"It has been shut down since February after several babies who had consumed formula that had been produced there fell ill and two died.
The agreement stems from a U.S. Department of Justice complaint and consent decree with the company and three of its executives. Those court records say the F.D.A. found a deadly bacteria, called cronobacter, in the plant in February and the company found more tranches of the bacteria later that month.
According to the complaint, the same Sturgis factory had also produced two batches of formula in the summer of 2019 and 2020 on different production equipment that tested positive for the bacteria. Abbott staff 'have been unwilling or unable to implement sustainable corrective actions to ensure the safety and quality of food manufactured for infants,' leading to the need for legal action, the documents state.
In a release, Abbott said 'there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses.'"
Here's the Wikipedia article on cronobacter:
Cronobacter was first proposed as a new genus in 2007 as a clarification of the taxonomic relationship of the biogroups found among strains of Enterobacter sakazakii....
Cronobacter (Cro.no.bac'ter) is from the Greek noun Cronos (Κρόνος), one of the Titans of mythology, who swallowed each of his children as soon as they were born, and the New Latin masculine noun bacter, a rod, resulting in the N.L. masc. n. Cronobacter, a rod that can cause illness in neonates.
Posts
86 comments:
The New York Times is guilty calumny here: the cronobacters that killed the two infants have been proven at this point NOT to have originated in the Sturgis factory.
Why can’t we import EU formula? With tiny fraction of 40 billion dollars.
This article is a lie.
The babies did not die of bacteria found at the plant. The died of a different bacteria and the bacteria found at the plant was not in the formula.
This article is a disgusting cover up and and attempt to shield the regulating bureaucracy from justly deserved criticism.
I would hope that Ann will note the obvious mis-truths in this article and that this Regime is blatantly lying to everyone about why this plant was shut down and that the government and the 3 giant corporations running this oligopoly are the true cause of the shortage.
This has nothing to do with safety.
Nice Picture of Progressives aborting babies after birth!!
The company claims testing shows the strain that killed the kids was not the same as the ones found in the factory and that the factory bacteria was not in the area where formula was produced.
Both the Biden Administration and Abbott have reasons to distort the truth.
But here's a question: Doesn't it seem .... convenient .... that when the spam hits the fan a settlement is reached?
The above states, "Abbott staff 'have been unwilling or unable to implement sustainable corrective actions to ensure the safety and quality of food manufactured for infants,". Has that changed?
Time after time I see some event blow up in the Biden Administration's face before action is taken.
Story from February and NYT is just getting to it.
I saw a report that the FDA had never linked the deaths with the plant. Now that it is political, the truth will never be known.
The timeline seems to start in December with a whistle blower. It will be more than 6 months, for a plant belonging to Abbott, that has over 40% of the market share, has been shut down. Largely because Abbott has the govt contract.
This could be a perfect storm, but more likely just another example of govt self created disaster. It doesn't take months to clean a processing plant, unless the govt is in charge.
I noted Saturday the FDA would come out Monday with an all clear, and production could resume. Because science always follow Public Relations incentives.
Shipping formula purchased in Jacksonville to the infant grand daughter in Annapolis is an expensive pain in the ass. This was not on my 2022 life bingo card.
Why did it take the FDA so long to get to this point? The Biden administration is so inept. And they only care about stuff that makes them look bad on Twitter.
"The babies did not die of bacteria found at the plant. The died of a different bacteria and the bacteria found at the plant was not in the formula."
If you have a better source, cite it. The NYT is using papers that were filed in court by the govt. What are you relying on? Your assertions without more just present *yourself* as the source.
Rocketeer is right. After a thorough investigation and a review of all the available data, there is no evidence to link Abbott formulas to infant illnesses. This was likely an overreaction by the FDA/Biden Admin and misinformation from the NYT.
In a statement released by Abbott, they said the following:
"Abbott conducts microbiological testing on products prior to distribution and no Abbott formula distributed to consumers tested positive for Cronobacter sakazakii or Salmonella.
All finished product testing by Abbott and the FDA during the inspection of the facility came back negative for Cronobacter and/or Salmonella. No Salmonella was found at the Sturgis facility.
The Cronobacter sakazakii that was found in environmental testing during the investigation was in non-product contact areas of the facility and has not been linked to any known infant illness. Specifically:
Genetic sequencing on the two available samples from ill infants did not match strains of Cronobacter in our plant. Samples from ill infants did not match each other, meaning there was no connection between the two cases.
In all four cases, the state, FDA, and/or CDC tested samples of the Abbott formula that was used by the child. In all four cases, all unopened containers tested negative.
