Issue proposal

Historically, consumption of raw milk or milk-based products has been identified as the source for infections such as E.coli, salmonella, brucellosis, and others. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has done several studies regarding disease outbreaks linked to consumption of unpasteurized (raw) dairy products, most recently looking at outbreaks reported from 2007 to 2012. This most recent study concluded there has been an increase in disease outbreaks linked to consumption of raw milk. Because of my previous job as a zoonotic epidemiologist for the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS), I knew there had been cases of illness linked to consumption of unpasteurized milk products. However, most of those were linked to unpasteurized milk products either consumed in or imported from other countries. In 2017, the CDC issued press releases and health advisories advising against consuming raw milk or raw milk-based products. This was the direct result of a DSHS investigation into the first documented case of human RB51 brucellosis infection linked to raw milk consumption. Currently, both the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have pages on their websites dedicated to warning against the dangers or raw milk. Before last year, I had no idea there was a widespread raw vs. pasteurized milk debate. However, as a member of the team investigating the RB51 brucellosis infection, I spoke with hundreds of different people who ardently endorsed raw milk’s benefits. They claimed drinking raw milk gave them healthier skin and nails, stronger immune systems, helped their allergies, and even helped them lose weight. I discovered there is a vast and close-knit pro-raw milk community.

The main questions I want to answer in this project are whether or not raw milk consumption should be avoided and, more specifically, do the alleged benefits of consuming raw milk or raw milk-based products outweigh the potential health risks to us as individuals and to the population as a whole. Currently, there are numerous papers and publications supporting both sides of the raw milk argument. My take on the issue, however, will examine the history of human illnesses conclusively linked to raw milk consumption and the negative implications that widespread consumption can have on public health. I also want to look at the science of pasteurization in order to determine if the scientific data available support the nutrient loss concerns of raw milk advocates. There are many pro-raw milk arguments positing the more holistic effects of consuming something “all natural.” What are the purported benefits of consuming raw milk and what is the role of raw milk in the holistic approach to nutrition? These are questions for which I do not currently have an answer, but I believe are an integral part of the ongoing conversation. While mine will be a science-based approach at both sides of the issue, I will also be looking at these claims and trying to find what evidence there might be to support them. All of this will help me better understand why people might choose raw milk over pasteurized.

To research the issue, I will look at scientific publications regarding raw milk disease outbreaks and illnesses linked to raw milk consumption. I will also look at the literature from agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. While I will not be focusing on the “should they or shouldn’t they” of raw milk sales, it may be worthwhile, as well, to research legislative arguments both in favor and opposed to allowing the sale or consumption of raw milk. For the pro-raw milk perspective, I will be looking for publications regarding the benefits of raw milk, as well as comparative analysis works weighing the benefits and risks. I will also be looking at publications regarding raw milk’s holistic benefits and the history of raw milk in holistic nutrition and medicine.

Opponents of my view would probably be people who prefer a more all-natural or holistic way of living and dairy owners who sell and distribute raw milk. Proponents of raw milk’s benefits would argue that pasteurization and what they view as over-processing destroy nutrients we need and do not completely eliminate the risk of foodborne disease. Another potential opponent group would be persons who advocate for a smaller central government or those with anti-government sentiment, since pasteurized milk is heavily regulated by the federal government. My most likely allies would be the CDC, the FDA, and the greater scientific community. The CDC and FDA have studied extensively the epidemiological link between outbreaks of disease and the consumption of unpasteurized dairy products. The greater scientific community continues to do work into the various existing and emerging foodborne diseases, as well as newly documented and previously undocumented modes of transmission. Other possible allies would be public health workers, medical practitioners, and persons who have contracted diseases linked to their consumption of unpasteurized dairy products. Public health workers work every day to educate the public in order to prevent the occurrence of foodborne illnesses and improve the well-being of their stakeholders. Medical practitioners educate their patients on their risk factors for illness in order to prevent the spread of infection, and the recurrence of infection in previously ill patients or patients with weakened immune systems. Persons who have contracted diseases linked to their consumption of raw milk or milk-based products have first-hand knowledge, and many were ardent pro-milk advocates prior to their illness. All of these stakeholders represent the differing views in the raw vs. pasteurized milk debate. It is in their best interest, as well as that of the general public, that this issue be examined in detail in order to determine the best way to protect the well-being of our communities.

1