Christine Seroogy, MD, professor, Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Rheumatology, recently spoke with The New York Times about the nuances of research on raw milk.
When ancient humans discovered that they could nourish themselves with milk, it became an important part of their diets. However, the risk of infections spreading from animals to people has always been present. These animal-born infections may have included smallpox and measles. And today, we see concerns related to the spread of H5N1 bird flu.
The rise of milk pasteurization in the beginning of the 20th century diminished threats of infection from milk, but the debate around raw milk has found a resurgence in recent decades. Research has found a “farm effect,” where children living on farms have a lower risk of allergies and asthma. However, scientists have been unable to fully understand what factors contribute to the “farm effect.” In The New York Times article, Seroogy encouraged more research to understand mechanism and biology in the findings. She also expressed the need for multiple stakeholders to be at the table for this discussion, including consumers, producers, regulators, and scientists. “Good decisions,” she says, “come from good information.”
The uncertainty around the benefits of raw milk consumption should not distract from the known risks. Pathogens that can be present in raw milk can cause severe disease among children and adults.
“Some Raw Truths About Raw Milk” was published in The New York Times online on January 13, 2025. (Gift link accessible through 3/1/2025, subscription required after that date.)