Open containers from the homes of the infants were also tested in three of the four cases; two of the three tested negative. The one positive was from an open container from the home of the infant, and it tested positive for two different strains of Cronobacter sakazakii, one of which matched the strain that caused the infant’s infection, and the other matched a strain found on a bottle of distilled water in the home used to mix the formula. Again, neither strain matched strains found in our plant.
The infants consumed four different types of our formula made over the course of nearly a year and the illnesses took place over several months in three different states."
From Abbott's press release dated May 13.
"It's important to know:
Abbott conducts microbiological testing on products prior to distribution and no Abbott formula distributed to consumers tested positive for Cronobacter sakazakii or Salmonella.
All finished product testing by Abbott and the FDA during the inspection of the facility came back negative for Cronobacter and/or Salmonella. No Salmonella was found at the Sturgis facility.
The Cronobacter sakazakii that was found in environmental testing during the investigation was in non-product contact areas of the facility and has not been linked to any known infant illness.
Specifically:
Genetic sequencing on the two available samples from ill infants did not match strains of Cronobacter in our plant. Samples from ill infants did not match each other, meaning there was no connection between the two cases.
In all four cases, the state, FDA, and/or CDC tested samples of the Abbott formula that was used by the child. In all four cases, all unopened containers tested negative.
Open containers from the homes of the infants were also tested in three of the four cases; two of the three tested negative. The one positive was from an open container from the home of the infant, and it tested positive for two different strains of Cronobacter sakazakii, one of which matched the strain that caused the infant’s infection, and the other matched a strain found on a bottle of distilled water in the home used to mix the formula. Again, neither strain matched strains found in our plant.
The infants consumed four different types of our formula made over the course of nearly a year and the illnesses took place over several months in three different states."
Here is a link to the Abbott statement
https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/nutrition-health-and-wellness/abbott-update-on-powder-formula-recall.html
Should know by now not to trust the NYT. It will almost always obscure the truth, and at times outright lie, to cover for the Dems/attack the Repubs.
"If you have a better source, cite it. The NYT . . . ."
A better source than the New York Times uncritically parroting what some bureaucrat told them? 🤣😂🤣
We are in the post-information age. Believe what you want to believe. It doesn't matter. The government says baby formula has AIDS. Who am I to challenge that claim? I'm not a biologist. I don't even know what a woman is. Just wear a mask or I will fight you. Derp.
Baby formula maker won’t accept Dems’ blame for shortages, says no evidence plant sickened infants
“The Cronobacter sakazakii that was found in environmental testing during the investigation was in non-product contact areas of the facility and has not been linked to any known infant illness,” Abbott officials said in a statement. “Genetic sequencing on the two available samples from ill infants did not match strains of Cronobacter in our plant. Samples from ill infants did not match each other, meaning there was no connection between the two cases.”
Per Abbott via the Washington Times. Available in many other places too. OBTW at this point I trust a random dude over the NYT most of the time....
It is clear this government screwed up and the NYT continues with lazy journalism and toting the party line
From the Wall Street Journal, May 11 Abbott could restart baby formula production within two weeks
From the article: "Open containers from the four infants were tested, and three of them tested negative, Abbott said. One container tested positive for two strains of cronobacter, one of which matched the strain that caused the infant’s infection and the other that matched a strain found on a bottle of distilled water that was used to mix the formula. Neither strain matched those found in Abbott’s Michigan plant, the company said."
If the plant is so full of cronobacter, one would think that there would be a larger number of children who got very ill or worse. Not saying the plant should not have been closed and disinfected before reopening. but correlation is not causation.
Anyway, a fun thing to ponder is: What would a Trump administration have done to move quickly on this situation? Would they have sat on their hands and talked for weeks about how racist the other party was, while sending billions of dollars- for whomever- to Ukraine? Or would they have worked to move mountains to get this done.
Even those who hate Trump would have to recognize he's a man who surrounds himself with people who get things done. This Biden team is a disaster. Like nothing we've ever seen in our history.
"Story from February and NYT is just getting to it."
That's an easily checked fact, but you have made a false assertion about it. Here's the article from February: link.
Incidentally, I see more evidence of "science" in the Abbott statement than in the 14+ studies that the CDC and others cited to justify mask mandates.
On the other hand, we know that nobody ever lied in a court statement.
My blog post cites Abbott's position, which "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Citing that doesn't refute what the FDA is saying.
There is evidence, enough to demand more from Abbott. It wasn't good enough for Abbott to just say there isn't "conclusive" evidence. The standard for protecting health is higher.
