases such as "precautionary measure" indicates a proactive approach rather than reactive panic, which can help alleviate some fear while still urging caution.

To guide readers’ reactions effectively, these emotions work together to create sympathy towards those affected by potential harm while simultaneously instilling worry about personal safety when consuming food products. The language chosen throughout—such as "recall," "concerns," and "injury"—is emotionally charged rather than neutral; this choice enhances urgency and compels readers toward compliance with safety measures.

Additionally, writing tools like repetition are subtly employed when reiterating customer safety concerns and actions they should take (returning bottles for refunds). This repetition reinforces key messages in an emotional context that prioritizes consumer well-being over mere product logistics. By framing these actions within emotional language—expressing both concern for health risks and regret over inconvenience—the writer effectively persuades readers not only to act but also fosters trust in Waitrose’s commitment to their safety.

Overall, this careful orchestration of emotions shapes how readers perceive both the situation at hand and Waitrose's response, guiding them toward understanding the importance of taking precautionary measures while maintaining confidence in their brand’s integrity.