Are there benefits to drinking raw milk? The scientific evidence explored

November 4, 2025 •

3 min read

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), raw milk consumption has been linked to numerous foodborne illness outbreaks and hospitalizations. In light of these risks, many question if there are any genuine benefits to drinking raw milk that would justify the potential dangers.

Quick Summary

This article investigates the purported health benefits of raw milk against scientific evidence, covering nutritional content, digestibility, and immune system effects, while detailing the significant food safety risks and public health warnings.

Key Points

No Nutritional Superiority: Scientific research indicates that raw and pasteurized milk have comparable nutritional profiles, with pasteurization causing only negligible changes.
Significant Health Risks: Raw milk is susceptible to contamination by harmful bacteria like E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria, which can cause severe, sometimes fatal, foodborne illness.
Unproven Immune Claims: The theory that raw milk boosts immunity or prevents allergies is not scientifically proven; any association may be related to general farm environmental exposure.
Not a Cure for Lactose Intolerance: Claims that raw milk's enzymes aid in lactose digestion are unfounded, as pasteurization does not cause lactose intolerance and raw milk offers no proven digestive benefits.
Vulnerable Populations at High Risk: Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with weakened immune systems face a disproportionately higher risk of severe illness from raw milk pathogens.
Pasteurization is the Safer Option: Health organizations like the FDA and CDC strongly recommend pasteurized milk, which is heated to kill pathogens without altering its nutritional value.

What is Raw Milk?

Raw milk is milk straight from a cow, goat, or sheep that has not been pasteurized. Pasteurization is a heating process that kills harmful bacteria that can cause serious illness. While proponents advocate for its natural state and claimed health advantages, public health organizations like the FDA and CDC strongly caution against its consumption due to well-documented risks.

Examining the Claimed Benefits of Raw Milk

Several supposed benefits of raw milk are often cited by advocates, but most lack scientific support. The following addresses the most common assertions.

Nutritional Profile: Is Raw Milk Superior?

The claim that pasteurization destroys nutrients is common, but studies show no significant nutritional difference between pasteurized and raw milk. Both are good sources of protein, calcium, and phosphorus. Minor reductions in some water-soluble vitamins from pasteurization are insignificant, as milk isn't a primary source of these. Fat-soluble vitamins remain largely unaffected.

Digestion and Lactose Intolerance

Raw milk advocates claim it's easier to digest for those with lactose intolerance due to natural enzymes. However, scientific evidence does not support this. Lactose is a sugar broken down by lactase produced in the human intestine. Both types of milk have similar lactose levels, and raw milk enzymes don't significantly aid digestion for intolerant individuals.

Immune System Claims: Allergies and Asthma

Some suggest raw milk links to lower childhood asthma and allergy rates. While epidemiological studies show correlation, this isn't a proven cause-and-effect. This effect might relate to general farm exposure rather than raw milk itself. Health agencies conclude that any potential, unproven benefit is far outweighed by bacterial illness risks.

The Undeniable Taste Difference

A richer taste is an appeal for some raw milk drinkers. This subjective preference doesn't negate safety and health concerns.

The Significant Dangers of Drinking Raw Milk

Public health authorities extensively document the substantial risks of drinking raw milk.

Harmful Pathogens in Raw Milk

Raw milk is a breeding ground for dangerous bacteria. Contamination can occur during milking from the animal, feces, or equipment. Pathogens include:

Salmonella: Causes food poisoning.
Escherichia coli (E. coli): Can cause severe illness, including kidney failure.
Listeria monocytogenes: Poses a high risk to pregnant women, newborns, and the elderly.
Campylobacter: A leading cause of raw milk illness.

Serious Illnesses Linked to Raw Milk

Ingesting these pathogens can lead to severe complications, including Guillain-Barré syndrome and Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome. Listeria can cause pregnancy complications.

Vulnerable Populations at Higher Risk

Certain groups face particularly high risk of severe illness:

Young children and infants
Pregnant women
Older adults
Individuals with weakened immune systems

Raw Milk vs. Pasteurized Milk: A Comparison


Feature	Raw Milk	Pasteurized Milk
Safety	High risk of carrying harmful bacteria; no safety guarantee	Heated to kill harmful bacteria, making it a much safer choice
Nutritional Content	Nutrient profile is comparable; minimal, insignificant differences	Nutrient profile is comparable; preserves nutritional value
Probiotics	Contains bacteria, but may include harmful pathogens; probiotic claims are unproven	Contains no active bacteria; probiotics found in cultured products made from pasteurized milk
Enzymes	Contains naturally occurring enzymes, but health benefits are unproven and destroyed by stomach acid	Enzymes are destroyed by heat, but this does not significantly affect digestion
Lactose	Similar lactose content to pasteurized milk; no proven benefit for lactose intolerance	Similar lactose content to raw milk; lactose intolerance is not caused by pasteurization
Taste	Often described as richer, fuller, and more complex	Flavor may be perceived as flatter or less complex than raw
Cost	Often more expensive due to smaller scale production and strict handling	Generally less expensive and more widely available due to large-scale production

The Verdict: Do the Benefits Justify the Risk?

The scientific evidence overwhelmingly favors pasteurized milk regarding safety and proven health benefits. Claims of superior nutrition, easier digestion, and immune benefits from raw milk are largely unproven. The risks of severe foodborne illness from pathogens like Salmonella and E. coli are significant, particularly for vulnerable groups. Pasteurization effectively eliminates these dangers without compromising milk's nutritional value. Public health authorities agree that pasteurized milk is the safest choice.

For more information on the misconceptions surrounding raw milk, you can review the FDA's detailed analysis.

Conclusion

Despite the appeal of unprocessed food, the scientific consensus is that raw milk's health risks far outweigh its unproven benefits. Pasteurized milk is the safest way to gain dairy's nutritional value without risking serious illness.

Frequently Asked Questions

No, pasteurization does not significantly alter the nutritional value of milk. While there may be minor losses of some water-soluble vitamins, they are insignificant, and milk's core nutritional content, including protein and minerals, remains intact.

No, there is no guarantee that raw milk from even the cleanest farm is safe. Harmful bacteria can be present in healthy animals or contaminate the milk during the milking process. Good sanitation practices can reduce risk but cannot eliminate it entirely.

No, this is a common myth. Raw and pasteurized milk have similar lactose levels. Lactose intolerance is caused by a lack of the lactase enzyme in the human body, not the presence or absence of enzymes in the milk itself. Scientific studies have not found a digestive benefit for lactose-intolerant individuals drinking raw milk.

Raw milk can contain a variety of dangerous bacteria, including E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria, and Campylobacter. These pathogens can cause severe foodborne illness, hospitalization, and in some cases, long-term health complications or death.

While some observational studies show a correlation between farm children drinking raw milk and lower allergy rates, this link is not proven. Scientists suggest other environmental factors on farms may be responsible, and the risk of illness from pathogens outweighs any potential, unproven benefit.

Yes. Vulnerable populations face a much higher risk of serious illness from raw milk. This includes infants and young children, pregnant women, older adults, and individuals with weakened immune systems.

Past generations faced a much higher incidence of milk-borne illnesses, with historical outbreaks causing many deaths. Pasteurization was introduced to combat this public health crisis. Modern sanitation has improved, but cannot completely remove the risk inherent in an untreated product.