The milk wars have become the latest theater to open up in the greater culture war.

Political lines are far from neat on this issue. Georgia’s Republican Congresswoman Majorie Taylor Greene is on one side, while pundits such as Matt Walsh and billionaire Elon Musk are on the other.

When Greene tweets her support for raw milk, she is attacked. When Walsh condemns the beverage, he is attacked. When Case Bradford, an advocate of raw and low-temperature pasteurized milk, tweets about the subject, he is almost always community-noted by other X users, DX has previously reported.

With so many people mad about cows and everyone looking for greener pastures in their next dose of dairy, The Dallas Express decided to prepare a primer on the subject.

The core of the issue is pasteurization: a process invented by scientist Louis Pasteur that involves heating milk to a high temperature to kill harmful bacteria. It is also homogenized, a process invented by Auguste Gaulin, which gives milk a uniform color and texture.

Both of these processes became standard and often effectively or explicitly legally mandated in most states in the early to mid-20th century. This is why most modern-day milk has a longer shelf life, and there is no longer a layer of cream at the top of a gallon of milk from your typical chain grocer.

Raw Milk

Pros:

  1. Rich Nutrient Profile: Raw milk contains a full array of vitamins, enzymes, and probiotics that may support digestion and immune function.
  2. Improved Taste: Many consumers prefer the taste, reporting it to be creamier and fresher compared to pasteurized milk​.
  3. Higher Omega-3 Content: Grass-fed raw milk tends to have a higher omega-3 fatty acid content, beneficial for heart health​.
  4. Probiotic Support: Raw milk contains natural probiotics, which can aid gut health and promote a balanced microbiome​.

Cons:

  1. Health Risks: Raw milk carries the risk of contamination with harmful bacteria like E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria, which can cause serious illnesses​.
  2. Limited Shelf Life: Without pasteurization, raw milk spoils much more quickly, requiring careful storage and quick consumption​.
  3. Lack of Standardization: The safety and quality of raw milk vary depending on farm conditions, which can introduce inconsistencies​.
  4. Legal Restrictions: Many regions have strict regulations or bans on raw milk sales, limiting access​.

Low-Temperature Pasteurized, Non-Homogenized Milk

Pros:

  1. Minimal Nutrient Loss: Low-temp pasteurization retains more vitamins, enzymes, and beneficial bacteria compared to high-temp methods.
  2. Improved Digestibility: Non-homogenized milk, with intact fat globules, may be easier for some people to digest and is less likely to trigger allergies​.
  3. Enhanced Flavor: This method retains more of the natural taste, often described as richer and creamier than homogenized milk​.
  4. Fewer Processed Proteins: Low-temperature pasteurization minimizes protein denaturation, preserving the milk’s original nutritional properties.
  5. Supports Local Farms: Many low-temp pasteurized milk products come from small, local farms, supporting sustainable agriculture​.

Cons

  1. Shorter Shelf Life: Although pasteurized, this milk has a shorter shelf life than high-temp pasteurized milk, requiring refrigeration and timely consumption.
  2. Potential Bacterial Contamination: While safer than raw milk, low-temp pasteurized milk may still harbor some harmful bacteria.
  3. Fat Separation: Non-homogenized milk causes fat to rise to the top, which may be inconvenient for those accustomed to homogenized milk​.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DALLAS EXPRESS APP

High-Temperature Pasteurized, Homogenized Milk

Pros:

  1. Extended Shelf Life: High-temperature pasteurization significantly increases shelf life, making it convenient for storage​.
  2. Widely Available: This is the most commonly available type of milk, sold in nearly every grocery store​.
  3. Safe from Pathogens: High-temp pasteurization eliminates virtually all harmful bacteria, reducing the risk of illness​.
  4. Convenient for Cooking: The longer shelf life and uniform fat distribution make it versatile for cooking and baking​.
  5. Affordable: Because of its industrial-scale production, high-temp pasteurized milk is typically cheaper than raw or low-temp milk​.

