Dexcom's FDA-posted notice says two lots of scrapped G7 sensors were stolen before destruction and sold through an unauthorized third party, with one lot carrying skin-infection risk and another no-reading risk. [1]

FDA provides the source record; no verified same-session X post is attached, so the article treats the lot and label as the evidence. [1]

The reader task is narrow: keep the lot and label in view, and do not let a summary substitute for the document, label, count, schedule, method, product name, lot number, public tally, governing line, affected place, or household action that can actually be checked. [1]

That is enough for a brief because the useful news is practical: FDA supplies the record, no verified same-session X post is attached, and the public value is knowing exactly what to verify next before the story becomes another generic warning, market slogan, or institutional talking point detached from the person who has to act.

If the next update changes the product, source date, public count, schedule, vote, measurement method, named actor, affected route, or consumer instruction, the story changes; if it only changes the volume of the argument, it does not.

-- NORA WHITFIELD, Chicago