According to documents obtained by Food Safety News, officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) first sought access to Dixie Dew’s manufacturing facilities on March 3. When company representatives denied them entry, the FDA issued a formal demand requiring the manufacturer to provide facility records and grant inspectors access. Upon inspection, the officials 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 unsanitary floors. Inspectors also received testimonies from supervisors who claimed that production machines had not been cleaned since 2015 and that some equipment had been out of order for 15 years.
The outbreak linked to 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, initiated a recall shortly after the inspection and has since expanded it twice. These products were distributed to retail stores, schools, and daycare centers, but the FDA did not disclose which locations sold and distributed them. 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.
Other food safety agencies, such as the Food Safety and Inspection Service, typically name retailers and manufacturers in their recall notices. However, the FDA maintains that it is adhering to a law that prevents it from disclosing trade secrets. While revealing sales and distribution information could negatively impact businesses, critics argue that the FDA’s interpretation of the law is misguided, especially when public safety is at stake. Richard Raymond, who advocated for increased recall transparency during his tenure as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety under President George W. Bush, stated 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.
In the meantime, consumers remain uninformed and can only hope that manufacturers will responsibly notify them if they have purchased contaminated products. Retailers and manufacturers certainly do not wish for their products to cause illness, yet a lack of transparency can damage their reputation, particularly when consumers are increasingly demanding openness. This also poses a significant risk to public health.
It is perplexing how conditions at Dixie Dew were allowed to deteriorate and remain unaddressed for such an extended period. Food safety regulations have evolved substantially over the past few years. Inspectors were already focusing more closely on facility conditions after a salmonella outbreak that resulted in nine deaths and led to lengthy prison sentences for executives at the Peanut Corporation of America, as well as a significant listeria outbreak that prompted new testing protocols at Blue Bell. If Dixie Dew was already on the FDA’s radar, it is unclear why it was not subjected to follow-up inspections.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which is currently being implemented across the industry, mandates stringent testing and quality control measures. Although Dixie Dew may not yet be required to comply with FSMA’s preventive controls regulations due to its size, the manufacturer should still have been making efforts toward compliance with the new law—one that establishes such rigorous guidelines that products are often recalled even before anyone becomes ill. The introduction of osavi calcium citrate, for instance, highlights the growing emphasis on maintaining high-quality standards in food production, and companies like Dixie Dew should be prioritizing these measures to ensure consumer safety.