Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

marlerblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 283 posts

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#31

Post by jmole »

ajmurmann wrote: post #10
sharps_xp wrote: post #6

I went to restaurant last night and asked where the chicken was sourced from and their response was "it's not the usual place we get chicken, but it's US Farm Raised Hatched", but I misinterpreted the her answer as a distributor name but then I realized even if I had a name, I probably couldn't figure out past that whether or not these chickens were pasture raised. If food labels are law, why doesn't this apply to wh…

I wonder how high the ongoing implementation cost of that would be and how that would affect choice between small, specialized and large, integrated suppliers. Sysco can probably hand me a single sheet I can use without any extra work.

I think if you watch video of a massive meatpacking plant, you'll pretty quickly realize how hard it would be to track. At the commodity scale, basically no one in the supply chain other than the rancher seems to care where the meat comes from. And the brands (Tyson, Smithfield, etc.) only want consumers to care about the logo on the box.

Literally the canonical example of capitalism-as-meat-grinder.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#32

Post by iwontberude »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #2

I have not been following this very closely but it seems like the source of this cyclospora contamination has been very challenging to identify. Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. Isn't it reasonable to update the official statement as new information emerges? "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” -John Maynard Keynes.

[flagged]

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#33

Post by dabraham1248 »

TylerE wrote: post #5
senthil_rajasek wrote: post #2

I have not been following this very closely but it seems like the source of this cyclospora contamination has been very challenging to identify. Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. Isn't it reasonable to update the official statement as new information emerges? "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” -John Maynard Keynes.

What changed is that right after the CEO visited the White House, a retraction was issued. This White House does not have a history of being factual, but does have a history of doing "favors" for big donors, which Taylor Farms is.

Mostly to be a pedantic devil's advocate here, I'm going to argue with something you're not saying. I've heard a _lot_ of people argue that the visit is _proof_ of corruption. You're just pointing out the possibility and I'm hoping to head off a bad path.

Anyway, if a company is being declared the source of a multi-state outbreak, that company _should_ be talking to the WH. And it's possible that some of those discussions would present evidence that _should_ result in a retraction.

For example, during heartbleed my grand-boss was in on calls with the WH (I don't work on openssl, at the time I worked on a product that _used_ openssl a couple of layers down). AIUI, official guidance changed because of those calls.

If we want to find proof of corruption, this is a place to start looking, not a place to stop.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#35

Post by gazebo2 »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #2

I have not been following this very closely but it seems like the source of this cyclospora contamination has been very challenging to identify. Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. Isn't it reasonable to update the official statement as new information emerges? "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” -John Maynard Keynes.

Took me a sec to realize you weren't quoting the guy from Tool lol

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#36

Post by Danox »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #2

I have not been following this very closely but it seems like the source of this cyclospora contamination has been very challenging to identify. Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. Isn't it reasonable to update the official statement as new information emerges? "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” -John Maynard Keynes.

Explosive diarrhea doesn’t take long to show up, and it may be hard to identify which company or who’s responsible when you fired all of the people from the department that it’s supposed to police those type of things.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#37

Post by foxyv »

dabraham1248 wrote: post #33
TylerE wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What changed is that right after the CEO visited the White House, a retraction was issued. This White House does not have a history of being factual, but does have a history of doing "favors" for big donors, which Taylor Farms is.

Mostly to be a pedantic devil's advocate here, I'm going to argue with something you're not saying. I've heard a _lot_ of people argue that the visit is _proof_ of corruption. You're just pointing out the possibility and I'm hoping to head off a bad path. Anyway, if a company is being declared the source of a multi-state outbreak, that company _should_ be talking to the WH. And it's possible that some of those discus…

Unfortunately, the mark of corruption spreads to everything it touches. Once you are seen taking bribes for pardons, engaging in crypto scams, and manipulating the stock market to make billions you no longer are given the benefit of the doubt. There is zero evidence for corruption in this case, other than all of the blatant corruption elsewhere. Worse, the person involved is responsible for investigating the corruption.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2026/05/07/democra...

https://www.binance.com/en/square/post/21073697321938

https://fortune.com/2026/05/23/trump-stock-portfolio-trading...

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#38

Post by senthil_rajasek »

falcor84 wrote: post #20
senthil_rajasek wrote: post #2

I have not been following this very closely but it seems like the source of this cyclospora contamination has been very challenging to identify. Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. Isn't it reasonable to update the official statement as new information emerges? "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” -John Maynard Keynes.

> Especially because it takes weeks before the infected start showing symptoms. I just wanted to say that your phrasing here is a fabulously ominous one for the first episode of an HBO show.

Ha! Seems like I am living in one these days.

Re: Taylor Farms has rewritten its cyclospora statement four times in sixteen days

#39

Post by Danox »

jmole wrote: post #31
ajmurmann wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how high the ongoing implementation cost of that would be and how that would affect choice between small, specialized and large, integrated suppliers. Sysco can probably hand me a single sheet I can use without any extra work.

I think if you watch video of a massive meatpacking plant, you'll pretty quickly realize how hard it would be to track. At the commodity scale, basically no one in the supply chain other than the rancher seems to care where the meat comes from. And the brands (Tyson, Smithfield, etc.) only want consumers to care about the logo on the box. Literally the canonical example of capitalism-as-meat-grinder.

Tyson and Smithfield are the worst two brands in the USA that you can get any meat from.
Post reply on HN