A look at raw milk's health risks and potential benefits as Trump administration hints at law changes

Jan 13, 2025

6 min

Kali Kniel


More than half of U.S. states allow the sale of raw milk directly from farms to consumers, a number that would likely increase if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – a raw milk advocate – is confirmed to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Kali Kniel, a professor of microbial food safety at the University of Delaware, can discuss the dangers and potential benefits of drinking raw milk.


Some have celebrated the legalization of raw milk around the country, claiming it tastes better and has some nutritional benefits. Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, one of the DHHS agencies Kennedy would lead, cautions against drinking raw milk, which comes directly from cows, sheep or goats and has been banned from being sold across state lines since the 1980s.


Concerns regarding raw milk have been elevated as a deadly strain of bird flu is infecting dairy farms around the country.


In the following Q&A, Kniel talks about the pathogens that may be present in raw milk, ways to communicate food safety to the public and other topics.


Milk and other dairy products that sit on shelves at the grocery store are pasteurized. What does this process involve and why is it important for dairy products?


Pasteurization of milk is a process of heating milk and passing it between heated stainless steel plates until it reaches 161 degrees Fahrenheit. It is held at that temperature for around 15 seconds before it is quickly cooled to 39 degrees Fahrenheit. This process is intended to kill the pathogenic bacteria that could make a person sick.


How does this process affect milk’s quality and nutritional value?


Scientific studies have shown that pasteurization does not significantly change the nutritional value of milk. Unpasteurized milk may have more vitamin C, which does not survive the pasteurization process, but milk is not considered a good source of vitamin C, as it contains less than 10% of the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA), the average amount of nutrients it takes to meet a healthy person’s needs.


There are no beneficial bacteria in raw milk. Milk (pasteurized or raw) is not a good source of probiotic or potentially beneficial bacteria, so for that consumers should choose yogurt and other fermented dairy products as well as other fermented products.


Scientific studies using animal models have shown no difference in how calcium in raw milk and pasteurized milk is absorbed by the human body.


Popularity in drinking raw milk is increasing, despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration advising that it’s not safe to drink. What are the health risks that come with drinking raw milk?


Raw milk may contain pathogenic bacteria, including Campylobacter, Salmonella, pathogenic types of E. coli, Listeria and Brucella, as well as the protozoan parasite Cryptosporidium. These are all zoonotic microbes, which means they can be transmitted from animals to humans. Often the animal does not appear ill, so it is not possible to determine if an ill animal is shedding these pathogens in its feces that can contaminate milk.


Microbial testing of the finished product and environmental monitoring programs may be helpful, but do not guarantee that the raw milk is absent of these pathogens. Milk can be contaminated with these pathogens from direct contamination with feces or from environmental conditions. Cross-contamination from dairy workers can also happen, even when people are trying their best to reduce the risk of cross-contamination.


The likelihood of a disease outbreak occurring associated with a person consuming raw milk is relatively high given that others may also be exposed. Unpasteurized milk will have a relatively short shelf life and may not be available for testing. Following good hygiene practices on the farm and during milking such as biosecurity around the farm, appropriately sanitizing equipment and monitoring the health of animals can reduce the chance of milk contamination, but not eliminate it.



There have been numerous outbreaks of illness associated with raw milk as well as cheese made from raw milk. Persons most at risk of illness associated with drinking raw milk include children, in particular 5 years of age and under, individuals aged 65 and over, pregnant women and immunocompromised individuals. It should be noted that all outbreaks of illness associated with raw milk have included individuals under 19 years of age. Children may be most vulnerable, as they cannot voice an opinion on consumption and risk of raw milk if it is in their household.


The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collects data on foodborne disease outbreaks voluntarily reported by state, local or territorial health departments. According to the CDC from 2013 to 2018 there were 75 outbreaks of illness linked to raw milk consumption. These outbreaks include 675 illnesses and 98 hospitalizations. Most of these illnesses were caused by Campylobacter, shiga-toxigenic E. coli, or Salmonella.


An increase in outbreaks has been correlated with changes in the availability of raw milk. For example, between 2009 and 2023, there were 25 documented outbreaks in the state of Utah, which has 16 raw milk retailers licensed by the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. In all of these outbreaks, the raw milk was contaminated with the bacteria Campylobacter, which typically causes gastroenteritis symptoms like diarrhea and nausea, but may also cause chronic illness, including Guillain-Barré syndrome which can cause paralysis.


How likely are these illnesses to happen from drinking raw milk?


It is difficult to say. Foodborne illness is often underreported, depending on how severe people’s symptoms are.


According to one study, only about 3.2% of the U.S. population drinks raw milk, while about 1.6% eats cheese made from raw milk. But compared with consumers of pasteurized dairy products, they are 840 times more likely to experience an illness and 45 times more likely to be hospitalized. The authors of this work used the CDC’s national reporting system to analyze data from 2009 to 2014.


Despite health risks, why do some people still drink raw milk?


Some people feel a nostalgic connection to raw milk, and others may feel that foods that are not treated with heat retain certain nutrients and enzymatic activity. I am not aware of any peer-reviewed rigorous scientific studies that indicate the nutritional benefits of consuming raw milk over time, given the risks of potential for illness, combined with a well balanced diet full of healthful food choices.


It remains that raw milk is particularly risky for children to consume, as children can get sick from consuming fewer bacterial cells compared to adults.


More than 900 cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza — the disease commonly known as bird flu — have been detected in dairy cattle across 16 states, and at least 40 people have been infected with the disease from close contact with dairy cows. Raw milk is being tested for the virus. With raw milk gaining interest among consumers, what are the possible consequences? Does it elevate the risk of bird flu spreading further to people?