Cons:

  1. Loss of Nutrients: Many critics argue high-temp pasteurization destroys many heat-sensitive nutrients, enzymes, and probiotics, reducing the nutritional value​.
  2. Altered Flavor: The process can cause the milk to lose its fresh taste and develop a slightly cooked flavor​.

Since pasteurization is at the center of this debate, so is disease. In DX‘s previous reporting on the Milk Wars, disease is the one criticism has been brought up in every exchange on the matter.

It is worth noting that pasteurization comes around at the tail end of the industrial revolution, when food production was migrating from the hands of local farmer whom a consumer likely knew to a large industrialized dairies and milking parlors where consumers and producers were largely separated.

A factory farm can have dozens or even hundreds of milk cows, compared to a traditional family farm which may only have a few.

“So the milk you buy in the store can have milk from over 1,000 different cows with a 1,000 different opportunities to be contaminated with E. Coli or Listeria. This is why pasteurization is important, as if there is a recall. Which farm do they end of having to investigate for the outbreak?” FAFO Farms, an X account for a farm known for its work in regenerative agriculture, said in one exchange about raw milk.

“Raw Milk Dairy Farms are different. We run a cleaner operation. The Milk that is produced is coming directly from that farm and farms like us label exactly what cow the milk is bottled from. At max we have 2 cows that can be bottled that you would receive,” the account added before adding that FAFO’s cows are regularly tested for things like mastitis.

This sentiment is echoed in many ways by San Antonio-area farmer Doug Haveman who previously talked to DX about his family farm.

Haveman owns just 14 cows and said farmers like him produce much of the raw milk consumed in the Lone Star State. He added that they have the highest incentives to ensure the health of his customers because any complaint about a contaminated product could put farms like his out of business.

Currently, state law heavily restricts the sale of raw in other medium than directly to consumers. Therefore he and others sell only to a small list of clients.

Haveman criticized the restrictions on his business because he saw them as more relevant to problems with the major producers rather than small ones like him and likewise added that “the laws were developed before refrigeration.”

However, an agency advisory says from the FDA points to a case of two children getting sick in California in 2006 to support the header “Raw milk is not an immune system building food and is particularly unsafe for children.” It further reinforces this point with several other cases of two to four people getting sick from raw milk in Washington, Connecticut, Missouri and Colorado.

This advisory was published last updated in 2024, yet all of the cases it cites are from the mid to late 2000s. It is not immediately clear if these were the only recent instances of people getting sick from raw milk or if they are just the ones the FDA chose to support the agency’s point. The agency does not indicate if any of the cases were fatal.

Notably, the FDA advisory does not address the Blue Bell Listeria outbreak of 2015 that resulted in three deaths and a brief pause in availability of their famous Texas-made ice cream.

Blue Bell uses pasteurized, homogenized and condensed milk in its factories yet somehow it still became contaminated with listeria. The company reportedly took several years to stop the contamination after becoming aware of it.

While Louis Pasteur certainly saw pasteurized milk as a means to control existent diseases, other medical professionals have seen raw milk as a way to prevent disease.

Dr. J.E. Crewe, a founder of the Mayo Foundation, used raw milk in his medical practice for many years and strongly advocated for its use for treating afflictions.

At an annual meeting of the United States Live Stock Sanitary Association in 1925, Crewe said of raw milk, “The results obtained in various types of illness have been so uniformly excellent that one’s conception of disease and its alleviation is necessarily modified.… When sick people are limited to a diet containing an excess of vitamins and all the elements necessary to growth and maintenance, they recover rapidly without the use of drugs and without bringing to bear all the complicated weapons of modern medicine.”

For each of the various types of milk, there is conflicting information about whether it is superior in terms of allergenicity and digestion. DX scoured the NIH of medicine and found conflicting and mutually exclusive arguments that would support all sides.

Raw milk is increasing in availability in some regions. However, demand is so high for it in North Texas that websites that are supposed to help you find it usually indicate that the vendors are sold out.

For many, low-temp pasteurized non-homogenized milk may be the happiest medium for your casual consumer. It is the middle ground on health benefits, safety, and price.

In DFW, Natural Grocers sells this type of milk and it is usually in stock. It is around $8 per half a gallon.