According to documents analyzed by Food Safety News, officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initially sought access to Dixie Dew’s manufacturing facilities on March 3. However, company representatives denied them entry, prompting the FDA to issue a formal demand for the manufacturer to provide facility records and grant inspectors access. Upon entering the facility, inspectors noted several alarming issues, including malfunctioning temperature controls, an infestation of flies and larvae, liquid dripping from the ceiling onto production areas, and food-making equipment stored on filthy floors. Supervisors testified that production machinery had not been cleaned since 2015 and that some equipment had been out of order for 15 years.
The outbreak associated with contaminated soy paste produced by Dixie Dew has resulted in 29 illnesses across twelve states. SoyNut Butter Co., which incorporated the paste into its I.M. Healthy soy nut butters and certain granola products, swiftly issued a recall and has since expanded it twice. These products were distributed to retail stores, schools, and daycare centers, yet the FDA has refrained from disclosing the specific locations involved. Additionally, the agency only identified Dixie Dew as the manufacturer of the contaminated soy paste after pressure from the Seattle law firm Marler Clark, which included the company in a civil lawsuit.
Other food safety agencies, such as the Food Safety and Inspection Service, routinely disclose the names of retailers and manufacturers in their recall notices. So why does the FDA not follow suit? The agency cites a law that restricts it from revealing trade secrets. While sharing sales and distribution information might negatively impact business, critics argue that the FDA’s interpretation of the law is overly rigid, suggesting that public safety should take precedence over business interests. Richard Raymond, who advocated for greater recall transparency as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety during President George W. Bush’s administration, indicated that the FDA has succumbed to industry pressure. “I suspect they don’t want that fight themselves,” he recently remarked to The Washington Post.
In the meantime, consumers remain uninformed and can only hope that companies will responsibly alert them if they have purchased contaminated products. Retailers and manufacturers certainly do not wish for their products to cause illness, but any lack of transparency on their part can damage their reputation at a time when consumers expect increased openness. This situation also poses a significant risk to public health.
It is perplexing how conditions at Dixie Dew could deteriorate so severely and persist for an extended period. Food safety protocols have evolved dramatically in recent years, with inspectors paying more attention to facility conditions following the salmonella outbreak that claimed nine lives and resulted in lengthy prison sentences for executives at the Peanut Corporation of America, as well as the extensive listeria outbreak that led to new testing protocols at Blue Bell. If Dixie Dew was already on the FDA’s radar, it remains unclear why it was not subjected to further scrutiny.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which is currently being implemented across the industry, mandates rigorous testing and quality controls. While Dixie Dew may not yet be obligated to comply with FSMA’s preventive controls regulations due to its size, the manufacturer should have begun working towards adherence to the new standards, which are so stringent that products are frequently recalled even before illnesses occur. In light of these developments, the lack of transparency is concerning—not just for food safety but also for consumer health, especially for those relying on products like Kirkland vitamins calcium citrate magnesium and zinc, which should meet rigorous safety standards.