Misinformation abounds: Raw milk debate continues to churn


UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — As the debate about the health attributes and risks of raw milk spills into capitols and courts across the country, a food safety expert in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences is urging people to think carefully about the risks before consuming unpasteurized dairy products.

Pushing to make it easier for consumers to buy unpasteurized dairy products, proponents of raw milk claim that pasteurization — the process of heating milk to destroy bacteria and extend shelf life — destroys important nutrients and enzymes.

The introduction of laws and lawsuits is leading to confusion.


“There is a lot of misinformation circulating about raw milk, but we recognize people’s right to consume the foods that they want,” said Kerry Kaylegian, director of industrial outreach for the university’s Department of Food Science.

“We are advising people to be cautious because we know that raw milk can carry an increased risk for bacterial contamination that can lead to illness and even death.”

The issue recently made headlines in Pennsylvania when raw milk sales were suspended at two dairy farms after random state checks revealed pathogen problems, underscoring concerns about the safety of unpasteurized milk.

More than 1,500 people became ill from drinking raw milk between 1993 and 2006, according to the most recent data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Kaylegian said.

“Of those, 185 were hospitalized and two died. And the CDC said not all foodborne illnesses are reported, meaning the actual number is likely higher.”

Consuming raw milk is particularly dangerous for pregnant women, children, the elderly and people with weakened immune systems.

Permits in Pa.

Kaylegian pointed out that the sale of raw milk for human consumption in the Keystone State is limited to dairies with raw-milk permits issued by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. But the state has more dairy operations licensed to sell raw, unpasteurized milk than any state in the nation.

Other states

The sale of raw milk is prohibited in 23 states, although seven of them let people get milk through so-called herdshare programs, in which customers can buy ownership in a cow in return for raw milk from the animal.

Retail sales of raw milk is allowed in eight other states besides Pennsylvania, and 18 other states, like Pennsylvania, allow the sale of raw milk from a farm directly to an individual.

Heating up

The controversy about the consumption of raw milk is intensifying across the country. Lawmakers in seven states — Georgia, Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Wyoming — recently have introduced measures seeking to change laws governing raw milk.

The Virginia-based Farmer to Consumer Legal Defense Fund also has filed lawsuits in California, Iowa, Missouri, New York and Wisconsin challenging various aspects of states’ laws regarding raw milk.

“With raw milk, the concern is that it can be contaminated and that it provides a good environment for bacteria to grow to high levels, which increases the chance it can make people sick,” said Kaylegian.

She noted that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention support pasteurization.

“The position of those organizations is that the process doesn’t significantly change the nutritional content of milk,” she said.

Farm inspections

In Pennsylvania, permitted raw-milk dairies are evaluated by a milk sanitarian from the Agriculture Department, Kaylegian explained.

“Essentially, the purpose of the farm evaluation is to assess farm cleanliness, animal health and potential food safety.”

Specifically, the milk sanitarian inspects the dairy farm using a risk-assessment checklist to make sure the dairy producer is following procedures in the Milk Sanitation Law.

“In addition, milk samples will be tested for hygiene, animal health and the presence of disease-causing bacteria,” she said.

“The intention of the law is to protect consumers from getting sick from consuming unpasteurized milk products.”

There is a risk

Kaylegian said many consumers aren’t aware of the danger and that the rising popularity of unpasteurized milk has obscured the risks that come with consuming it.

“A lot of people don’t realize that milk is a potentially hazardous food,” she said. “Actually, most raw animal products do have a pathogen risk to them — which is why we traditionally cook beef, eggs and poultry. Milk falls into that category.”

Farms selling raw milk are tested twice a year for pathogens, but occurrence of pathogens in raw milk is sporadic, Kaylegian warned.

“So just because a test last month came back negative doesn’t mean your milk is pathogen free,” she said. “It is to your advantage to know as much as possible about your farmer and his or her sanitation practices.”

Be smart consumers

Some people want to drink raw milk for a variety of reasons, Kaylegian noted, including perceived health benefits, flavor, the desire to increase their connection with local food producers and the desire to consume less-processed foods.

To accommodate such consumers and dairy producers who want to supply them, Penn State Cooperative Extension dairy scientists offer educational programs for raw-milk providers, encouraging them to concentrate on farm sanitation, milk cooling, animal health and regular testing of milk.
Consumption of dairy products (yogurt and cheese) can be traced back 8,500 years.


For most of history, the world was an agrarian society in which milk was produced in small herds on family farms.

In the mid-1800s there was a shift from agrarian to urban societies, and in the early 1900s milk consumption was found to be associated with diphtheria, tuberculosis, brucella and typhoid.

“In 1938, 25 percent of foodborne-illness outbreaks were traced to dairy products,” said Kaylegian.

