Did arthur rathburm's meat go to mcdonald's.
Executive summary
The claim that Arthur Rathburn’s meat—or human remains connected to his business—ended up in McDonald’s supply chains is unsupported by reporting: independent fact-checkers and contemporaneous news coverage say the 2013 FBI probe involved International Biological Inc., a medical-education tissue supplier, and not McDonald’s or its meat vendors [1] [2]. McDonald’s publicly names established meat suppliers such as Keystone Foods and Lopez Foods, and none of the reporting ties Rathburn or his operation to those companies [3] [4] [5].
1. The core incident: Rathburn, International Biological Inc., and the 2013 FBI probe
Contemporary coverage and later debunking identify the underlying footage circulating online as a 2013 news report about an FBI investigation into International Biological Inc., a medical-education service provider owned or operated by Arthur Rathburn, who was later convicted for selling diseased human body parts for medical and dental training [2] [1]. Rathburn received a nine-year sentence related to those unlawful sales, a fact repeated in multiple reports that examined the original case [2] [1].
2. Where the viral claim diverged from the record
Viral social posts overlaid text claiming the FBI “found human remains at a McDonald’s meat supplier,” but fact-checkers determined the clip was repurposed footage of the 2013 story and does not show a McDonald’s supplier facility or any of McDonald’s named vendors [2] [1]. PolitiFact explicitly labeled the meme-style posts “Pants on Fire,” noting the reporter in the clip was covering the International Biological Inc. case rather than a commercial meatplant tied to McDonald’s [2].
3. Who actually supplies McDonald’s—and why that matters
McDonald’s publicly documents its supplier relationships and highlights long-term partners such as Keystone Foods and Lopez Foods as major meat processors for the chain [3] [4] [5]. Industry profiles and reporting corroborate that McDonald’s sources beef, chicken and other proteins through a network of large, audited processors—companies with distinct supply chains and food-safety protocols—which are not connected in reporting to Rathburn or International Biological Inc. [6] [7].
4. The evidence gap and the responsible conclusion
The available reporting and fact-checks assert there is no connection between Rathburn’s medical-tissue operation and McDonald’s supply chain; therefore, the responsible conclusion—based on these sources—is that Rathburn’s “meat” did not go to McDonald’s, and the viral claim is false [1] [2]. None of the cited pieces trace human tissue from International Biological Inc. into commercial food channels, and McDonald’s named suppliers are separate entities documented in corporate materials and industry profiles [3] [4] [6].
5. Why the false link spread—and who benefits
The mischaracterization wedged an old criminal case into a mainstream food scare by recycling archival broadcast footage with sensational captions; that tactic amplifies fear, drives clicks, and exploits distrust of large food companies [1] [2]. Fact-checkers and mainstream outlets aimed to correct the record, but the viral format—short clip plus alarming overlay text—favored shareability over nuance, a dynamic that benefits accounts seeking rapid engagement more than truth [1] [2].
6. Caveats, sources, and outstanding unknowns
The reporting reviewed decisively rebuts the McDonald’s connection but does not provide exhaustive chain-of-custody data beyond stating the separate nature of the businesses involved; in other words, absence of evidence in these sources supports the debunking, and no credible source links Rathburn to McDonald’s suppliers in the reviewed materials [1] [2] [3]. If additional documents, recalls, regulatory findings, or internal supplier audits exist showing a direct link, those are not included in the cited reporting and would be necessary to overturn the current conclusion.