I choose NO milk.

I believe it should be up to the consumer to make the choice between which product they choose to put in their body. I've had raw goat milk before, never got sick, and loved it. My mother makes kefir from local, organic grass-fed goat milk, and she's never gotten sick from it. It all comes down to the information available and the choice should reside solely with the consumer. And don't forget about sanitation --human error can account for a lot.

This isn't about safety, it's about freedom of choice. Raw milk: drink it or not according to the dictates of your knowledge and food philosophy, but allow me the freedom to do the same. Given the legality of much more dangerous things like alcohol, tobacco, HFCS, aspertame, sodium nitrate, food dyes, monosodium glutamate, and the much higher incidence of food-borne pathogens lately found in seafood, fish, meats and raw veggies, why is raw milk being demonized while these other things are freely available? This isn't about food safety, it's about a powerful industry (industrial dairy) attempting to eliminate competition from smaller farmers who supply a higher quality product to a niche market.

I personally don't think cow's milk, in its mass produced form is of any benefit to humans. There are many more people allergic to milk or lactose intolerant than are being officially diagnosed. Many doctors even refuse to do blood allergy testing on patients because they will not even consider that milk isn't the wonder food it is marketed to be. The thing that is alarming here is that our food is being policed. We have lost all control over food and lifestyle choices that we make for ourselves and our families when the police get involved. I believe this is very dangerous territory; what's the next thing in our lives that is going to be mandated and policed?

I think a person who goes out and parties once in a while, while consuming more than just a couple alcoholic beverages, should try it for a couple of weeks...just to build up the probiotics that they had before they went out. You all do know drinking too much destroys these friendly probiotics, you can develop them other ways but I think to more natural way is more preferable.

I agree that people should have a choice. There are far more dangerous substances in the food supply as Steven pointed out. That said, there is no reason for humans to be consuming the milk of another species. Contrary to the conditioned beliefs pushed on us since we were children, cow's milk is not a health food. The calcium in dairy does NOT build strong bones, as we have been led to believe. If anything, the animal protein causes an acidic environment in the system resulting in calcium leaching from the bones to maintain proper pH. There is also much evidence that the casein in milk is linked to tumor growth, and it's addicting - all animal milk contains a protein called casein which breaks down during digestion to release a host of opiates called casomorphins. (No wonder it's so hard to give up cheese.) Plus, most milk produced in this country is laden with pus. The dairy industry has developed a system known as the "somatic cell count" to measure the amount of pus in the milk, and milk with a count of 200 million per liter is not considered safe for the human food supply. The national average is 332 million per liter. Got Milk?... Got Pus?

From a humane standpoint, cows don't GIVE us milk, we TAKE it (steal is probably more appropriate here) from them. Their milk is meant to be fed to their calves. In order for them to keep producing milk they are artificially inseminated so they are constantly either pregnant or lactating. Their babies are taken from the mother cow shortly after birth - extremely traumatic for both mother and baby. If the calf is male it will likely be crated up and turned into veal a few months later. Most cows are fed grain, which causes chronic digestive problems, typically treated with antibiotics. I could go on, but I think you get the idea. Even though we don't kill the cow to get its milk, we do shorten her life by about 80%. Most dairy cows are "spent" (not producing enough milk to be profitable) by age 4, and then slaughtered to become hamburger. A cow's normal lifespan is 20-25 years.

Back to the question about raw milk... In my opinion, the best thing about raw milk is that the consumer is more likely connect with the dairy farmer and ask questions about how the cows are raised.
http://blog.rawchefmarilyn.com/2010/08/02/addicted-to-cheese-isnt-organi...

My god, this smacks of almost all of the anti-milk propaganda out there.

You are blurring the lines between factory farms and high-quality organic ones. A calf does not have to be removed from their mother; even a low-production Jersey cow can produce enough milk in one day to feed their calf and provide the farmer with product.

Dr. Campbell is not a good source to cite. His studies were done on powdered casein; this is dishonest science. If you want to know whether a food product is a danger or not, you test the whole food. You can not do a test on powdered casein and come to the conclusion that milk (what kind? raw? conventional? grass fed? grain fed? pasteurized? homogenized?) is cancerous or otherwise deleterious to ones health.

