2025年12月16日，中國楊女士與其丈夫食用從拼多多平台某店鋪購買的娃娃菜。該筆訂單共計8斤，售價僅人民幣17.48元，價格明顯低於一般市價。兩人當日晚間正常烹調後食用，起初並未察覺異狀，然而隔日即陸續出現流鼻血、口腔內長出血泡等異常症狀。

隨著時間推移，病情不但未改善，反而在一週後急劇惡化。楊女士開始出現嚴重便血並陷入昏迷狀態，送醫後因全身大量失血與凝血功能全面崩潰，被緊急轉入加護病房（ICU）搶救，前後住院長達一個月。其丈夫的情況同樣危急，出現肺積水與呼吸衰竭等症狀，需長時間接受醫療監護。

經多項檢查與鑑定，醫院最終診斷夫妻二人均為急性鼠藥中毒，其中楊女士丈夫的血液樣本中，明確檢測出殺鼠劑成分。由於夫妻生活作息與飲食高度一致，醫療團隊與家屬開始懷疑問題可能出在近期共同食用的食材上，調查線索最終指向那批網購的娃娃菜。

相關單位對剩餘蔬菜與包裝進行檢驗後，發現娃娃菜本身含有高濃度的殺鼠劑成分，更令人震驚的是，包裹蔬菜所使用的舊報紙上，也檢出殘留的劇毒物質「溴鼠靈」。初步研判，污染來源可能並非直接噴灑於蔬菜上，而是報紙曾接觸過鼠藥，在長時間包覆與擠壓過程中，毒物滲透進蔬菜組織，最終造成嚴重中毒。

溴鼠靈屬於脂溶性極強的高毒性殺鼠劑，其特性是耐高溫、不易分解，一般家庭常用的處理方式，例如清水沖洗、鹽水浸泡或短時間焯水，幾乎無法去除其毒性。一旦進入人體，會破壞凝血機制，造成內出血，且中毒症狀往往具有延遲性，等到明顯不適出現時，往往已相當危險。

更令人憂心的是，該拼多多商家所販售的娃娃菜屬於同一批次，累計銷量已超過上千份，意味著潛在受影響人數不只是一個家庭，事件已升高為嚴重的公共食品安全隱患。消息曝光後，引發輿論對於電商平台食品來源、包裝流程以及監管漏洞的高度關注。

面對檢測結果，涉事商家否認在任何環節使用鼠藥，並對檢驗證據的真實性提出質疑。然而在事件持續發酵後，該店鋪已悄然關閉，商家亦拒絕再與消費者或媒體進行任何溝通，使事件責任歸屬與後續賠償問題更加撲朔迷離。

整起案件不僅凸顯低價農產品背後可能隱藏的風險，也暴露出網購生鮮在包裝、倉儲與物流管理上的安全盲點。對消費者而言，這起事件是一個沉痛警訊；對平台與監管單位來說，更是一次關乎制度與責任的嚴峻考驗。

On December 16, 2025, Ms. Yang and her husband consumed a batch of napa cabbage purchased from a store on the e-commerce platform Pinduoduo. The order consisted of eight jin (approximately four kilograms) of cabbage, priced at only 17.48 yuan, a figure noticeably lower than the typical market price. The couple prepared and ate the vegetables that evening without noticing anything unusual at the time.

However, by the following day, both began experiencing abnormal symptoms, including frequent nosebleeds and blood blisters forming inside the mouth. Instead of subsiding, their condition deteriorated rapidly over the next week. Ms. Yang developed severe gastrointestinal bleeding and eventually fell into a coma. She was rushed to the hospital and admitted to the intensive care unit, where doctors fought for her life for nearly a month due to massive blood loss and complete collapse of her blood-clotting function. Her husband’s condition was also critical, marked by pulmonary edema and respiratory failure, requiring prolonged medical treatment and monitoring.

After extensive testing and clinical evaluation, hospital doctors diagnosed both patients with acute rodenticide poisoning. Laboratory analysis of the husband’s blood sample confirmed the presence of anticoagulant rat poison. Given that the couple shared similar daily routines and meals, medical staff and family members suspected that the poisoning was food-related. The investigation eventually focused on the recently purchased online cabbage as the most likely source.

Subsequent testing of the remaining vegetables and packaging materials revealed alarming results. The napa cabbage itself contained a high concentration of rodenticide, and the old newspapers used to wrap the vegetables were found to be contaminated with bromadiolone, a highly toxic anticoagulant rat poison. Investigators preliminarily concluded that the poison may not have been deliberately applied to the vegetables but instead transferred from the contaminated newspapers. Prolonged contact and pressure during packaging and transport likely allowed the toxin to seep into the cabbage tissues, ultimately causing severe poisoning when consumed.

Bromadiolone is a fat-soluble, extremely toxic substance known for its resistance to heat and chemical breakdown. Common household food-preparation methods—such as rinsing with water, soaking in salt water, or briefly blanching—are ineffective at neutralizing its toxicity. Once ingested, it disrupts the body’s blood-clotting mechanism, leading to internal bleeding. Symptoms are often delayed, meaning patients may not realize the severity of exposure until their condition becomes life-threatening.

What raised even greater public concern was the scale of distribution. The same batch of napa cabbage sold by the Pinduoduo vendor had reportedly been purchased by more than a thousand consumers, suggesting that the incident posed a serious food safety risk extending far beyond a single household. As news of the case spread, it triggered widespread alarm over the safety of fresh food sold through online platforms, as well as the lack of oversight in packaging, storage, and logistics processes.

In response to the test results, the merchant denied using any rodenticide at any stage of production or packaging and questioned the authenticity of the evidence. Shortly after the incident gained public attention, the online store was shut down, and the seller refused further communication with consumers or the media. This lack of cooperation has made it difficult to determine accountability or pursue compensation.

Overall, the case has become a stark warning about the hidden dangers that can lie behind unusually low-priced agricultural products. It also exposes critical weaknesses in the regulation of online fresh food sales, particularly regarding packaging materials and supply chain hygiene. For consumers, the incident serves as a sobering reminder to remain vigilant. For e-commerce platforms and regulatory authorities, it represents a serious test of responsibility, oversight, and systemic reform in food safety management.