I started by career at CDC investigating outbreaks of foodborne diseases. I learned that they are one of the leading causes of preventable illness in the United States and that protecting the public requires rigorous standards from farm to fork, not just voluntary efforts or wishful thinking.
That’s why recent announcements from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are so concerning. The agency has officially withdrawn a proposal that would have required poultry producers to limit the amount of salmonella bacteria in chicken and turkey products. This plan, years in the making, was designed to prevent an estimated 125,000 illnesses from contaminated poultry every year.
Instead, citing industry concerns about cost, feasibility, and food waste, the USDA scrapped the rule entirely. Officials also delayed enforcement of a related regulation targeting breaded and stuffed raw chicken products — foods that have repeatedly been linked to Salmonella outbreaks.
Why Foodborne Disease Is Still a Major Threat
The message seems unmistakable: when it comes to food safety, Americans are increasingly being left on their own. Sadly, the FDA was first established in 1906, because of public uproar about food contamination and widespread recognition by elected officials that food producers cannot be trusted to make food safe without regulation. Indeed, as the food system has become increasingly globalized and industrialized, the U.S. has been adapting by making standards progressively more rigorous – a model for other countries, including China.
It’s a dangerous step backward. Salmonella causes about 1.35 million infections and 420 deaths annually in the U.S., according to the CDC. That number hasn’t changed significantly in two decades, despite improvements in science and technology. Chicken and turkey are among the most common sources of infection.
What Stronger Salmonella Standards Would Have Meant
The Biden-era proposal would have been a major step forward — treating dangerous salmonella strains in poultry much like we now treat certain E. coli strains in beef: as contaminants that should not be allowed into the food supply. Setting real limits, not just guidelines, would have finally matched regulation to scientific knowledge. Even if bacteria contamination cannot be eliminated, safety can be improved by limiting the infectious dose people are exposed to.
Industry groups applauded the withdrawal, arguing that the proposed standards were “legally unsound” and “misinterpreted the science.” But food safety experts and former USDA officials were blunt: this decision puts businesses’ short-term interests over public health. If Salmonella isn’t a contaminant, is it a nutrient?
We Need Stronger — Not Weaker — Food Safety Protections
Food safety should not be optional. It should not hinge on voluntary efforts, or whether companies feel it’s convenient or cost-effective. Strong, enforceable standards from farm to fork are the only proven way to reduce the burden of foodborne disease.
The U.S. can and must do better.