We need a Mothers’ March on the WH.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/what-happened-with-abbott-baby-formula-that-worsened-us-shortage-2022-05-16/
DID THE FDA OR CDC FIND A LINK?
Abbott says there is no evidence to link its formulas to these illnesses. The FDA and the CDC have not disclosed any information that connects the illnesses and the plant.
The product samples tested negative.
The CDC analyzed clinical samples from two of the infants and did not find a genetic match to the environmental strains found at the plant. It also said the bacteria from the patient samples were not closely related to one another.
I should have added "and school closures" to in my prior post.
Why is formula regulated as a drug and not as a food? It should prob4be regulated the way all other dairy products are regulated.
That probably doubles or triples the price and makes it very difficult for anyone else to make it.
Very good business for the 6 companies authorized to make it in the US.
If I wanted to make a brand new kind of catsup, I could be producing in 6 months from scratch. 6 days if I already had any kind of food plant in operation.
If I wanted to produce formula (a drug) it would take me 5 years to get the permits then another 5 years to get the plant up and running.
John LGKTQ Henry
My blog post cites Abbott's position, which "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Citing that doesn't refute what the FDA is saying.
🙄This seems like a sill hill to die on. (If Abbott's recitation of the facts is true--and I'm pretty sure someone somewhere would fine or even prosecute someone if it were lies.) It sure seems like some family bought contaminated water and in response the government stopped the production of baby formula.
The contaminated water seems like a really important and newsworthy fact. I'd be mad if I paid to get beyond a paywall and didn't even come away with basic facts. Then I'd probably be stubborn and act like the NYT story was accurate all along. I'd just really stick to my guns and look super foolish. But that's just me.
The standard for protecting health is higher.
An argument those welding doors in China might use or the leaders of Sri Lanka. It doesn’t change the fact that the lack of formula on the shelves is a creation of the government. Your claims of “false assertion” won’t feed children. The NYT articles are behind a paywall, so they don’t exactly share information freely about health matters. On the other hand, Abbott has been providing statements since February that none of the production facility tested positive for the bacteria. Claims in court don’t make them suddenly guilty.
"there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses" That quote is in the NYT story, but that's not what Abbott's statement, as posted in this comment section says. Something is fishy in the NYT version of Abbott's position. Abbott explicitly argues that there is no link. It's right there in their full statement.
When just the line, "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses" is stated, it sounds like slimy lawyer speak. But when the testing is mentioned, it adds to Abbott's credibility and the government is the one who seems slimy.
Couple days back we were talking about why the NYT and others did not say how to make formula at home.
Legal liability was the consensus.
It just occurred to me trashy there may be another, bigger reason: money.
How much advertising does Abbott, nestle and the other 4 formula makers do? Not just for formula but fire all their products?
Probably billions of dollars a year among them (not just formula, of course)
How much would it cost Abbott et al if people found that there was a cheap, equally good, substitute for formula? (condensed milk, water, Karo syrup, some vitamins)
How much pressure do you think they can bring to bear on the m5m not to break their rice bowl?
John LGKTQ Henry
Abbot staff 'have been unwilling or unable to implement sustainable corrective actions to ensure the safety and quality of food manufactured for infants,'. I trust this statement implicitly, because in my career I have inspected hundreds of food processing plants for organic certification. A big part of my work was evaluating food-safety procedures and protocols, because if safety is weak the rest does not matter. I wrote up at least 10 percent of the places I inspected on food safety alone. Another 20 percent could not prove that their incoming ingredients were indeed "organic" ... but that's another story.
By contrast, I used to inspect an aseptic soy-"milk" production, also in Michigan, that was so clean I'd willingly have emergency surgery on their floor in preference to a Michigan hospital. It's all a matter of dedication to food safety. In particular how do you monitor? In the case of the soy-milk plant -- not a good product for babies -- they changed lot numbers every six minutes, then embargoed shipment of that for a week during which they plated out samples from that lot. If you can count, that is a serious amount of lab work.
One CFU and the lot was condemned. CFUs in more than one lot got the plant shut down and the HACCP team went to work.
Abbott clearly lacked / lacks that level of dedication, at least in their Michigan operation.
Jaore said: "Time after time I see some event blow up in the Biden Administration's face before action is taken."
What you're seeing is Biden's petty bluffs being called.
"Oh ... you want to shut down my baby formula factory because the FDA and CDC don't understand proper science? OK then, go ahead. Nice little Presidency you got there. Be a shame if something happened to it." - Abbot Labs, 3 months ago.
