[VillagesDude]

First, if the person was concerned about the meat and posted the “evidence” to social media, they have a duty to mitigate, which in this case would be not consuming the product and returning it to the point of sale for a satisfactory replacement or refund. If the meat appeared as tainted, why did the individual cut it up further rather than returning? For the example at hand, if the individual knowingly consumes the product and subsequently gets ill, they would not necessarily be successful in suit where they did not mitigate. That’s not to say if someone unsuspectingly purchases a food item and becomes ill, let say from listeria, they wouldn’t have a suit. Lots of that in the news lately. This would come under product liability law including negligence, breach of warranty, failure to warn, etc. in which case one of the local personal injury attorneys would consider. In the case at hand, just return the product for a satisfactory replacement or refund. (This should not be construed as legal advice; it is opinion.)