Online Exclusive

The Udder Truth About Raw Milk
By Juliann Schaeffer

Dietitians are quite familiar with the benefits of milk. But as consumers consider foregoing the usual grocery store variety for the unpasteurized version—either for its perceived better taste or health benefits—this growing trend could prove more dangerous than many currently realize. Nutrition professionals may do well to educate themselves on the raw milk debate before clients come running for dairy advice.

“The main difference between raw milk and regular milk is pasteurization,” explains Isabel Maples, MEd, RD, of the Mid-Atlantic Dairy Association. “Milk is heated to kill pathogens. While pasteurization also kills spoilage bacteria, which extends milk’s shelf life, the primary goal of pasteurization is to prevent disease.”

The FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention both recommend consuming only pasteurized milk due to the dangers of bacteria such as Escherichia coli and Listeria, but advocates such as the Weston A. Price Foundation, which founded A Campaign for Real Milk, say raw milk provides benefits that its pasteurized counterpart simply doesn’t offer. “Today’s milk is accused of causing everything from allergies to heart disease to cancer, but when Americans could buy Real [raw] Milk, these diseases were rare,” its Web site reads, implying that consuming raw milk could possibly prevent these conditions.

Federal law prohibits the sale of raw milk across state lines, but state laws vary considerably concerning who can legally consume and sell unpasteurized milk, which could be confusing consumers about raw milk’s safety. Twenty-eight U.S. states currently allow the sale of raw milk for human consumption, 18 others prohibit it, and four others allow its sale for pet food only—but with whom do you side if a client were to ask for your recommendation?

Maples says that she’s yet to see the scientific evidence to back up claims regarding raw milk’s benefits. “In terms of the evidence, it’s really anecdotal,” she says. And regarding the claim that pasteurization denatures enzymes in milk, rendering them ineffective, she adds, “That doesn’t make sense biologically because enzymes from a cow would be digested as a protein in our bodies. That’s why [people with diabetes] take insulin via a syringe instead of by mouth. And even if the enzymes survived intact during digestion, enzymes are species specific so [they] wouldn’t work in our bodies, similar to why your car key doesn’t unlock the front door of your house.”

She’s quick to say, however, that she wouldn’t be so against raw milk consumption if she were to read some concrete facts about its benefits. “My view might change down the line if I saw more benefit, but particularly when you look at the potential dangers of raw milk,” she says the risks—to her knowledge—are greater than any rewards.

“Milk is a very nutrient-rich food, and so it is a good medium for any harmful bacteria that can be in there,” she explains. “You can go along for 50 years and not have a pathogen, but if a pathogen is introduced, it can grow rapidly because it’s such a nutrient-rich food.”

Michael Bergman, MD, an assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, specializes in infectious diseases and knows all too well the bacteria that can be found in raw milk. “There are many bacteria that live in the udders of the mammary glands of livestock, including cows, [such as] Mycobacterium bovis [which resembles tuberculosis]. It’s nasty, very hard to get rid of, and easily prevented with the pasteurization process,” he explains.

Speaking of Mycobacterium bovis, Brucellosis, and Listeria, all bacteria that can be found in raw milk, Bergman says, “So that’s a list of three conditions [that are very rare in the United States] because of pasteurization [but] are common in countries that don’t have pasteurization. So unless you can show me some very compelling benefits, to me, it’s just not worth the risk.”

The Weston A. Price Foundation acknowledges that there are risks involved with drinking raw milk but believes consumers should have the choice about whether to consume it. This debate is sure to continue, but as for the current scientific evidence (or lack thereof) of raw milk’s benefits, Maples says steer your clients away.

“As a registered dietitian, I agree with MyPyramid’s recommendation of three servings a day of dairy. And I recognize that the alleged health attributes of raw milk may seem alluring, especially to people with health issues,” she says. “But when I look at the science, as a health professional, it scares me that drinking raw milk is becoming more popular. In reality, pasteurized milk offers the same health benefits as raw milk—without the potential food safety risk.”

— Juliann Schaeffer is an editorial assistant at Today’s Dietitian.