"Oh, you want us to open back up. Maybe we'll get around to that in a couple of weeks while your Presidency twists in the wind." - Abbot Labs, today.
"Oh, you want to shut down our pipelines, do you? Fine, gas is now $4.75/gallon. Enjoy your one term presidency." - Exxon
Why would Abbott refuse to fix a problem? Why keep a profit stream shutdown? That is not believable to me.
It is believable that an inspector/regulator would be unwillingly to accept the science when they feelz it could still be a factory problem. Bet they demanded some incredibly pricey fix that had no basis in reality.
The FDAs own testing disproves a link.
Ann Althouse said...
My blog post cites Abbott's position, which "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Citing that doesn't refute what the FDA is saying.
There is evidence, enough to demand more from Abbott. It wasn't good enough for Abbott to just say there isn't "conclusive" evidence. The standard for protecting health is higher.
Who has lied more over the last 6 years?
Abbot?
The Democrat Regime?
The New Your Times?
The fact that you still gullibly suck up anything this regime and the NYT's spews out is really kinda sad. They have proven to be mendacious liars over and over and over again.
Everything the New York Times prints should be assumed to be a lie on it's face because everything they have printed for the last 6-10 years has been a lie. The babies did not die of the bacteria found at the plant. Period.
Notice the words in the FDA release itself:
It has been shut down since February after several babies who had consumed formula that had been produced there fell ill and two died.
This was clearly bureaucratic overreach and stupidity. Washington DC is 100% responsible for this shortage and the people of the US are paying for it.
You can defend the Regime and the NYT's all you want.
But it reflects on you when you defend these scum.
The baby formula "industry" is now 3 plants in the whole country.
It is only 3 plants because 3 giant corporations have lobbied for insane regulations that kill competitors.
This shortage being caused right now is just making these 3 oligarchs rich because they get to raise prices.
Without the DC bureaucracy protecting them there would be competition, supply, and a better product.
I have to shake my head when a company defends itself by claiming "there is no conclusive evidence." I understand this statement in the context of a courtroom where there are specific standards of evidence that the prosecution must meet, but in the court of public opinion, when they say "no conclusive evidence," the normal person hears, "there is a lot of evidence." Do they not realize this?
I sniffed out the potential formula shortage several weeks ago. I alerted my daughter who has an 8 month old newborn. Between the two of us we have accumulated enough to cover the baby's needs until she's on solid food. Sorry folks, my granddaughter comes first.
Think it's bad now? Wait until diesel prices force trucks off the road. And you know the Elmer Fudd administration is not prepared for this eventuality either.
Get a freezer, plant a garden, buy a quarter beef.
I think the position of most here is that the effect of the FDA is often iatrogenic to the health of the nation. The regulators in the bureaucracy see industry as the enemy, and the perceived goal of many administrators is to functionally take over the means of production as their reward for enforcement.
Then, we will get infant formula produced to the specs and available in the quantities of deep space launches from NASA, governed by responsible experts, who aren't subject to the kinds of personal greed found in industry and corporate culture. Anything less isn't safe enough. Babies may die, hence reinforcing the far-right's retrograde narrative of "the left stands for death to the future, while they live for the present" buttressed by the Roe v Wade troubles and women affirming the right to remove offspring from their lives with extreme prejudice to the forty-eighth week of conception. That's why that retrograde narrative must be silenced as much as possible by responsible news sources.
Did I miss anything? How many people need evidence supported in a court of law before they can jump to these conclusions? The rule of law is the best solution, but this era is all about the feelz.
gilbar
Well. Somebody has to sued. Because as we all know law suits can cure any kind of physical shortcoming.
We should change the national symbol to a huge, dry nipple.
"There is evidence, enough to demand more from Abbott. It wasn't good enough for Abbott to just say there isn't "conclusive" evidence. The standard for protecting health is higher."
If you think Abbott's statement was the only action they took, you're dead wrong. It appears to me that they carried out an exhaustive cleaning and testing regimen and found no evidence of contamination in any product samples, processing equipment or unopened packages in the infants' homes. They also confirmed that at least one of the contaminates was genetically unrelated to the contaminates found in the non-food processing parts of the plant. Also, they found that the contaminates from the two infants were different from each other as well. Finally, out of the hundreds of thousand containers produced and shipped from the plant produced no other cases. This product is produced in batch on an automatic line so that the probability that a single package was contaminated but no others is essentially zero. All the evidence points to introduction of the contaminate in the home after the package was opened.