The argument that milk causes osteoporosis ignores basic nutritional biochemistry. Vitamin D and Magnesium are needed for proper calcium absorbency; Americans are highly deficient in both of these. This is what's causing the rampant bone disease.

Mastitis is a disease where the udders become inflamed and pussy. This is largely brought on by the usage of rBGH, and that's why it got banned in the EU. Any farmer that gives two-hoots isn't going to milk from a sick cow.

Painting with such a broad brush is incredibly dishonest. Even Mike Adams (who used to criticize milk a lot with a similar brush) promotes the consumption of raw milk and Paul Pitchford as well does not reiterate the claims made by many vegan groups and those associated with the PCRM.

I agree. I personally wouldn't drink raw milk, as I'm concerned about the harmful bacteria and I'm not lactose intolerant, but I think it might be worth a try for people who are lactose intolerant or anyone who wants to, really, I think raw milk should be allowed but there should be laws about clearly putting warnings about the risks of it on the packaging. I also think regular pasteurized milk should have information about pasteurization on the label, including the drawbacks of pasteurization. I think that's the only way a consumer can make an informed decision, but I do think it's necessary to put the decision in the hands of the consumers since there are pros and cons to both raw and pasteurized milk.

If one must consume dairy, raw is best--in my opinion. The big farms and ag companies are trying to regulate the little guys out of biz by banning raw milk and other fresh-from-the-source products. Consumer's choice should be the guide; both should be available.

When I eat dairy, I always go raw. So good that pasteurized does not even taste right anymore.

I went raw and almost killed my child. Others have also suffered the same fate. Watch these videos and decide if raw milk is worth the risk. http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/real-life-stories/

Stop the factory farming and pasteurization of milk! Raw milk is healthy as long as it comes from a healthy, humanely treated cow that sees the light of day and eats from the pasture.

I always thought that it should be up to the consumer. I never got sick from drinking raw milk, and maybe even benefited from drinking it when I was a child -- it was produced by my aunt's cow or by neighbour's goats, but I never liked the taste, so once I was old enough to have a choice, I opted for not drinking raw milk. If one does not trust it -- one can choose to not consume it. But making it illegal -- should not that be illegal?

I believe the decision should always be up to the consumer. As another reader said, there are much more dangerous products we are allowed to purchase, that the government not only allows but endorses & financially funds - which they know are harmful. If people don't want to be responsible for making well-informed choices themselves, they are free to shop at the grocery store and buy as many chemical-laden, nutrient-void products as they want. Those products may be free of bad bacteria, but they are also free of most everything beneficial. Many who are allergic to milk have no problem consuming raw milk. I make kefir from raw goat's milk and find it very beneficial for my digestive health.

I believe the decision should always be up to the consumer. As another reader said, there are much more dangerous products we are allowed to purchase, that the government not only allows but endorses & financially funds - which they know are harmful. If people don't want to be responsible for making well-informed choices themselves, they are free to shop at the grocery store and buy as many chemical-laden, nutrient-void products as they want. Those products may be free of bad bacteria, but they are also free of most everything beneficial. Many who are allergic to milk have no problem consuming raw milk. I make kefir from raw goat's milk and find it very beneficial for my digestive health.

I will have to say that, in my opinion, raw milk but it is certainly personal choice and whatever makes you sleep at night. Last year when I started drinking raw milk it provided the beneficial enzymes and good bacteria to help with my daughters ezcema since it is full of Vitamin D. I understand why pasterurization is important with factory farming since the cows aren't allowed a break and are over worked to produce the milk which then leads to other issues so yes, it needs to be pasterurized. However, if you are getting raw milk from a farm one needs to do their due dilegence and make sure the farm is cleaned and how the cows are cared. I know of some farms in Michigan that I would never buy raw milk from becaue the conditions are horrible and there are other farms that are what I consider clean. Pasteruization does kill all the good nutrients associated with milk and then it has to be synthetically put back in for which the body does not recognize. Studies have linked pasturized milk to osteoporosis because the form of calcium in that milk is not recognized so the body has to leech its own calcium to make it usable. Some good information to read about raw milk comes from the Weston A Price foundation. http://www.westonaprice.org/

UHm, a matter of choice? If the FDA knows that raw milk contains deadly bacteria, it would be irresponsible for them to allow it on the market...