Milk studies stir debate over what type to drink
LOS ANGELES — Raw, pasteurized, organic, whole, skim. Choosing what sort of milk to drink grows ever more complicated, with several recent studies adding to the debate.
The American Academy of Pediatrics advised that pregnant women and children not drink raw milk because of the danger of bacterial illnesses, including salmonella, E. coli and listeriosis — food-borne diseases that can be fatal.
The academy in December also endorsed “a ban on the sale of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products throughout the United States, including the sale of certain raw milk cheeses, such as fresh cheese, soft cheeses and soft-ripened cheeses.”
California is among 30 states that allow the sale of raw milk and one of the few that allows the sale in supermarkets. When raw milk production is properly regulated, advocates say, it is safe, delicious and provides health benefits, including protections against asthma and lactose intolerance.
Mark McAfee, whose raw milk dairy in Fresno, Calif., Organic Pastures, produces milk sold in 625 stores, said the academy’s position is confusing.
“This is not the raw milk we saw 50 to 75 to 100 years ago,” he said.
A Minnesota study published earlier this month concluded that more people were getting sick from raw milk than had been recognized. And scientists in yet another study reported that organic whole milk offered more of the fatty acids good for the heart than conventional milk. None of it is likely to be the last word on a beverage that many Americans consume every day and rely on to provide nutrition for their children.
Maureen Bligh, a registered dietitian nutritionist, said some of the controversy may have grown out of the perception that it’s better to avoid processed food.
Minnesota health officials estimated that more than 17 percent of the state’s residents who drank raw milk got sick, based on 10 years of health information.
Raw milk — from cows, goats and sheep — long has been identified as a source of food-borne illness outbreaks, causing symptoms such as diarrhea, stomach cramps and fever. It is also responsible for uncounted sporadic illnesses, the Minnesota officials said.
Pasteurization, introduced in the U.S. in the 1920s, kills bacteria by heating the milk.
The academy’s statement contends that the benefits of raw milk “have not been clearly demonstrated in evidence-based studies” and do not outweigh the risks. The pediatric group’s stand supports the position of other government health officials.
The pediatricians estimate that 1 percent to 3 percent of dairy products consumed in this country are not pasteurized. From 1998 to 2009, that resulted in 1,837 illnesses, two leading to death. The popularity of raw milk products, including soft cheeses, has been on the rise.
“We have no scientific evidence that consuming raw milk provides any advantages over pasteurized milk and milk products,” said a statement from Yvonne Maldonado, lead author of the policy statement, a professor of pediatrics at the Stanford School of Medicine and an infectious disease expert. “But relative to the amount of raw-milk products on the market, we do see a disproportionately large number of disease and illnesses from raw milk.”
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration prohibits the interstate shipment of raw milk for human consumption, though it allows transport of some clearly labeled raw cheeses.
McAfee says he sees business motivations. He said milk processors oppose the sale of raw milk because they are in the business of processing it.