Regarding your question: "The NYT is using papers that were filed in court by the govt. What are you relying on?" You seem to forget that this is the same NYT that helped to hound a president out of office based on some "papers that were filed in court by the govt." What I'm relying on are the facts presented in Abbot's statement, logic and my own knowledge of food processing practices, statistics and bureaucratic incompetence in federal agencies.
Zeus looks upset in that picture.
Ann, you’re mighty defensive about the NYT. Or is it you’re mighty defensive about AA who posted the NYT uncritically? Either way, not a good look doubling down.
Here's what Abbott Labs says about the results of the CDC investigation on their website:
Detailed Findings of Investigation
After a thorough investigation by FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Abbott, and review of all available data, there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott's formulas to these infant illnesses. Specifically:
CDC concluded its investigation with no findings of a link between Abbott formulas and infant illnesses.
Abbott conducts microbiological testing on products prior to distribution and no Abbott formula distributed to consumers tested positive for Cronobacter sakazakiior Salmonella.
All retained product tested by Abbott and the FDA during the inspection of the facility came back negative for Cronobacter sakazakii and/or Salmonella. No Salmonella was found at the Sturgis facility.
The Cronobacter sakazakii that was found in environmental testing during the investigation was in non-product contact areas of the facility and has not been linked to any known infant illness.
Genetic sequencing on the two available samples from ill infants did not match the strains of Cronobacter sakazakii found in our plant. Samples from ill infants did not match each other, which means there was no connection between the two cases.
In all four cases, the state, FDA and/or CDC tested samples of the Abbott formula that was used by the child. In all four cases, all unopened containers tested negative.
Open containers from the homes of the infants were also tested in three of the four cases; two of the three tested negative. The one positive was from an open container from the home of the infant, and it tested positive for two different strains of Cronobacter sakazakii, one of which matched the strain that caused the infant's infection, and the other matched a strain found on a bottle of distilled water in the home used to mix the formula. Again, neither strain matched strains found in our plant.
The infants consumed four different types of our formula made over the course of nearly a year and the illnesses took place over several months in three different states.
Cronobacter sakazakii is naturally occurring and found nearly everywhere in the environment. Powdered infant formula manufacturers periodically detect it in their plants, and FDA, in issuing its infant formula Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) regulations, stated that, based on current technologies, it is not possible to produce a sterile powdered infant formula (79 Fed. Reg. 7987). However, Abbott has no tolerance for Cronobacter sakazakii in its production environment, and no Abbott product was distributed with Cronobacter sakazakii contamination.
https://abbott.mediaroom.com/2022-05-16-Abbott-Enters-into-Consent-Decree-with-U-S-Food-and-Drug-Administration-for-its-Sturgis,-Mich-,-Plant-Agreement-Creates-Pathway-to-Reopen-Facility
The FDA head insists that it is a distribution problem. Maybe our government should stop lying to us, and tell us the truth for once. (and that includes their propagandists in the media!) They ignored this problem. It has been happening for some time now. NOW that it is CRISIS time....it's time to blame everybody but the people responsible for keeping the plant shut down. https://nypost.com/2022/05/16/fda-head-no-baby-formula-shortage-just-distribution-issues/
Ann said, “ The standard for protecting health is higher.”
Oh really? After two years of lockdowns, school closures, church closures, masks, contact tracing, banning and censoring alternative medications such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, canceling careers of anyone who didn’t go along with the CDC narrative and no gold standard studies to support any of the aforementioned all to the result of a supposed one million dead … sorry, your protection of the NYT and government regulatory agencies rings very, very hollow.
Right now I have more faith in my crazy neighbor’s Old Farmers Almanack than any of the agencies you defend so reflexively.
I'm no expert, but it seems to me that a nationwide shortage of baby formula might also have significant public health consequences.
Since testing apparently exists to determine whether a given batch of formula is safe to consume, wouldn't a more rational approach have been to allow Abbott to continue manufacturing the formula while simply ensuring that it's been thoroughly tested before going out to the stores? Shutting down the entire production line for months when it is not even clear that any babies died from this contamination seems like a really harmful and unnecessary bureaucratic response.
Anyone who relies on the NYT for authoritative coverage of anything, is at best living in the past.
"The babies did not die of bacteria found at the plant. The died of a different bacteria and the bacteria found at the plant was not in the formula."
“If you have a better source, cite it. The NYT is using papers that were filed in court by the govt. What are you relying on? Your assertions without more just present *yourself* as the source.”
