Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, once declared that he drinks only raw milk. Earlier this year, at a state legislative hearing in Michigan, a Republican state representative, Matt Maddock, theatrically sipped from a glass of raw milk and declared, “There’s few things in the world that are better than fresh milk.”
Raw milk was once a counterculture cause, today it is supported by the federal government’s top health official and the iron-pumping, vaccine-doubting Make America Healthy Again movement.
Republicans in Michigan and several other states are considering legislation that would make raw milk easier to obtain, despite warnings that it is dangerous to the public health.
Supporters attribute a litany of healthful properties to raw milk. They say it reduces asthma and allergies, cures lactose intolerance and builds the immune system — beliefs that the Food and Drug Administration, which Mr. Kennedy oversees as health secretary, calls “misconceptions” on its website.
The raw milk supporters have also aligned their arguments with a broader MAHA movement, which presses for deregulation, not just of food choices but of other decisions involving bodily autonomy, like vaccine mandates for schoolchildren.
Most of the state bills would make incremental changes in raw milk availability, and none would put it on the shelves at Walmart. But after Covid, when many people, especially in Republican-leaning states, felt strong-armed into coercive public health measures, like masking and quarantining, there is more resistance to government rules.
So, raw milk advocates say, an opportunity may have opened up. Other states — North Dakota, Georgia, Alaska, Wyoming, Montana — have liberalized their rules in the last few years.
“The environment is kind of ripe for some potential change — you’ve just got to take it when it’s there,” said Jonathan Wingard, a Republican state senator in Oklahoma who is sponsoring raw milk legislation. Mr. Wingard also happens to have been born and raised on a dairy farm.
But should states make it easier for consumers to take such risks?
Pasteurization, heating the milk to kill germs, was considered a revolutionary contribution to food safety when it was adopted in the late 19th century. And pasteurized milk was widely credited with significantly lowering infant mortality at the turn of the 20th century.
Unpasteurized milk today can harbor the same deadly pathogens, such as salmonella, E. coli and listeria, according to the F.D.A., the American Academy of Pediatricians and other medical organizations. They stress that raw milk should be avoided by infants, pregnant women and older adults.
Studies have found that raw milk is responsible for a disproportionately high rate of illness, and that expanding access — by selling it in grocery stores, for instance — is associated with more outbreaks of food-borne illness.
Recent health alerts reflect some of the risk.
On Feb. 3, the New Mexico Department of Health warned residents to avoid raw dairy products, after a newborn died of a listeria infection. Officials said the most likely source of infection was unpasteurized milk that the infant’s mother drank while pregnant.
The next day, health officials in Ada County, Idaho, announced that nine people had become seriously ill after consuming unpasteurized milk. Two children were hospitalized with hemolytic uremic syndrome, a complication of E. coli infection that can lead to kidney failure, according to the local health department.
Raw milk supporters contend the hazards can be avoided through careful sanitation, and compare drinking it to eating sushi or oysters — a calculated risk.
The bill sponsored by Mr. Wingard, the Oklahoma Republican, would allow a dairy farmer to sell 1,500 gallons of raw milk per month, up from 100 gallons for goat milk and 200 gallons for cow’s milk, and to advertise it.
“There has to be a point where, as a government, we say, ‘You’re responsible for your actions, and you’re responsible for your safety,’” he said, adding that the government would “make sure you have the information to know what you’re getting into,” via a labeling requirement.
“The free market will weed out the bad actors,” he said.
Laws governing the sale of raw milk vary widely and have so many permutations that it is difficult to make direct comparisons. The laws typically refer to cow milk, but may also apply to goats, sheep or donkeys.
Some states, including California, Maine, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, allow it to be sold, with labeling, at retail outlets like health food stores, farm stands and co-ops, according to the Weston A. Price Foundation, which supports the sale of raw milk.
Others restrict it to sales directly from the farmer to the consumer. Some states allow customers to own part of a cow or a herd and to receive a share of milk.
A few states allow it to be sold as pet milk, which advocates say is sometimes used as a subterfuge for human consumption.
Esther Arkfeld sells raw milk through subscriptions from her farm in southwest Iowa. Every Monday, a dozen or so customers pick up their weekly supply. It’s stored in glass jars, labeled with each customer’s name, and comes from a cow milked less than 24 hours earlier, she said. Most of her customers have known her for years, and that familiarity is part of the appeal.
“I know them, I know their family, I know their children,” she says. “There’s a trusted relationship.”
Iowa farmers can sell raw milk directly to the consumer, as long as the farmer is milking no more than 10 cows. A state bill would allow Ms. Arkfeld to sell unlicensed raw milk and licensed meat together at her farm store, potentially expanding her market, she said.
The bill sponsor, Chad Ingels, a Republican state representative and a farmer, said he once had safety concerns about raw milk.
“My position now,” he said, “is if people want to consume that product, we notify them of the risk and they’re able to do as they wish.”
In Oklahoma, farmers are not permitted to sell enough raw milk to be economically viable, said Stephanie Ludlam, a farmer. The state bill that would push the limit to 1,500 gallons a month, she said, would help her without motivating large commercial dairies to jump into the market. “I do believe large-scale dairies should be pasteurizing their milk,” she said. “I don’t want to be that size.”
Sale of raw milk across state lines has been banned by the F.D.A. since 1987, unless it is for pets. That ban, too, is being challenged. Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Chellie Pingree, a Maine Democrat, just introduced the “Interstate Milk Freedom Act,” which would allow the sale of raw milk between states where it is legal.
The bill has been proposed before, but might stand a better chance in the current climate.
The decision to consume raw milk is ultimately a decision about risk, said Marion Nestle, a professor emerita of public health at New York University.
Most raw milk is safe, she said in an email, but it is not always possible to tell in advance, even through testing.
“Personally, I prefer my milk pasteurized, a great public health achievement,” she said. “But I understand the passion.”
Kirsten Noyes contributed research.
Anemona Hartocollis is a national reporter for The Times, writing about public health.
The post Drinking Raw Milk Is Risky. Should People Be Able to Buy It Anyway? appeared first on New York Times.
