Unpasteurizedvs.pasteurized Whattoknowaboutfoodsafety

Published in Food and Wine on Saturday, July 19th 2025 at 11:27 GMT by The Hill
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Pasteurization, a long-practiced food processing method, has been at the center of a polarizing debate.

The Ongoing Debate: Health Risks of Raw Milk Versus the Safety of Pasteurized Milk

In the realm of public health and consumer choices, few topics spark as much controversy as the consumption of raw milk. Unlike its pasteurized counterpart, raw milk is straight from the cow, untreated by heat processes that eliminate harmful bacteria. This distinction has fueled a heated debate among health experts, dairy farmers, and consumers, with proponents touting raw milk's purported natural benefits and critics warning of significant health dangers. As outbreaks of foodborne illnesses continue to make headlines, understanding the risks associated with raw milk is crucial for informed decision-making.

At its core, raw milk is milk that has not undergone pasteurization, a process developed in the 19th century by French scientist Louis Pasteur. Pasteurization involves heating milk to a specific temperature for a set period, effectively killing off pathogenic microorganisms without significantly altering the milk's nutritional profile or taste for most consumers. This method has been a cornerstone of food safety in the United States since the early 20th century, dramatically reducing the incidence of milk-borne diseases that once plagued populations. Before widespread pasteurization, illnesses like tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and scarlet fever were commonly transmitted through contaminated milk, leading to thousands of deaths annually, particularly among children.

The appeal of raw milk lies in claims that it retains more beneficial enzymes, vitamins, and probiotics that are allegedly destroyed during pasteurization. Advocates argue that raw milk can improve digestion, boost immunity, and even alleviate conditions like allergies and asthma. Some consumers prefer its creamier texture and richer flavor, viewing it as a more "natural" product aligned with farm-to-table movements. Raw milk enthusiasts often point to small-scale dairy operations where cows are grass-fed and hygiene standards are meticulously maintained, suggesting that these practices minimize contamination risks. Organizations like the Weston A. Price Foundation promote raw milk as a superfood, emphasizing its role in traditional diets and potential health advantages over processed alternatives.

However, health authorities, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), strongly advise against consuming raw milk due to its inherent risks. Raw milk can harbor a variety of dangerous pathogens, such as Salmonella, E. coli, Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter, and Brucella. These bacteria can contaminate milk during the milking process if cows are infected, through fecal matter, or via unsanitary equipment. Even in well-managed farms, it's impossible to guarantee that every batch is free from contamination, as animals can carry pathogens asymptomatically. Outbreaks linked to raw milk have resulted in severe illnesses, hospitalizations, and even fatalities. For instance, vulnerable populations like pregnant women, young children, the elderly, and those with weakened immune systems are at heightened risk of complications, including kidney failure from E. coli or miscarriages from Listeria.

Recent events have amplified concerns about raw milk safety. The detection of highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1), commonly known as bird flu, in dairy cattle herds across several states has raised alarms. Fragments of the virus have been found in raw milk samples, prompting investigations into whether the virus could survive in unpasteurized products. While pasteurization effectively inactivates the virus—ensuring that commercially available milk remains safe—the presence of H5N1 in raw milk underscores the potential for emerging pathogens to enter the food supply. Health officials have reported cases where individuals consuming raw milk from infected herds experienced symptoms, though human-to-human transmission remains rare. This development has led to calls for stricter regulations on raw milk sales, with some states reconsidering their policies amid the ongoing bird flu outbreak in livestock.

From a regulatory standpoint, the sale of raw milk is heavily restricted in the U.S. The FDA bans interstate sales of raw milk for human consumption, but individual states set their own rules. In about half of the states, raw milk can be sold directly to consumers through farm stands, retail outlets, or herd-share programs, where people buy a "share" in a cow to obtain its milk. Proponents argue that these regulations infringe on personal freedoms and support for local agriculture, while opponents highlight the public health burden. Data from the CDC indicates that between 1993 and 2012, raw milk was associated with over 120 outbreaks, sickening more than 1,900 people and hospitalizing nearly 150. These figures likely underrepresent the true impact, as many cases go unreported.

Experts in food safety emphasize that the benefits of raw milk are largely anecdotal and not supported by robust scientific evidence. Studies comparing raw and pasteurized milk show minimal differences in nutritional content; any enzymes lost in pasteurization are not essential for human digestion, as the body produces its own. Moreover, the risk of bacterial contamination far outweighs any potential advantages. Dr. Michael Osterholm, a prominent epidemiologist, has likened drinking raw milk to "playing Russian roulette with your health," pointing out that even organic or grass-fed raw milk isn't immune to pathogens. In contrast, pasteurized milk has an exemplary safety record, with outbreaks being exceedingly rare and often traced to post-pasteurization contamination.

The debate extends beyond health risks to economic and cultural dimensions. Small dairy farmers who sell raw milk often rely on it as a premium product, commanding higher prices that sustain their operations amid competition from large-scale pasteurized milk producers. Consumer demand for raw milk has grown with the rise of health food trends and skepticism toward industrialized food systems, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when interest in "immune-boosting" foods surged. Social media platforms amplify raw milk advocacy, with influencers sharing testimonials and recipes, sometimes downplaying risks. However, public health campaigns counter this narrative by educating consumers on the science of pasteurization and the real-world consequences of outbreaks.

One notable case involved a 2023 outbreak in California, where raw milk contaminated with Campylobacter led to dozens of illnesses, including severe gastrointestinal distress and hospitalizations. Victims ranged from young children to adults, highlighting how quickly pathogens can spread. In response, health departments issued recalls and warnings, but the incident reignited calls for nationwide bans on raw milk sales. Internationally, countries like Canada and Australia prohibit raw milk entirely, citing its risks, while some European nations allow it under strict controls.

For those considering raw milk, experts recommend alternatives like pasteurized organic milk or fermented dairy products like yogurt, which offer probiotics without the dangers. Home pasteurization is possible but not foolproof, and it's generally discouraged. Ultimately, the choice boils down to weighing perceived benefits against proven risks. As one FDA official stated, "Pasteurization is one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century, saving countless lives."

In conclusion, while raw milk holds allure for its natural appeal and claimed health perks, the scientific consensus underscores its dangers compared to pasteurized milk. With emerging threats like avian influenza adding new layers of concern, consumers are urged to prioritize safety. The debate reflects broader tensions between tradition, personal choice, and public health imperatives, but evidence tilts firmly toward pasteurization as the safer option. As awareness grows, so too does the hope that informed decisions will prevent unnecessary illnesses and protect vulnerable communities.

(Word count: 1,048)

Read the Full The Hill Article at:
[ https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5409835-raw-pasteurized-milk-health-risks/ ]

N※N

Unpasteurizedvs.pasteurized Whattoknowaboutfoodsafety

The Ongoing Debate: Health Risks of Raw Milk Versus the Safety of Pasteurized Milk