Why do you blindly accept what the FDA and the NYT claim either? Filing something in court doesn’t mean that it is true, and esp for the government that doesn’t appear to be bound by Rule 11 sanctions (etc). Call it the Government Work exception to normal attorney ethics requirements. Heck, Kevin Clinesmith has his law license back already after blatantly lying to the FISC about whether Carter Page was working for another intelligence agency (I.e. the CIA) in order to procure FISA warrants that would extend to Trump (and intentionally violated their civil rights). Very likely most of the 1/6 related charges are not supported by any real evidence. And that is the problem, what attorneys working for the federal government file in court is determined, or at least strongly influenced, by the Presidentially selected attorney they work for (AG, USA, etc), and that changes with a change of Administration.
And the FDA has been massively lying throughout the COVID-19 crisis. They have lied about prophylactics like Ivermectin. They have lied about the mRNA vaccines having been adequately tested (they weren’t) and that they are safe (very likely not). They were happy with spreading out the release of the Pfizer vaccine approval docs over 75 years, since they show that the FDA was fully aware of the many types and quantity of side effects of the vaccines, yet approved the vaccines anyway. (Luckily for those paying attention, a federal judge rejected their 75 year discovery plan, and ordered the docs released over maybe 10 months, and so far, they are damming of Pfizer, but esp the FDA).
So, why again do you think that we should automatically believe agents of the Biden Admin (AUSAs and the FDA) over Abbott? Abbott may have an incentive to lie, but they also face repercussions for doing so, that Biden Administration employees do not.
The Abbott statement, linked to by several above, seems a lot more comprehensive than simply stating "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Did the NYT give the Abbott statement fair coverage in their article or did they give it short shrift because it doesn't fit their narrative? (I can't access the article)
"There is evidence, enough to demand more from Abbott."
Show, don't tell.
“My blog post cites Abbott's position, which "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Citing that doesn't refute what the FDA is saying.”
This is your NYT bias showing, Professor. You can’t see your blind spot for the NYT.
Just because the FDA claims something doesn’t make it true either. It’s just a claim. Read the response and you see the claim didn’t hold up. This is like an indictment. Sounds like Abbot murdered children. Until you realize they’re just allegations (indicting ham sandwiches). And there’s no presumption of innocence because “science”. The FDA speaks, omg omg it must be true, they’re murdering babies….
How does Abbot get it’s reputation back. FDA like the FBI never says “oh, guess we were wrong, sorry”. They just “suddenly” decide to let them start producing formula again. Surely they wouldn’t do that if their claims were accurate, and no cures or fixes were instituted. That’s not very “sciencey”.
Sounds like another regulatory overreach based on a strict adherence to the precautionary principle.
An abundance of caution is the wrong standard. Abundance implies more than enough. We are trying to nerf the world. We need some caution, possibly enough (though that is quite expensive in 2nd and 3rd order effects), not an abundance. It is the one form of government action that creates too much: disincentives to act.
That guy Cronos sounds like an asshole.
But at least he waited until they were born...
'If you have a better source, cite it. The NYT is using papers that were filed in court by the govt.'
The government and the NYT?
Good enough for me...
"Our source was the New York Times."
The Church of Science — the only growing church in the West — is populated by college-educated women who adore the priests. Adore … not comprehend. The priests, you see, speak in Latin and the college-educated women (mostly white) don’t know Latin. The priests, you’ll notice, do strange rituals, swing incense boxes, and turn the bread of data into the flesh of SCIENCE and the “wisdom” of institutions into the blood of society. And the bishops and cardinals above the priests, working with the Pope (AKA as Dr. Fauci, at the moment) produce edicts which the godly college-educated, logic-deficient women vigorously enforce, sometime wearing red dresses and strange hats.
What about the men in this church? Well, as I have told you, they’re the priests and bishops. The few you see in the pews next to red dress wearing women are eunuchs.
The End
NYT: Some say babies died because there was Cronobacter in your formula.
Abbott: No Cronobacter was found in our formula.
NYT: Oh. A quick follow-up, what about the Cronobacter in your formula?
Abbott: As I stated, No Cronobacter was found in our formula.
NYT: I see...but what about the Cronobacter in your formula?
Abbott: How do you spell Cronobacter?
NYT: C-r-o-n-o-b-a-c-t-e-r
Abbott: You forgot the F.
NYT: There's no F in Cronobacter.
Abbott: That's what I keep telling you. There's no F-in' Cronobacter!
