Raw Milk: Understanding the Truth Behind the Controversy
- Alex Kelly
- Dec 30, 2025
- 13 min read
Updated: 3 days ago
Let's first tart off by breaking down all the different types of milk so we have a better understanding of what we are dealing with.
UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF MILK
Raw Milk: Raw milk is milk in its natural state (unheated and unprocessed), retaining its native enzymes, naturally occurring microbes, and intact cream structure. Many people choose raw milk for its perceived digestibility, nutrient density, and the presence of bioactive components that may play a role in gut and immune function.
Low-Temperature Milk: Low-temperature pasteurized milk (often called vat-pasteurized milk) is gently heated to about 145°F for 30 minutes to reduce harmful bacteria while minimizing heat exposure. This slower, lower-heat process helps preserve more of milk’s natural flavor and structure compared to higher-temperature methods. In many states, this is considered the closest legally available retail option to raw milk.
Non-Homogenized Milk: Non-homogenized milk has not undergone the mechanical process that breaks fat into tiny particles, so the cream naturally rises to the top. This keeps the fat structure more intact and gives milk a traditional “cream-top” appearance. Non-homogenized milk can be either pasteurized or low-temperature pasteurized and is often chosen by those looking for a less mechanically processed option. Although, most options you’ll find in conventional stores (outside of wellness stores) will be homogenized.
Homogenized Milk: Homogenized milk is mechanically processed so fat stays evenly suspended rather than rising as cream. This creates a uniform product, but alters the natural structure of milk fat. The process became widespread in the early 1900s to standardize milk and improve commercial efficiency. Most milk found in conventional grocery stores is homogenized.
Pasteurized Milk: Pasteurized milk is heated to a moderate temperature for a short time (~161°F for 15 seconds) to reduce harmful bacteria while preserving more of milk’s natural structure and flavor. It must be refrigerated and typically has a shorter shelf life, which is often a sign of less intensive heat processing.
Ultra-Pasteurized Milk: Ultra-pasteurized milk is heated to much higher temperatures for a very brief time (~280°F for 2 seconds) to greatly extend shelf life. This process allows milk to last longer in transport and storage but results in greater heat-related changes to proteins and enzymes. Ultra-pasteurized milk is common in organic and shelf-stable products and usually stays fresh much longer when unopened.
A 2019 study found that 60% of conventional milk samples contained detectable levels of antibiotics, pesticides, or hormones, with some containing antibiotics illegal for use in dairy cattle.
USA Grass-Fed Milk: USDA grass-fed milk comes from cows that are fed 100% grass and forage for their entire lives, with no grain, corn, or soy. To carry the USDA Grass-Fed label, farms must also allow cows continuous access to pasture during the grazing season. Because of this natural diet, grass-fed milk typically contains higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and reflects a more traditional, pasture-based approach to dairy farming.
Organic Milk: Organic milk comes from cows raised under USDA organic standards, which require at least 30% of their diet to come from pasture for a minimum of 120 days per year, with the rest of their feed being organic and non-GMO (often including grain). Organic standards prohibit synthetic hormones, routine antibiotics, and GMO feed, and require pasture access during the grazing season. While organic milk is often ultra-pasteurized in large commercial stores for longer shelf life, ultra-pasteurization is not required—some organic milk is low-temperature pasteurized, especially from smaller or local dairies.
"Conventional" Milk (not organic, not grass fed): Conventional milk comes from cows that are not required to be grass-fed or organically raised. Their diet often includes grain (which may be GMO), and production allows the use of synthetic hormones and antibiotics when needed. Compared to grass-fed or organic milk, conventional milk typically has lower levels of omega-3s and CLA, fewer restrictions on chemicals and feed quality, and is more heavily processed for consistency and shelf life, making it a less nutrient-dense option for those prioritizing milk quality and farming practices.
A1 vs A2 Milk: Milk contains beta-casein proteins. Some cows produce A1 beta-casein, others produce A2, and some produce a mix. Certain breeds like Jersey, Guernsey, Brown Swiss, and heritage breeds, naturally produce A2 milk.
Some individuals experience bloating, mucus production, or digestive discomfort from A1 protein because it breaks down into a peptide called BCM-7, which may slow gut motility, increase intestinal inflammation, and interact with opioid receptors in the digestive tract. A2 protein does not produce BCM-7, which is why many people find A2 milk easier to digest. While both A1/A2 and A2 raw milk are nutrient-dense, those with sensitivities often tolerate A2 raw milk better.
Grade A Milk: “Grade A” refers to sanitation and handling standards set by the FDA for pasteurized milk, not nutritional quality. These standards include equipment requirements, bacterial count limits, cooling temperatures, and testing intervals. Many small raw dairies meet or exceed these sanitation standards but do not fall under the commercial pasteurization framework.
