52 replies to this topic

[qa_maddy]

I truly just saw something online that said there's the "major/ 1st(?) " outbreak that they think might be leafy greens/ spinach/ salads and then they're doing a parallel count of cases from berries - but I truly don't know what to believe anymore. 

 

This all just feels like such a mess. 

 

 

Looks like there are two different case#'s on the outbreaks:

This week's updates are:

• A new outbreak of Cyclospora (ref #1390) linked to a not yet identified product has been added to the table. FDA has initiated traceback and sampling. Additionally, CDC has issued an Investigation Notice.

• For the outbreak of Cyclospora (ref #1385) linked to a not yet identified product, the case count has increased from 7 to 8 cases.

 

[G M]

I truly just saw something online that said there's the "major/ 1st(?) " outbreak that they think might be leafy greens/ spinach/ salads and then they're doing a parallel count of cases from berries - but I truly don't know what to believe anymore. 

 

This all just feels like such a mess. 

 

In a normal year there are a few of them, each with a relatively small number of cases.  It wouldn't be too surprising if there were still a couple small events going on in the background behind a big one racking up thousands of cases from a more widely distributed commodity.

[GMO]

I remember seeing a talk years ago that said that since WGS they found that the "baseline" cases for food poisoning were actually outbreaks, just ones where you might get one case one week then another 10 weeks later. Which is obvious when you think about it. We only think of outbreaks as being linked to one serious event over a short timescale because that's the only way we found out about them before.

[Scampi]

https://www.theguard...ttuce-taco-bell

[MDaleDDF]

Taylor Farms, a-gain....

 

"Federal officials identified shredded iceberg lettuce supplied by Taylor Farms as the potential source of a multistate cyclosporiasis outbreak. Taco Bell is proactively removing the affected lettuce from its supply chain."

[Setanta]

Taylor Farms, a-gain....

 

"Federal officials identified shredded iceberg lettuce supplied by Taylor Farms as the potential source of a multistate cyclosporiasis outbreak. Taco Bell is proactively removing the affected lettuce from its supply chain."

 

 

I SAW THAT!!!  

[MDaleDDF]

That makes 4 major nationwide recalls in the last 5 years.   They're almost batting a thousand.    

[TimG]

Playing devils advocate just a little bit, but is it just because of the sheer volume of product they push out to the country? They were the source of the Mcdonalds onions issue 5 years or so ago right?

[Scampi]

All the more reason they should (if it is in fact them) have stricter controls........volume itself is a risk  (as we keep seeing)

[MDaleDDF]

Playing devils advocate just a little bit, but is it just because of the sheer volume of product they push out to the country? They were the source of the Mcdonalds onions issue 5 years or so ago right?

[Tony-C]

Cyclosporiasis Outbreak – 17 July 2026 Update

 

Has a source been identified for the cyclosporiasis outbreak?

FDA and CDC, in collaboration with state and local partners, are investigating a multistate outbreak of Cyclospora illnesses linked to shredded iceberg lettuce served at Taco Bell locations in 5 states (IN, KY, MI, OH, WV). There is no product recall at this time.

 

Click on the link for more info.

 

[jfrey123]

Taylor's press page is a bit of a roller coaster this week...

 

Taylor Fresh Foods Statement Regarding Cyclospora Outbreak - Taylor Farms

7/17:  Voluntary recall based on FDA testing.

7/19:  FDA apologized to us, the test was a false positive.

7/20:  Listen, we're still recalling everything and won't use central Mexico lettuce for the rest of this year.

 

To some extent, this jives with what my boss and I have been discussing.  There seem to be too many "pockets" of cyclo showing up between different states.  I think pointing a single finger towards Taylor and Taco Bell was a bit shortsighted, and my actual feelings are that it's going end up being more widespread from farms and suppliers using that region.

 

But man, what an event for FDA to use to reinvigorate their want for Rule 204 to implement asap.

Edited by jfrey123, 21 July 2026 - 02:39 PM.

[LostInTheWoods]

Taylor's press page is a bit of a roller coaster this week...

 

Taylor Fresh Foods Statement Regarding Cyclospora Outbreak - Taylor Farms

7/17:  Voluntary recall based on FDA testing.