The Church of Science — the only growing church in the West — is populated by college-educated women who adore the priests. Adore … not comprehend. The priests, you see, speak in Latin and the college-educated women (mostly white) don’t know Latin. The priests, you’ll notice, do strange rituals, swing incense boxes, and turn the bread of data into the flesh of SCIENCE and the “wisdom” of institutions into the blood of society. And the bishops and cardinals above the priests, working with the Pope (AKA as Dr. Fauci, at the moment) produce edicts which the godly college-educated, logic-deficient women vigorously enforce, sometime wearing red dresses and strange hats.
What about the men in this church? Well, as I have told you, they’re the priests and bishops. The few you see in the pews next to red dress wearing women are eunuchs.
The End
You’ve read and critiqued the New York Times for many years; surely you know by now that it exists to reveal certain things and obscure others. Read the Reuters story one of your commenters linked and ask yourself why the Times merely gestures at the dispute at the heart of this story. If the Times were actually doing its job it would sort out the science being debated here, but at a minimum it would quote the company’s response to the government’s claims. Instead it’s acting as a stenographer for a federal bureaucracy.
A woman who sees a purple bubble arise from her dying grandmother has more earned credibility than the NYTimes and a US government agency.
When Bluebell Ice Cream here in Texas experienced a bacterial problem in their plant and poisoned people with Listeria, there was a huge recall, the factory was closed for over six months, the company president was criminally charged, and fines of almost $20,000,000 were assessed. And this despite the company racing to cooperate and get the plant sanitized, sanitary, and freed of the contaminant, which most likely came into the ice cream via the milk - and thus could not be blamed on the factory itself.
Here's hoping that the baby formula is not affected by a similar problem of raw material contamination of a hard to stop kind.
This might be a good case to promote irradiation sterilization of food products.
Ann really nailed this post, all the corporate apologists are out in force.
"“My blog post cites Abbott's position, which "there is no conclusive evidence to link Abbott’s formulas to these infant illnesses." Citing that doesn't refute what the FDA is saying.”"
And as we all know the FDA has nothing but your good health in mind after two years of health mismanagement.
I'm going to go with Abbot on this because,1) actual scientists not bureaucrats. 2) Despite what you might believe they make their nut helping people get better not killing them. Their QA probably exceeds what is required by the FDA.
https://www.cdc.gov/campylobacter/index.html
I’ve heard of one this before. Can occur in raw milk and that’s all we drink here.
Freshly squeezed.
The FDA was so preoccupied with whether it could that it didn't stop to think if it should.
I see that Ann is determined to defend the NY Times. Sad to see such blind obedience to the narrative.
Just to try to clear this up, the government does not accuse Abbott of shipping contaminated formula.
They accuse them of operating their formula production operation in a manner not consistent with FDA regulations for the production of formula.
To correct this deficiency the government has come down with both feet on Abbott, accused three of their employees of criminal behavior and (if you read the proposed consent decree) largely taken over the operation.
It looks to me that there is some degree of personal animosity between Abbott's people and the FDA's inspectors.
Also, it is worth noting that the complaint and proposed consent decree were filed with the court on May 16, 2022.
That was Monday. The issue has been open for months.
If you read the two legal documents and then read the Times article it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Times piece was carefully worded propaganda.
I am mystified that the NYT ignored Abbott's official statement and went with "no conclusive evidence." Yes, apparently that was also issued by Abbott. But the former statement is far more detailed and informative, saying that no salmonella or cronobacter of the specific strains involved in the cases was found in any of the processing areas of the plant, and that the one case that did actually involve the cronobacter strain in question turned up cronobacter in the distilled water used to mix the formula, but not in the formula itself.
That doesn't sound like "no conclusive evidence" to me, but more like "We have no responsibility for this. Zilch."
And, Ann, I have to agree with many other commenters here that you are too quick to take the NYT as gospel. When the longer statement from Abbott was quoted entire here by several different commenters, you really ought to have backed off a bit. Obviously that statement is incompatible with the NYT story.
I ought to have added that that was not the image of Kronos I was expecting. I forget the artist responsible for the one I know, but it was once used by M. Kahil (the now-deceased rabidly anti-Semitic cartoonist of the Saudi Arab News) with the caption "What's the matter? You've never seen a politician kissing babies before?" (meaning Ariel Sharon or some such, naturally).
But I don't think that painting contained a rod. You needed the rod!
I'm guessing it went something like this. The plant was shut down to determine if the bacteria came from the plant. They found that there was bacteria, but not the strain that killed the kids. Abbott says if it ain't the strain, we're not to blame. Let's start up. The FDA says, it doesn't matter that it's not the strain, it's still the bacteria. You have to clean it up. Then they proceeded to move at the speed of bureaucracy and here we are.
Some questions. Are some strains more dangerous than others? Is it common to find some of this bacteria in these plants? Does it matter that it is in the plant as long as it doesn't show up in the formula?
Maybe the FDA should allow Abbot et. al. to use irradiation on the final product to prevent this kind of thing. They could always use the other name I've heard "electronic pasteurization" so the cry baby morons won't freak out.
I’m willing to concede the NYT covered the closing of the Abbott facility based on FDA claims back in February. They probably even requested comment from Abbott, that perhaps had already performed its own analysis of the source of bacteria that the FDA asserts came from their production facility.
I do have doubts the NYT provided equal coverage to both sides. That the NYT explained how Abbott’s market share is driven by WIC. Or that there is clear understanding of the number of children (the February reporting headline says as many as 3, Politico said as many as 6, now it seems only two) and how some cases were ruled out while others still considered relevant, especially in light of the clear methods in which Abbott analyzed its connection. I also wonder how much coverage discussed the “voluntary” nature of the closure. I have doubts because the NYT retains 2 Pulitzer Prizes in the past ten years won for stories that ended up being wrong.
The blind faith in govt agencies is for persons that have never had to answer to them.
I had a run in with the EPA. 3 months after an annual audit, we got a 5 figure fine. The cause was breach of contract between us and a Manufacturer. Got hold of the manufacturer and told them we were fined and they said we were honoring all parts of the contract. The manufacturer wrote a letter to the EPA. Pointed out both parties agreed to the language and agreed all actions were within the understanding of the contract by both parties of the contract.
The EPA refused to back down. When I asked the person pushing he fine what else I had to do to cancel the fine, he said he would not back down unless his boss forced him. By sure luck, the VP for the distributor was a Frat brother to a high up Deputy in DC for the EPA, the fine was suspended, but not canceled.
Govt agencies are evil hydras, ruling without accountability.
“Get a freezer, plant a garden, buy a quarter beef.“
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gx97BH5kKo
So...two children supposedly died from bacterial contamination, for which there is no forensic evidence, out of millions of children who were fed formula from the same manufacturing plant? Under the "precautionary principle" (if it saves only one life!) we must shut down the plant. For several months!
Surely the CDC/FDA has concrete evidence that Abbott formula products were contaminated, otherwise why would they consign many thousands of other babies to go hungry, or subsist on insufficient, homemade formulas, and many parents to panic as they seek to feed their infants?
This is just another sick, sick episode of "Government knows best" where actual lives are at stake, while people are waiting and freaking out.
Lying liars lie and lie,
Doo-dah! Doo-dah!
Lying liars lie and lie,
Oh, the Doo-dah day!
Heartless Aztec: my husband & I did the same. Shipping formula from Madison to Colorado. 4 month old grandson has a way to go before he can eat solid food or drink regular milk.
What Iowan describes is the capitalist bureaucracy. Staff has a lot of power and gets promoted based on successful prosecutions. Review and appeal processes are cumbersome expensive and slanted towards Staff. There are some good people but they rarely get promoted to leadership.
"Maybe the FDA should allow Abbot et. al. to use irradiation on the final product to prevent this kind of thing."
The people who claim they "believe in science" would oppose this. Seriously.
No conclusive evidence sounds like the FDA, NYT et al want Abbott to prove a negative. The same model followed for allegations of systemic diversity (e.g. racism, sexism), [catastrophic] [anthropogenic] climate change, reproductive rites (e.g. wicked solution) and evolution of human life, etc.
The real news would have been who in the Biden administration ordered the FDA to "get this fixed now or it's your ass!"
“There is evidence, enough to demand more from Abbott. It wasn't good enough for Abbott to just say there isn't "conclusive" evidence. The standard for protecting health is higher.”
Thank you.
“Abbot staff 'have been unwilling or unable to implement sustainable corrective actions to ensure the safety and quality of food manufactured for infants,'. I trust this statement implicitly, because in my career I have inspected hundreds of food processing plants for organic certification. A big part of my work was evaluating food-safety procedures and protocols, because if safety is weak the rest does not matter. I wrote up at least 10 percent of the places I inspected on food safety alone. Another 20 percent could not prove that their incoming ingredients were indeed "organic" ... but that's another story.
Abbott clearly lacked / lacks that level of dedication, at least in their Michigan operation.”
Thank you too.
Abbott could have avoided any and all difficulties simply by offering a Board position to any Biden family member.
Post a Comment