Why Raw Milk Became Controversial
Raw milk has become a hot political topic…which is crazy. Why has MILK become political? (Well…I know why 😝). While it is true that pathogens such as E. coli, listeria, and salmonella can be present, I like to remember what Dr. Bruce German of the International Milk Genomics Consortium said, pasteurization is an “18th-century solution to an 18th-century problem.”
Raw milk restrictions did not arise because milk itself was inherently dangerous, but due to the Industrial Revolution, poor sanitation in the 1800s, and later, the rise of Big Agriculture.
The 1800s: The “Swill Milk” Crisis
In the mid-1800s, American cities were exploding in population. Urban dairies were popping up next to distilleries and factories, and cows were kept in cramped indoor pens and fed the leftover mash from liquor production (something called “swill”). No longer were they feeding from pastures, and drinking from clean, flowing streams.
This milk was:
low in nutrients
often visibly blue-tinted
sometimes mixed with chalk, plaster, or starch to look whiter
responsible for thousands of infant deaths in cities like New York and Chicago
Public outrage grew. Newspapers published undercover reports, doctors spoke out, and people began demanding safer milk. And can you blame them?
There were basically two routes to take: Clean and certify it, or pasteurize it.
Clean and Certify
In 1893, Dr. Henry Coit, a medical doctor who founded the first Medical Milk Commission and the certified milk movement, advocated for improving milk at the source. His belief was simple: milk needed to come from healthy cows raised on green pastures with access to clean water.
He helped pioneer the idea of certified milk (milk that was carefully produced, routinely tested, and held to strict cleanliness standards). This approach allowed high-quality raw milk to continue being supplied to institutions like the Mayo Clinic, where it was used as part of therapeutic “milk diets” to support healing. Raw milk continued to be used clinically through the 1920s and 1930s, with entire treatment protocols built around it (1-6).
Pasteurize
That same year, Nathan Straus, a businessman and philanthropist, began promoting milk pasteurization in American cities. He introduced a heat-treatment system adapted from European methods originally used in wine and beer production to slow bacterial growth. Rather than focusing on improving farm conditions, pasteurization aimed to reduce risk by heating milk that was already being produced under unsanitary urban conditions.
The impact was immediate. In crowded cities with poor sanitation, unsafe water, and no refrigeration, infant mortality rates dropped dramatically (sometimes by nearly 40 percent) when pasteurized milk depots were introduced. This outcome made pasteurization an appealing public-health solution at the time. However, it did not address the underlying causes of contamination, such as unhealthy cows and filthy dairies. Instead, it functioned as a corrective measure, making unsafe milk less dangerous to consume.
These two pathways reflect a fundamental difference in philosophy: one prioritized prevention through clean farming and testing, while the other relied on processing as a corrective measure.
Ultimately, Nathan Straus’ pathway became the norm.
Pasteurization Arrives as a Public Health Tool
In 1917, Chicago became one of the first major U.S. cities to mandate milk pasteurization, and many others soon followed. At this point most of Americans where consuming milk produced in crowded, unsanitary systems far removed from pasture-based farms. Within that reality, pasteurization wasn’t evil, it was a necessary public-health response to an unsafe supply chain.
Big Ag Smells the Money
As the food system industrialized through the 1920s–1950s, pasteurization aligned well with the rise of centralized dairies, refrigeration, and grocery stores. Standard pasteurization modestly extended shelf life and reduced spoilage, while later ultra-pasteurization dramatically increased storage time.
Big Ag and big-box grocery chains saw an opportunity. Longer shelf life meant fewer losses, easier national distribution, and higher margins. This made pasteurization financially more attractive to large agricultural producers and big-box retailers.
longer shelf life = fewer losses = bigger margins.
Over time, pasteurization became the norm (and still is today), not because it addressed the root causes of milk contamination, but because it fit the industrial food system that had developed.
Now the moment you've all been waiting for!
The Benefits of Raw Milk
Raw milk is truly natural. It contains a full spectrum of essential fats, proteins, enzymes, vitamins, and minerals in forms the body can readily recognize and use. Because it hasn’t been heat-treated, its naturally occurring digestive and anti-inflammatory enzymes remain intact, which can help support better digestion. Raw milk also helps stimulate the body’s own lactase activity in the gut, which explains why individuals who struggle with “lactose intolerance” sometimes tolerate raw milk.
Raw Milk Compared to Other Milks
Large epidemiological studies have found that raw milk consumption is correlated with:
less eczema
lower rates of ear infections, fevers, and respiratory infections
increased abundance of probiotic Lactobacillus in the gut
you can find lots more studies here
Why is Milk The Most Allergenic Food in America
Milk has become highly allergenic because the processing fundamentally changes what milk is. High heat and mechanical processing deactivates many of milk’s natural bioactive components mentioned above like enzymes, beneficial bacteria, and microscopic signaling particles that play a role in immune and digestive function.
