Is raw milk healthier than pasteurised milk?
Written by AI from saved sources. A script checks every quote word for word, and a second AI compares each claim with its source. How we work and corrections
Saved evidence does not show that raw milk is healthier overall. Heating milk (pasteurisation) does cause some vitamin losses, and studies link farm milk with less childhood asthma. But infections from raw milk are documented.
Checked against: US FDA, US CDC, New Zealand Chief Science Advisor, October 2026.
Why people believe it
An online Pacific Northwest survey had 227 responses. Among current raw-milk consumers, 72.4% cited taste. Of those consumers, 67.2% cited perceived benefits for their health as a whole. Many distrusted state food-safety advice. Some worried about pasteurised milk’s safety. Those concerns deserve answers. Liking the taste needs no defence.
“It has more vitamins”
A little more of some vitamins. One study reviewed by the FDA found about 15% less vitamin C after pasteurising whole milk. That is one study’s result, not a universal loss rate. The FDA puts the vitamin C in a 240 ml cup of milk at about 5 mg. New Zealand’s 2015 review reports less vitamin B2. For B12, limited evidence suggested a small loss with negligible impact on typical adult intake. The FDA says protein quality and the calcium available to the body remain the same.
“It makes bones stronger”
The FDA found no scientific literature supporting claims that raw milk helps calcium build up in bones. It also found none supporting claims that pasteurised milk is linked to osteoporosis. Its cited experiment found no difference in calcium absorption among young rats fed raw milk, homogenised milk pasteurised at high temperature for a short time, or homogenised milk treated at ultra-high temperature. It tested rats, not whether milk prevented fractures in humans.
“It helps with lactose intolerance”
A trial involved 16 adults who reported trouble tolerating lactose (milk sugar). Poor lactose absorption was confirmed in all 16. They tried raw, pasteurised and soy milk in separate eight-day phases. The trial used a double-blind design. On day one, breath tests showed worse milk-sugar absorption with raw milk than with pasteurised milk. The trial found no clear difference between them on day eight. The highest dose was 710 ml. At that dose, day-seven symptoms among 13 participants did not differ clearly between raw and pasteurised milk. The small, short trial could not answer questions about adapting over a longer period. Funding came from a foundation gift with no restrictions and a university student research stipend (payment). The authors said funders had no role in the study’s design, conduct, data collection or analysis, interpretation of results, or manuscript preparation, review or approval.
“The enzymes and good bacteria help”
The FDA refers to yoghurt linked to better lactose digestion. It says raw milk does not contain the same bacteria at comparable levels. Pasteurisation stops most activity of lipoprotein lipase, a milk enzyme. The FDA reports no resulting loss of nutritional value. Enzyme activity alone is not evidence of a health advantage.
“It boosts immunity”
A 2019 Nutrients review describes a laboratory study of human monocytes, a type of immune cell. Raw milk changed how those cells responded. That did not test whether drinking it improves people’s health.
“It prevents asthma and allergies”
The same review reports on GABRIELA, a study of school-aged children. Raw-milk consumption was linked with less asthma and hay fever. One study followed over 900 rural children from birth. It linked regular consumption of unpasteurised milk with less asthma onset at age six. These associations do not prove that raw milk prevents asthma or allergies.
The details matter: in PARSIFAL, one of the studies, about half the farm milk was boiled. The authors said they could not compare raw and pasteurised milk because they could not confirm its raw status.
Thinking tool: is it the milk, or the farm?
The review says efforts to find which parts of farm life protect children have had limited success. The review suggests this is probably because researchers have been unable to separate individual exposures. Yet one study accounted for measured microbial compounds (substances from tiny organisms) in animal sheds and farm homes. Its link with farm milk remained. New Zealand’s review says the studies did not establish cause and effect. For other claims, ask what else differs between groups before deciding what caused an outcome.
“A clean farm makes it safe”
A model used US cow-milk and cheese outbreaks from 2009–2014 to estimate rates across four germs. Unpasteurised products had about 840 times the outbreak illness rate per serving of pasteurised products, it estimated. Their hospitalisation rate was 45 times that of pasteurised products, it estimated. An exception involved the germ Listeria. In those data, Listeria illnesses and hospitalisations were more often attributed to pasteurised cheese than to unpasteurised cheese.
Separately, US raw drinking-milk outbreaks in 1998–2018 accounted for 2,645 reported illnesses, 228 hospital stays and three deaths. These are recorded totals, not risks per serving. Serious complications can include kidney failure.
“What about bird flu?”
On 3 June 2024, the CDC reported H5N1 bird flu in raw milk from sick and apparently healthy cattle. It said the risk of human infection from drinking H5N1-contaminated raw milk was unknown. On 28 June 2024, the FDA reported that a study inactivated H5N1 in milk using the most commonly used pasteurisation time and temperature. The study used a continuous-flow system designed to simulate commercial milk processing.
Official positions, dated
The FDA’s 2024 review repeats advice from the PARSIFAL authors. They advised against raw farm milk for allergy prevention because of infection risk. The CDC’s 31 January 2025 guidance lists groups at higher risk of serious illness from raw-milk germs. These are children under 5, adults over 65, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems. USDA APHIS updated its guidance on 21 January 2026. It says raw milk and its dairy products should not be sold or distributed for people to consume.
What people also ask
Is there a way to make raw milk safe?
The FDA says pasteurisation kills harmful germs in raw milk without significantly affecting its nutritional quality. The CDC says good farm practices can reduce contamination but cannot guarantee safety.
Is raw milk safe for babies?
The CDC identifies children under five as being at higher risk of serious illness from raw-milk germs. New Zealand’s evidence review reports that researchers did not recommend raw milk for infants. Their reason was that it can cause life-threatening infections.
Which is healthier, raw milk or pasteurized milk?
Saved evidence does not show that raw milk is healthier overall. The FDA reports that pasteurisation kills harmful germs while preserving protein quality and the calcium available to the body.
How many people are hospitalized from raw milk?
A study of reported US raw drinking-milk outbreaks during 1998–2018 recorded 228 hospitalisations. That is a total for those outbreaks and years, not a risk per serving.
Check it yourself (5 minutes)
- Open the CDC’s Raw Milk page, saved in this pack with the date 31 January 2025.
- Use your browser’s Find for “good practices”.
- Read the sentence: does farm hygiene guarantee safety?
What you should have found
“While good practices on farms can reduce contamination, they cannot guarantee safety from harmful germs.”
Before you forward this: does the box at the top say exactly what the sources below say?