7/19:  FDA apologized to us, the test was a false positive.

7/20:  Listen, we're still recalling everything and won't use central Mexico lettuce for the rest of this year.

 

To some extent, this jives with what my boss and I have been discussing.  There seem to be too many "pockets" of cyclo showing up between different states.  I think pointing a single finger towards Taylor and Taco Bell was a bit shortsighted, and my actual feelings are that it's going end up being more widespread from farms and suppliers using that region.

 

But man, what an event for FDA to use to reinvigorate their want for Rule 204 to implement asap.

It gets even more confusing. According to a TikTok (so I am not vouching for the accuracy of this, but he at least appears to be reasonably educated on the subject)

• The interviews of people infected, many reported eating at Taco Bell, recalling items containing shredded lettuce.
• The Taco Bells identified then identified lettuce originating from a single farm (out of many) operated by Taylor Farms
• The FDA sampled lettuce from multiple of Taylor Farms' lettuce farms.
• One farm, had a sample test positive, although it was a different farm that was identified by Taco Bell
• That positive was then called a false positive.

So, despite the test being called a False Positive, traceback analysis still implicates Taylor Farms iceberg lettuce. This was the first media that I've seen that explained the fact that the False Positive came from a different farm than the reverse trace IDs. Again, it's TikTok, so they didn't quote sources, but they did lay out a good explanation of the epidemiological work being done.

[TimG]

And somehow, it's become political. The latest buzz is that the FDA only turned around and labeled it a 'false positive' after folks from Taylor Farms visited the White House? 

"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." 

[qa_maddy]

The amount of people that I've seen talking about FSMA 204 being extended due to the singular "bribe" from Taylor's farms as if 15 different industry groups didn't submit supportive public comments in Sept. 2025 (and were likely also putting lobbying dollars towards that as well) is making me feel like I'm losing my mind. 

 

I hate when the food industry makes it into mainstream media. I'm so annoyed. 

[seanjones]

Catching this thread up since a lot has moved since mid-July. Links are to the primary pages.

 

The traceback isn't speculation anymore. FDA and CDC confirmed epi and traceback data pointing to shredded iceberg from Taylor Farms de Mexico, served at some Taco Bell locations. Taylor Farms initiated a recall on July 17 covering iceberg sourced from central Mexico (retail and foodservice), and it has expanded since. FDA's page: Investigation of Cyclospora Illnesses: Iceberg Lettuce, July 2026. CDC's: Cyclospora Outbreak Linked to Iceberg Lettuce. CDC reported the outbreak's first two deaths on August 3.

 

On the two different case numbers question from earlier in the thread: both numbers are real, they just count different things. State health departments report all cyclosporiasis cases, which includes the normal summer seasonal baseline that has nothing to do with this outbreak. CDC's outbreak count only includes cases epidemiologically linked to the exposure. Add in the reporting lag (CDC says it can take up to 6 weeks to link a case) and the state numbers will always run higher and earlier than the outbreak count. Neither number is wrong. They answer different questions.

 

The earlier point about speculation hurting brands is well taken. The official pages above are the only sources making causal claims, and they update in place as the investigation moves.

 

One question for the group, since this is a live test of something most of us only tabletop: for those receiving leafy greens, how fast could your trace-forward actually answer "did we receive affected lots"? Hours, or days? Iceberg is on the FTL, so this is basically a dry run of what FSMA 204's records are supposed to make routine by July 2028. Curious if anyone is treating it that way.

[Tony-C]

how fast could your trace-forward actually answer "did we receive affected lots"? Hours, or days?

 

Hi Sean,

 

I normally work to a full traceability being possible within 4 hours. For one item it should be quicker. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

[BM5]

We do regular traces on raw materials (Lettuce and other produce). We supply to multiple retailers and processors as well as into our own high care ready to eat salads. We can have a full trace and mass balance done in 2 hours.

[seanjones]

Hi Sean,

 

I normally work to a full traceability being possible within 4 hours. For one item it should be quicker. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

 

 

We do regular traces on raw materials (Lettuce and other produce). We supply to multiple retailers and processors as well as into our own high care ready to eat salads. We can have a full trace and mass balance done in 2 hours.