Homogenization further alters the structure of milk fat, which some researchers are beginning to explore as metabolically and immunologically active rather than inert. When these natural elements are removed or inactivated, supporters argue that milk becomes harder to digest and more likely to provoke reactions, especially in sensitive individuals.
What remains is a stripped-down product that still contains fat and protein, but lacks the enzymes and microbes that help the body digest and utilize those nutrients.
Lactose Intolerant or Pasteurization Intolerant?
Lactose is the natural sugar found in milk, and many people view it as a beneficial prebiotic that can help nourish certain gut bacteria. When lactose is consumed alongside bacteria capable of breaking it down and supporting lactase activity, it may be digested without issue. This explains why lactose intolerance is often framed as a lack of lactase rather than a true intolerance to dairy itself, and why many people choose to take supplemental lactase when they want to enjoy milk or other dairy products comfortably.
As Mark McAfee, Founder and CEO of Raw Farm and Chairman and President of the Board for the Raw Milk Institute, says, "are you lactose intolerant, or are you pasteurization intolerant?”
FDA Regulation and Raw Milk
The FDA regulates milk based on large scale conventional production, which they view as inherently requiring pasteurization due to cleanliness and handling standards. And I don’t disagree, because the only milk the FDA acknowledges is industrial, filthy, and cheap.
Mark McAfee has tried for twenty years to meet with the FDA, and they refuse. This says a heck of a lot to me. Why might this be? Could it be because it would require them to acknowledge the distinction between industrial milk and carefully managed raw milk? Would they have to acknowledge their milk is dirty, dead, and highly allergenic? Would they have to acknowledge the European study already showing this to be true? Might these individuals in the FDA be tied to processing plants, heavily influencing their paycheck?
I don't know the answer. I’m strictly thinking out loud here, but why would the FDA refuse for 20 YEARS (!!!) to have a simple, genuine conversation with a passionate qualified farmer? And instead, berate and blacklist him? The math aint mathin' to me.
Ensuring Raw Milk Safety
So how can you ensure your milk is safe? Ask questions and get to know your farmers! Don't be being raw milk (or any product for that matter) from a rando in a parking lot. Ha!
How is your milk being harvested?
Pathogens are not naturally present inside a healthy animal, and safety depends largely on how the milk is handled. Raw milk from a healthy cow, when harvested correctly, is extremely clean and low risk.
Most raw milk dairies will offer tours to show you just this!
Proper raw milk farming includes practices like pasture-raised cows, clean water, meticulous udder preparation, sanitized equipment, rapid chilling, and routine batch testing through certified laboratories.
When farmers are well trained, follow strict hygiene standards, feed their cows properly, and test their milk regularly, the result is a fundamentally different product from large-scale systems where milk is allowed a certain number of coliforms and is pooled together from many farms, destined for pasteurization - reducing the incentive to prioritize individual farm-level cleanliness. One approach focuses on prevention and quality from the start, the other on processing as a corrective step.
Ask your farmer questions.
Reputable raw milk farms will make themselves available to customers. You should feel comfortable asking both simple and tough questions, and even requesting a farm visit. The only reasonable pushback should be scheduling. Families live and work on these farms, so a little notice is normal. Beyond that, transparency should be the standard. If a farmer seems evasive or uncomfortable with reasonable questions or a visit, that’s a red flag.
Ask about testing.
You can also ask when they last tested for pathogens like E. coli. Some consumers even choose to do their own independent testing for extra reassurance. And finally, trust your senses. In food science there’s a saying: your nose knows. Pour milk into a clean cup (don’t smell it straight from the container), look at it, smell it, and pay attention to how your body reacts. If something seems off, trust your gut and don’t consume it.
An Observational Story
One of Ciera’s raw milk customers works with cancer cells professionally. Out of curiosity, she looked at raw milk, low-temperature pasteurized milk, and ultra-pasteurized milk under a microscope. She noted clear visual differences between the three. The raw milk appeared bright and dynamic, the low-temperature pasteurized milk showed some movement and color, and the ultra-pasteurized milk looked more uniform and still.
RAW MILK FAQ / MISCONCEPTIONS
Here's a few comments I have received that are very common and worthy of addressing:
"So I’m confused though… what I’ve learned about raw milk is that its shelf life is actually exponentially longer than homogenized milk. Not the other way around."
We’re really talking about two different definitions of “shelf life,” and I should have clarified that up above. Pasteurized milk has a longer marketable shelf life, but a shorter biological one.
When I think about raw milk’s shelf life, I’m referring to it in a biological sense. Raw milk contains living bacteria and active enzymes, so when it’s fresh and properly handled, it doesn’t spoil the way conventional milk does - it ferments. That means it can remain usable for a very long time, even though the flavor eventually changes and isn’t something most people want to drink straight. That said, it can still be used in many different ways. Pasteurized milk’s shelf life is more commercial. Pasteurization kills most bacteria and inactivates enzymes, which allows the milk to taste fresh for longer. In other words, it extends the shelf life from a consumer and retail perspective, rather than a biological one.
