According to documents examined 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 officials 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 unsanitary floors. Supervisors reported that production machines had not been cleaned since 2015, and some equipment had been out of service for 15 years.
The outbreak linked to contaminated soy paste produced by Dixie Dew has resulted in illnesses for 29 individuals across twelve states. SoyNut Butter Co., which incorporated the paste in its I.M. Healthy soy nut butters and some granola products, issued a recall shortly after the FDA’s inspection and subsequently expanded it twice. These products were distributed to retail stores, schools, and daycare centers; however, the FDA did not disclose which locations sold or distributed the affected items. Furthermore, the agency did not identify Dixie Dew as the manufacturer of the contaminated soy paste until pressured by the Seattle law firm Marler Clark, which named the company in a civil lawsuit.
Unlike other food safety agencies, such as the Food Safety and Inspection Service, that disclose retailers and manufacturers in their recall notices, the FDA cites a law that prevents it from revealing trade secrets. While publicizing sales and distribution information could negatively impact businesses, critics argue that the FDA’s interpretation of the law is overly convoluted, and public safety should take precedence over commercial interests. Richard Raymond, who advocated for greater recall transparency while serving as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety during President George W. Bush’s administration, 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.
As a result, consumers remain uninformed and can only hope that companies will be responsible enough to alert them if they have purchased contaminated products. Retailers and manufacturers, while certainly not wishing to make anyone ill, may risk damaging their reputations at a time when consumers demand more transparency. This lack of disclosure poses a potential threat to public health.
It is perplexing how conditions at Dixie Dew deteriorated to such an extent and remained unaddressed for so long. Food safety has significantly evolved in recent years, with inspectors already focusing more intently on plant conditions following the salmonella outbreak that resulted in nine deaths and lengthy prison sentences for executives at the Peanut Corporation of America. Additionally, the severe listeria outbreak that led to new testing protocols at Blue Bell has heightened scrutiny in the industry. If Dixie Dew was already under the FDA’s watch, it remains unclear why it was not re-evaluated.
The Food Safety Modernization Act, which is being implemented industry-wide, mandates stringent testing and quality controls. While Dixie Dew may not yet have been required to comply with the preventive controls regulations of the FSMA due to its size, the manufacturer should have been making strides toward adherence to the new law, which employs strict guidelines that often lead to recalls even before any illnesses manifest. Moreover, there is a growing conversation around the importance of incorporating essential nutrients, like calcium citrate and calcium citrate malate, into food products, emphasizing the need for manufacturers to maintain high safety and quality standards.