ByHeart for the botulism outbreak and terrible response to the crisis – 'Aggressive' denial of evidence: Consumer advocates, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest, criticized ByHeart for downplaying the original findings. After the California Department of Public Health found C. botulinum in an open jar, ByHeart said the result lacked “scientific basis,” a position experts called an “unusual” and “bizarre” attempt at damage control. Scope of Delayed Review: Critics claimed that ByHeart was “in denial” and was too slow to respond. The company initially recalled only two batches on November 8, despite the wider problem; On November 11, the company expanded the recall of all products only under pressure from the FDA. History of Security Violations: Investigations have revealed that ByHeart had been flagged for security violations long before the outbreak. FDA inspections in 2023 and 2024 found mold, water leaks and thousands of dead insects in food production areas. Inadequate return policy: During the early stages of the recall, ByHeart limited refunds to just two units, which caused significant backlash from parents who had been purchasing formula formula for months through a subscription. The company later expanded this policy under public pressure.
USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service Critics, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and Consumer Reports, argue that abandoning these efforts exposes food 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 current regulatory system is inadequate as salmonella cases rise and current standards allow for high levels of contamination in poultry products entering the marketplace. Lack of accountability: The system would be the first time in more than two decades that poultry corporations have faced real penalties for salmonella contamination, classifying certain levels of contamination as adulterated, which could lead to product recalls. A rollback removes this responsibility. Shifting responsibility to consumers. Opponents of the repeal argue that it is unfair to place the primary responsibility for food safety on consumers through proper handling and preparation instructions, rather than ensuring a safer product leaves the processing plant. Ignoring a serious 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 finding ignores this important public health issue.
FDA, CDC and state health departments – Failure of public health authorities to detect outbreaks. Failure to Disclose Verified Sources: There have been cases where the CDC and FDA identified a specific food source through reverse investigations but did not inform the public. For example, the agencies were criticized for not declaring an E. coli outbreak in late 2024 linked to romaine lettuce that sickened 89 people in 15 states, even though the investigation was supported by internal data. Silence on Ongoing Outbreaks: In early 2025, while the FDA was reporting outbreaks in several states (such as salmonella outbreaks in mini baked goods), the CDC remained “silent” and did not publish reports or reviews on its own platforms, departing from decades of standard practice. “Sweeping Outbreaks Under the Rug”: The decision to withhold information about outbreaks is “covering up” evidence that such behavior is “drastic” 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. The right to market accountability. Transparency allows consumers to differentiate between companies with good and poor food safety records. Without this knowledge, consumers will not be able to use their purchasing power to reward safe producers or avoid those who have poisoned them.
Delay in compliance with food traceability rules – Food safety advocates and consumer groups such as Consumer Reports and the Center for Science in the Public Interest have criticized the delay, arguing it puts the public at risk following a surge in foodborne illness outbreaks in 2024.