Considering how little raw milk is consumed and how many foods exists, that seems pretty high. (In response to the fact that raw milk makes up ~1% of reported food borne outbreaks).
It’s really not as many as people think. From 2015-2025 the CDC reported several thousand food borne outbreaks, the vast majority linked to restaurant and grocery-store foods. Over that same time period, only around 100 outbreaks have been linked to raw milk. Looking back further, the CDC compiled data showing ~200 raw-milk associated outbreaks from 1998-2018 (out of 21,919 outbreaks). You also have to keep in mind the context behind the outbreaks. I know a big one talked about recently-ish was in FL where raw milk cannot be sold for human consumption, so of course that milk isn’t going to hold up to the standards as it would in, let’s say, Texas. You just gotta be smart! Like with anything you ingest. Don’t be buying raw milk (or anything for that matter) from a rando in a parking lot 😂
But what percent of milk drinkers are raw milk drinkers? (Also in response to he fact that raw milk makes up ~1% of reported food borne outbreaks).
That’s fair!! You also have to take into account what percentage is from pet milk, cow-share milk, herd-share milk, milk labeled “not for human consumption,” milk obtained illegally across state lines, milk from unregulated or non-sanitary operations, petting zoo or calf milk, cow-share programs with no sanitation oversight, milk that’s been improperly stored/transported, etc, because they don’t differentiate, which is a real shame. You also have to think, raw milk is naturally easier to trace (I personally believe this to be a good thing because it holds distributors accountable), because it’s produced by fewer farmers and distributed in smaller localized batches. Whereas pasteurized dairy comes from massive, multi-state supply chains mixed with tons of farms and gets used in dozens upon dozens of foods. Because of this, illnesses linked to pasteurized dairy often get classified as “unknown source,” “multi-ingredient food,” or attributed to something else entirely. When a small exposure group has any outbreak the percentages look huge, even if the absolute number of illnesses is small. So tbh the % for properly handled raw milk is probably waaaaaay lower, if not almost zero.
"But 96% of dairy based food borne outbreaks are from raw milk. And when you consider that only 3% of the population drinks raw milk, but that it accounts for 96% of the hospitalizations related to dairy consumptions we can see how dangerous it is."
A few important considerations. That 96% doesn't distinguish between legal vs illegal raw milk. It doesn't take into consideration if the illnesses were linked to pet milk, cow-share milk, herd-share milk, milk labeled "not for human consumption," milk obtained illegally across state lines, milk from unregulated or non-sanitary operations. There is a disproportionate number of raw milk outbreaks involving people drinking petting zoo or calf milk (yes, really), cow-share programs with no sanitation oversight, improper storage/ transport, etc. Hospitalization stats are also heavily skewed because raw milk illnesses are more like to be tested, reported, super aggressively traced, and more likely to be classified as an outbreak. Meanwhile many sporadic illnesses from other food often go under tested, mild illnesses are rarely reported, and many foods never get traced at all. I'm not saying go out and buy raw milk (or any food for that matter) from the guy in the parking lot or the raw milk sold in pet stores - yeah, then you're just asking for a higher risk.
This is a really good video along similar lines to the above 3 questions on relative vs absolute risk.
Sources:
PDF testimony citing Dr. J.E. Crewe’s 1929 article on raw milk treatments (Mayo Foundation founder): “Raw Milk Cures Many Diseases” – excerpts and historical commentary. Raw Milk Cures Many Diseases (Crewe, 1929)
“On the Milk Cure” (Philip Karell, 1866) — a primary historical medical article (now hosted by NCBI/PMC) describing milk-cure protocols and claimed clinical uses from that era. PMC
“Milk Treatment of Disease” (J. Tyson, 1884) — JAMA — an early mainstream medical discussion of milk treatment, explicitly referencing Karell’s paper and giving historical context. JAMA Network
“The skim-milk treatment of diabetes and Bright’s disease” (Arthur Scott Donkin; 1860s/1870s era text, digitized PDF) — a period text on milk-based treatment approaches (skim milk specifically). Wikimedia Commons
Charles Sanford Porter, MD — Milk Diet as a Remedy for Chronic Disease (3rd ed., 1911; originally 1905) — full scanned book available as a PDF via Internet Archive servers. Internet Archive+1
Proceedings PDF (1925) — “Use of Milk in the Treatment of Human Disease.” Dr. J. E. Crewe (Rochester, Minnesota) appears in conference proceedings (U.S. Live Stock Sanitary Association). This is one of the more “primary-ish” Crewe items that’s easy to point to online. US Animal Health Association
Comments