Foods Alive Recalls Organic Moringa Leaf Powder Over Possible Salmonella
The FDA and Foods Alive Inc. announced a recall of 8-ounce packages of organic moringa leaf powder due to possible salmonella contamination.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 5, 2026, 6:46 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 5, 2026, 6:52 p.m. ET
FDA Reports Illnesses Linked to Recalled Moringa Leaf Powder
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received reports of illnesses associated with the recalled organic moringa leaf powder from Foods Alive, according to kwtx.com. The agency had previously announced the recall due to potential salmonella contamination.
The recall covers 8-ounce packages of organic moringa leaf powder with a freshest date of 110127 and number 02726. The product was distributed to retailers nationwide and online at foodsalive.com. The FDA advises consumers to stop using the product immediately and may return it to the place of purchase for a full refund.
No further details about the illnesses have been provided by the agency.
Sep 5, 2026, 6:46 p.m. ETFirst report
Foods Alive Recalls Organic Moringa Leaf Powder Over Possible Salmonella
Foods Alive is recalling 8-ounce packages of organic moringa leaf powder because of potential salmonella contamination, according to the FDA as reported by KWTX. The recall affects products with a freshest date of 110127 and number 02726, sold at retailers nationwide and online at foodsalive.com.
No illnesses have been reported. Consumers are advised to stop using the product immediately and may return it to the place of purchase for a full refund.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- Moringa leaf powder recalled for potential salmonella contamination29news.com
- Moringa leaf powder recalled for potential salmonella contaminationkwtx.com
- Foods Alive moringa powder recalled because of Salmonella contaminationfoodsafetynews.com
- A Supplier Test on a Different Product Triggered This Nationwide Moringa Powder Recall Before Anyone Fell Illmedicaldaily.com
- Nine Greens and Superfood Powders Recalled Over Salmonella Are Still Sitting in Pantries a Month Latermedicaldaily.com
Revision history
- Version 46 Sept 2026, 22:47current
Added attribution for the recall announcement and clarified the reason for the recall with sourced descriptions.
- Version 36 Sept 2026, 17:32
Updated to include medicaldaily.com as a source and reflect its reporting on the product description and remedy.
- Version 26 Sept 2026, 02:21
Corrected recall status to ongoing; added distribution details and remedy; clarified hazard and reason as reported by each source.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 22:46current
First published.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 22:52current
First published.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 22:53
First published.
- Version 16 Sept 2026, 02:17
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.