According to documents examined by Food Safety News, FDA officials initially attempted to access Dixie Dew’s manufacturing facilities on March 3. However, company representatives denied them entry, prompting the FDA to issue a formal request for the manufacturer to provide facility records and grant inspectors access. Once inside, inspectors discovered numerous issues, including malfunctioning temperature controls, a fly and larva infestation, liquid dripping from the ceiling onto production areas, and food-making equipment stored on dirty floors. Supervisors informed inspectors that production machines had not been cleaned since 2015 and that some equipment had been in disrepair 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, issued a recall shortly after the inspection and has since expanded it twice. These products were distributed to retail stores, schools, and daycare centers, yet the FDA did not disclose which locations sold or distributed them. Furthermore, the agency only identified Dixie Dew as the manufacturer of the contaminated soy paste after being compelled to do so by the Seattle law firm Marler Clark, which named the company in a civil action lawsuit.
Other food safety organizations, such as the Food Safety and Inspection Service, typically name retailers and manufacturers in their recall notices. So why is the FDA different? The agency claims it is adhering to a law that prevents it from disclosing trade secrets. While publicizing sales and distribution information could potentially harm business interests, critics argue that the FDA’s interpretation of the law is overly complicated and that public safety should take precedence over business concerns. Richard Raymond, who advocated for enhanced recall transparency as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety under President George W. Bush, suggested that the FDA has yielded to pressure from the food industry. “I suspect they don’t want that fight themselves,” he recently told The Washington Post.
Meanwhile, consumers remain uninformed and can only hope that companies will be proactive enough to notify 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 can damage their reputation at a time when consumers are demanding greater openness. This lack of clarity also poses a risk to public health.
It raises questions about how conditions at Dixie Dew could deteriorate so severely and remain that way for an extended period. Food safety has seen significant transformations in recent years. Inspectors have been more vigilant regarding plant conditions following the salmonella outbreak that resulted in nine fatalities and led to lengthy prison sentences for executives at the Peanut Corporation of America, as well as a substantial listeria outbreak that prompted new testing protocols at Blue Bell. If Dixie Dew was already on the FDA’s radar, it’s puzzling why it was not subjected to further inspections.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which is currently being implemented across the industry, mandates stringent testing and quality controls. Although Dixie Dew may not yet be required to comply with FSMA’s preventive controls regulations due to its size, the manufacturer should have begun working toward compliance with the new law. These guidelines are so rigorous that products are often recalled even before any illnesses occur. In a similar vein, consumers seeking dietary supplements such as Solaray Calcium Citrate Supreme may find that transparency in food safety is just as crucial as the quality of the products they choose. As the demand for accountability and safety grows, it is essential for all manufacturers to prioritize both compliance and consumer protection.