Thanks both, that's useful calibration. Two hours with mass balance, on a regular drill cadence, is a good deal faster than what I hear from a lot of US operations working toward FSMA 204's 24-hour records requirement.

 

BM5, the "we do regular traces" part seems like the whole thing. Do you find the speed comes mostly from the systems, or from the practice itself, that everyone knows their part because you run it often? Asking because a lot of 204 readiness spend over here is going into software, and I suspect drill frequency is the cheaper variable that gets less attention.

 

Tony, is 4 hours a standard you set internally, or is it coming from the certification schemes? BRCGS has required traceability exercises for a long time, and I'm curious how much of the UK speed advantage is just having drilled it since well before the US had a rule.

[qa_maddy]

I'm not produce but a full trace one step forward and one back with or without a mass balance plus my documentation gathering can be done in 4 hours easily.

 

If I'm going through our internal inventory system and pulling data for *only* a trace forward and back - I can accomplish that in about an hour depending on if the product was work-ordered into a different lot or not.  

 

The sheer inability of these huge producers to be able to pull this information is baffling - considering they're all selling to major retailers that require some kind of GFSI certification on top of having products on the FTL that should be getting prepped for the FSMA204. 

[TimG]

 

The sheer inability of these huge producers to be able to pull this information is baffling - considering they're all selling to major retailers that require some kind of GFSI certification on top of having products on the FTL that should be getting prepped for the FSMA204. 

 

Yep, there's no way I could get away with not having a trace done in 4 hours, 2 really to match up with our recall program doc. Almost like the bigger you are, the less the rules apply to you 

[GMO]

Most retailer standards demand 4 hours for all of the information including internal quality documents and one step forward, one back in 2 hours. So yep, agree with Tony, those kinds of limits are hard wired into most manufacturers I know.

[seanjones]

Quick follow up on the trace speed talk. Over the weekend there was a clean example of why it matters. Coast Citrus recalled fresh jalapenos for possible Salmonella. Taylor Fresh Foods got the notice and had to pull its finished products made with those peppers. Different product and different pathogen than the lettuce outbreak, so the two are not related. But it shows the thing we have been talking about: the clock starts on someone else's schedule. Which lots used the peppers. Which customers got them. How fast can you reach them.

 

A distributor QA colleague and I published a short piece last week on that exact window, the first 72 hours after a supplier recall notice lands. Sharing in case it is useful to anyone here: fsmaradar.com/articles/first-72-hours-supplier-recall-distributor.html

 

Her main point fits this thread well. The trace itself is the fast part if you drill it. The slow parts are the hold decision you make before you have all the facts, and telling customers what you know while it is still changing.

[G M]

...

One question for the group, since this is a live test of something most of us only tabletop: for those receiving leafy greens, how fast could your trace-forward actually answer "did we receive affected lots"? Hours, or days? Iceberg is on the FTL, so this is basically a dry run of what FSMA 204's records are supposed to make routine by July 2028. Curious if anyone is treating it that way.

 

Most third party certifications, and many large retail customers, put the requirement at 2-4 hours, including the ones requiring mass balance on identity preserved materials.  The regulators are way behind the curve on this.

[Tony-C]

Quick follow up on the trace speed talk. Over the weekend there was a clean example of why it matters. Coast Citrus recalled fresh jalapenos for possible Salmonella. Taylor Fresh Foods got the notice and had to pull its finished products made with those peppers. Different product and different pathogen than the lettuce outbreak, so the two are not related. But it shows the thing we have been talking about: the clock starts on someone else's schedule. Which lots used the peppers. Which customers got them. How fast can you reach them.

 

A distributor QA colleague and I published a short piece last week on that exact window, the first 72 hours after a supplier recall notice lands. Sharing in case it is useful to anyone here: fsmaradar.com/articles/first-72-hours-supplier-recall-distributor.html

 

Her main point fits this thread well. The trace itself is the fast part if you drill it. The slow parts are the hold decision you make before you have all the facts, and telling customers what you know while it is still changing.

 

Hi Sean,

 

Having read the article, my kindest thought was that it lacked substance.

 

Although I can see being kept up-to-date with legislation as being useful, good luck with getting $49 a month for that sort of content.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony