USDA Withdraws Proposal for Salmonella Framework for Raw Poultry Products

M. DuBose
May 12
3 min read

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has recently withdrawn its proposed framework to reduce salmonella contamination in poultry products.

This decision, announced in April 2025, has significant implications for consumer health and food safety oversight in America. Currently Salmonella contamination remains a pressing public health concern, causing approximately 1.35 million illnesses annually, with nearly 200,000 cases specifically linked to chicken consumption. Even more troubling, these infections aren't decreasing, they're actually on the rise and expected to continue growing.

The Withdrawn Proposal

The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) had proposed regulations that would have:

Classified certain raw poultry products contaminated with salmonella as "adulterated"
Triggered recall processes for contaminated products
Prevented the sale of affected products at retail locations
Required poultry producers to maintain stricter testing protocols

Current Regulatory Framework

Under existing rules, poultry producers must test for salmonella and take action if levels exceed certain thresholds. However, a significant loophole exists, companies can continue selling their products while investigating contamination issues. Recent analysis has revealed that numerous poultry plants across the U.S. maintain high levels of salmonella contamination.

The Industry's Position

The National Chicken Council has defended the withdrawal, arguing that the proposed regulations were:

"Legally unsound"
Based on misinterpretations of scientific evidence
Not demonstrated to meaningfully impact public health
Potentially disruptive to the food supply chain

Strong Counterarguments

However, food safety advocates present compelling counterarguments:

Proven Regulatory Success, the USDA's similar approach with E. coli in beef serves as a powerful precedent. After declaring certain E. coli strains as adulterants in ground beef, related foodborne illnesses dropped significantly.
Scientific Evidence While industry claims the regulations "relied on misinterpretations of the science," recent investigations found nearly one-third of ground chicken samples contained salmonella, with 91% harboring the most dangerous strains.
Public Health Priority Sandy Eskin, former USDA deputy undersecretary of food safety, raises a crucial question: "The government is supposed to ensure that industry is doing everything it can to make safe products. But why are companies allowed to sell highly contaminated products?"

Expert Concerns

Food safety advocates and experts have voiced serious concerns about this decision. Brian Ronholm, director of food policy at Consumer Reports, warns that this move, combined with recent budget and staffing cuts at the USDA and FDA, appears to be part of a broader weakening of food safety oversight.

Consumer Impact

This decision effectively shifts more responsibility onto consumers to protect themselves from foodborne illness. The withdrawal of these proposed regulations means that Americans will need to be even more vigilant about food safety in their kitchens.

Protecting Yourself

Given these developments, consumers must be extra vigilant about food safety. Essential safety measures include:

Keeping raw poultry separate from other foods during shopping and storage
Storing raw meat in sealed containers in the refrigerator
Cooking poultry thoroughly to an internal temperature of 165°F
Avoiding rinsing raw meat as this can spread bacteria
Using separate cutting boards for meat and other foods
Washing hands thoroughly before and after handling raw poultry

The Path Forward

The withdrawal of this framework represents a critical moment in food safety regulation. The debate essentially centers on a fundamental question: Should the primary responsibility for food safety lie with producers or consumers?

While the industry maintains that current measures are sufficient, safety advocates argue that preventing contamination at the source is more effective than relying on consumer handling practices alone. Sandy Eskin predicts that this regulatory rollback could lead to at least one major foodborne illness outbreak linked to poultry within the next three to four years.

The decision effectively shifts more responsibility onto consumers to protect themselves from foodborne illness. With regulatory oversight potentially weakening and salmonella infections continuing to rise, consumers must remain vigilant about food safety practices. This ongoing tension between industry interests and public health protection continues to shape our food safety system, with significant implications for public health.