The pasteurization process was applied to milk for the purpose of killing pathogens. Pasteurization conditions were adopted in 1939 that were sufficient to destroy Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the most heat-resistant pathogen known at the time.

In 1956, pasteurization conditions (time, temperature) were increased to destroy Coxiella burnetii, which causes Q-fever.

Pasteurization was adopted nationwide in the United States in 1958.


Allegheny couple files lawsuit against Pasture Maid Dairy in New Castle, Pa.
Thursday, April 29, 2010

Pa. Dept. of Ag suspends raw milk permit held by Lawrence Co. dairy
Tuesday, April 27, 2010

NMPF pushing for raw milk regs
Monday, November 16, 2009

Infectious Diseases Society of America is inaccurate
Friday, December 19, 2008

Unpasteurized milk poses serious health risks without benefits
Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Farmer can supply raw milk
Thursday, March 29, 2007

Raw milk case back in court
Thursday, February 8, 2007

Judge overturns raw milk verdict
Thursday, January 11, 2007

False comfort: Raw milk is safe
Thursday, November 2, 2006


Up-to-date agriculture news in your inbox!


  1. I would have to agree with Mr. Rutledge, having friends that bought raw milk to a meeting and having been assured it was wholesome, which it was. I do question why there is not more concerns for the industrial farm meats which continue to raise havoc in the marketplace!

  2. I can’t remember the gov’t source I found but about 1,000 people get sick each year on pasteurized milk and you can bet that’s under reported because most people never think of pasteurized milk as a problem. This journalist needs to read “The Untold Story of Milk,” by Ron Schmid, ND. The times that milk was hazardous were a very specific period of history and conditions. Unpasteurized milk for consumption is different than milk headed for pasteurization. The standards are higher.

  3. It is hard for me to believe that our state/government thinks it is just fine to allow raw hamburger on store shelves where one pack could contain the ground remnants of over 1000 animal who might have been sick, dying and fed chicken poo, cooked feathers, antibiotics, hormones, genetically modified corn and soy which have been sprayed with tons of pesticide and herbicide and after all that is treated with chemicals to keep it “fresh” in the store.
    I bet if someone were to eat the raw ground meat there might be some illnesses.

    Allows raw chicken and eggs on the shelves from chickens that could have been feed remnants of dead pigs and cows, residual chemicals and drugs from the cow and pig remnants, ground up baby chicks and feathers, arsenic, antibiotics, genetically modified corn and soy which have been sprayed with tons of pesticide and herbicide and after all that dipped in ammonia or bleach to keep them “fresh”. I bet if someone were to eat the raw chicken and eggs there might be some illness.

    Allows raw lettuce,spinach, berries, and any number of fruits and vegetables on the shelves from fields sprayed with chemicals, fertilized with liquid manure from sick cows, chickens, pigs, where wild animals and human crop pickers could walk in or fly over and defecate and then treated with cancer causing chemicals to keep them “fresh”. I bet if someone were to eat the raw veggies and fruit there might be some illness.

    Allows the ingredients for cookies, cake and bread to be sold in the store, and I bet if someone were to eat the batter raw there might be some illness.

    Allows cancer causing cigarettes full of chemicals on the shelves along with alcoholic products. I bet if someone were to smoke and drink there might be some illness.

    See our State or Government gives us the “CHOICE” when it comes to these products, any of which “could” make you ill, and we are bright enough to “Choose” to either pass them up, use them in their raw state or cook them, whether or not you got sick and died was your choice.

    Raw milk should not be any different, it is a raw food the same as veggies, fruits, raw cookie dough, meat or eggs. How we use it is our own business.
    the “CHOICE” should be ours.
    Allow the customer to choose whether or not they wish to consume raw milk. They are bright enough to know the risks.

  4. What isn’t being said here either is how a cow is fed and where it lives 23 hours a day is significant in the safety of raw milk.

    I wouldn’t drink raw milk from most of the dairy farms around either…and it sure might contain pathogens from the cow lounging in its (or a number of others) manure. But, when a cow is rotated to fresh pasture each day, she stays significantly cleaner.

    As stated above, read the book, “The Untold Story of Milk”.

  5. Raw milk accounts for the majority (about 70%) of dairy-related illnesses in the United States. They even come from farms that don’t use antibiotics, feed their livestock grass, and promote themselves as local and responsible. Raw milk intended to be sold as raw milk sickens people.

    In the first ten months of this year, in the United States, raw milk has sickened five times as many people as pasteurized milk. This is despite the fact that almost 100% of milk in this country is pasteurized.

Leave a Reply to Kathy B Cancel reply

We are glad you have chosen to leave a comment. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated according to our comment policy.

Receive emails as this discussion progresses.