Publisher’s Platform: Food Safety Naughty List
ByHeart for the botulism outbreak and terrible crisis response – “Aggressive” denial of evidence: Consumer advocates, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest, criticized ByHeart for downplaying initial findings. After the California Department of Public Health found C. botulinum in an open box, ByHeart claimed the finding lacked “scientific basis,” a position experts called an “unusual” and “bizarre” attempt at damage control. Scope of delayed recall: Critics argued that ByHeart was “in denial” and reacted too slowly. The company initially recalled only two lots on November 8, 2025, despite evidence of a broader problem; It was not until November 11 that the recall was extended to all products, under pressure from the FDA. History of Security Breaches: Investigations revealed that ByHeart had been flagged for security violations well before the outbreak. FDA inspections in 2023 and 2024 documented mold, water leaks and thousands of dead insects in food production areas. Inadequate Refund Policy: Early in the recall, ByHeart limited refunds to just two units, causing significant backlash from parents who had purchased months of formula through subscriptions. The company later expanded this policy under public pressure.
FSIS – for rolling back the Salmonella framework, indefinitely delaying testing of raw, stuffed and breaded chicken – Critics, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and Consumer Reports, say rolling back the effort exposes grocery shoppers to dangerous bacteria, potentially leading to hundreds of thousands of illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths each year. Inadequate Current System: Food safety experts say the existing regulatory system is inadequate because Salmonella infections have increased and current standards allow high rates of contamination in poultry products entering the market. Lack of accountability: This framework would have been the first time in more than two decades that poultry companies faced real penalties for Salmonella contamination by classifying certain levels of contamination as adulterated, which could have led to recalls. Restoration removes this responsibility. Shift Responsibility to Consumers: Opponents of rollback argue that it is unfair to place primary responsibility for food safety on consumers through proper handling and cooking instructions, rather than ensuring that a safer product leaves the processing plant. Ignoring a major health problem: Salmonella is the leading cause of foodborne illness in the United States, causing an estimated 1.35 million infections and 420 deaths each year, with poultry being the main source. Critics say the withdrawal ignores this important public health problem.
FDA, CDC and state health departments – Failure of public health to disclose outbreaks. Failure to Disclose Confirmed Sources: Instances have been highlighted in which the CDC and FDA identified a specific food source through traceability investigations but failed to notify the public. For example, agencies have been criticized for not announcing an outbreak of E. coli by the end of 2024. coli linked to romaine lettuce that sickened 89 people in 15 states, although the investigation was confirmed by internal data. Silence on ongoing outbreaks: In early 2025, when the FDA had reported outbreaks in several states (such as Salmonella in mini-pastries), the CDC remained “silent” and did not post the reports or recalls on its own platforms, departing from decades of standard practice. “Sweeping outbreaks under the rug”: The decision to withhold information about outbreaks amounts to “hiding” data that such behavior is “radical” and detrimental to food safety. Additionally, health officials often do not tell actual victims or their families which specific product caused their illness or death. Right to Market Responsibility: Transparency allows consumers to differentiate between companies with strong and weak food safety records. Without this knowledge, consumers cannot use their purchasing power to reward safe manufacturers or avoid those who have “poisoned” them.
Delay on food traceability rule – Food safety advocates and consumer groups (such as Consumer Reports and the Center for Science in the Public Interest) have criticized the delay, arguing that it puts the public at risk following a surge in foodborne illness outbreaks in 2024.
