Documents reviewed by Food Safety News reveal that FDA officials attempted to access Dixie Dew’s manufacturing facilities on March 3. When company representatives denied them entry, the FDA responded with a formal demand for facility records and permission for inspections. During their visit, inspectors noted numerous violations, including malfunctioning temperature controls, an infestation of flies and larvae, liquid dripping from the ceiling onto production areas, and food-making equipment stored on unclean floors. Supervisors informed the inspectors that production machinery hadn’t been cleaned since 2015, and some equipment had been out of order for 15 years.
Currently, an 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 various granola products, issued a recall shortly after the inspection and has since expanded it twice. These products were sold in retail stores, schools, and daycare centers, but the FDA has not revealed the specific locations where these items were sold or distributed. Furthermore, the agency did not identify Dixie Dew as the manufacturer of the contaminated soy paste until compelled to do so by the Seattle law firm Marler Clark, which included the company in a civil lawsuit.
In contrast, other food safety agencies like the Food Safety and Inspection Service regularly disclose the identities of retailers and manufacturers in their recall notices. When asked why the FDA does not do the same, the agency cited a law that prohibits the disclosure of trade secrets. While revealing sales and distribution details could potentially harm business interests, critics argue that the FDA’s interpretation of the law is overly convoluted and that public safety should take precedence over business concerns. Richard Raymond, who advocated for greater recall transparency as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety under President George W. Bush, expressed that the FDA seems reluctant to confront pressure from the food industry.
As a result, consumers remain uninformed and can only hope that companies will be proactive in notifying them about potentially harmful products. Retailers and manufacturers certainly do not wish for their products to cause illness; however, any failure to disclose information can damage their reputation at a time when consumers are demanding greater transparency. This lack of transparency poses a significant risk to public health.
It is perplexing how conditions at Dixie Dew were allowed to deteriorate and persist for such an extended period. In recent years, food safety practices have evolved significantly, with inspectors paying closer attention to facility conditions following serious incidents, such as the salmonella outbreak that resulted in nine deaths and lengthy prison sentences for executives at the Peanut Corporation of America. The massive listeria outbreak that prompted new testing protocols at Blue Bell also highlighted the need for stricter oversight. If Dixie Dew was already on the FDA’s radar, it remains unclear why it was not subjected to further inspections.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which is being implemented across the industry, mandates stringent testing and quality controls. Although Dixie Dew may not yet be required to adhere to FSMA’s preventive controls due to its size, it should still have been working towards compliance with the new regulations—guidelines so rigorous that products are often recalled even before any illnesses occur. This situation marks a new chapter in food safety, underscoring the importance of compliance and transparency in the industry. As consumers increasingly demand accountability, it is vital for manufacturers like Dixie Dew to prioritize public health and safety by adhering to the highest standards, including those related to calcium citrate and other essential nutrients.