There remain clear risks of transmission of pathogenic bacteria through consumption of raw milk, and now with the potential for contamination of raw milk with avian influenza, it is even more important that consumers protect themselves by drinking pasteurized milk.


The people most at risk right now are those involved with the milking process and in the handling of dairy cattle. So it is important that those individuals be aware of the risks and take appropriate precautions, including hand washing and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment like protective clothing, gloves, face shields and eye protection.


As of December, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is requiring 13 states to share raw milk samples so the agency can test for bird flu viruses. How could this testing better help us understand the virus?



I think it is very smart that USDA is leading the National Milk Testing Strategy, which will help us understand the extent of infected herds. Surveillance of microorganisms is an important way to assess risk so we can develop appropriate strategies to reduce and control these risks.

Connect with:
Kali Kniel

Kali Kniel

Professor, Microbial Food Safety

Prof. Kniel’s laboratory explores issues of food safety and public health that involve transmission of viruses and pathogenic bacteria.

Food SystemsPathogenic BacteriaFood Safety Public HealthMicroorganisms
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

3 min

Expert Q&A: What is Soft Diplomacy and how does it impact classrooms

"Right now, storytelling is critical. Language learning is highly personal, and it’s the person-to-person relationships that grease the wheels," says Cheryl Ernst, director of the English Language Institute at the University of Delaware. She recently published English Language Programs as Facilitators of Soft Diplomacy in Innovations in Star Scholars Press. Here's how she's discussing this important topic.  Q: What is the focus of this research, and why is it important? Ernst: ELI and other English language programs provide the ideal space for communication development, cross cultural appreciation, gaining life skills, and raising awareness about people beyond the media. Post pandemic, we’re hearing across campus how individuals feel less connected, and in English language classrooms, connection is critical. Language is only learned through production and practice since it’s a skill that needs to be honed. In language, there is no such thing as perfect. In our classrooms, English is the common goal, and everyone comes to that space at their own levels and overflowing with imperfection. Our students learn to use their vulnerability as a tool. They learn the value of a growth mindset living in a culture that is different from their own, and with that comes an appreciation for difference, respect for others, trust, human-to-human communication. Q: What inspired this research? Ernst: More than 30 years of observation, conversations, experiences, and personal relationships. There was no term for what English language programs do beyond grammar (what’s perceived, anyway). Terms like personal diplomacy, person-to-person diplomacy, civic diplomacy, and the like happens all the time and oversimplifies what we do. In my readings, I started to see overlaps between soft power and diplomacy, which led to the concept of Soft Diplomacy. Then what distinguishes Soft Diplomacy from other more common monikers are the variety of skills that happen organically in our classrooms that we rarely acknowledge and students may not recognize. Q: What are some key findings or developments? Ernst: Institutionally: ELPs can do better highlighting the skills beyond English that we teach organically or deliberately. Q: How could this work potentially impact the field or the wider public? Ernst: Respecting ELPs for the space they provide and the skills they offer. It’s not “just English,” rather is learning to communicate in a common language and with people from around the globe. I’d like people to realize that relationships are foundational, that there are common values across nations and that differences are not bad. What version of English is “correct” British or American (the New York? Wisconsin? Alabama? Iowa?). Q: What are the next steps or upcoming milestones in your research? Ernst: A former student and I have launched a podcast series called Soft Diplomacy in Action that focuses on personal stories from those who work in international education. We’ve interviewed an ELI associate professor from Morocco, the UD coordinator of the Mandela Fellows program, a professor who sees (and lives) the diplomatic value of sports, and a retired English language professional. We’re looking forward to continuing these conversations with individuals from a variety of disciplines that also work in this space but through different lenses. ABOUT CHERYL ERNST Cheryl Ernst is the director of the English Language Institute at the University of Delaware where she and her colleagues and students practice Soft Diplomacy every day. Her professional areas of interest include program administration and international marketing, teacher training and working with international teaching assistants, curriculum design, and advanced level academic English (graduate levels). To speak with Ernst her work and the importance of Soft Diplomacy, reach out to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

4 min

AI gives rise to the cut and paste employee

Although AI tools can improve productivity, recent studies show that they too often intensify workloads instead of reducing them, in many cases even leading to cognitive overload and burnout. The University of Delaware's Saleem Mistry says this is creating employees who work harder, not smarter. Mistry, an associate professor of management in UD's Lerner College of Business & Economics, says his research confirms findings found in this Feb. 9, 2026 article in the Harvard Business Review. Driven by the misconception that AI is an accurate search engine rather than a predictive text tool, these "cut and paste" employees are using the applications to pump out deliverables in seconds just to keep up with increasing workloads. Mistry notes that this prioritization of speed over accuracy is happening at every level of the organization: • Junior staff: Blast out polished looking but unverified drafts. • Managers: Outsource their ability to deeply learn and critically think in order to summarize data, letting their analytical skills atrophy. • Power users: Build hidden, unapproved systems that bypass company oversight. A management problem, not a tech problem "When discussing this issue, I often hear leaders blame the technology. However, I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership," Mistry said. "When already overburdened employees who are constantly having to do more with less are handed vague mandates to just use AI without any training, they use it to look busy and produce volume-based work. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." "I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." The real costs to organizations and incoming employees Mistry outlines three risks organizations face if they don’t intervene: 1. The workslop epidemic "These programs allow people to generate massive amounts of workslop, which is low-effort fluff that looks good but lacks substance. It takes seconds to create, but hours for someone else to decipher, fact-check, and fix," Mistry notes. "This drains money (up to $9 million annually for large companies) and destroys morale. As an educator, researcher, and a person brought into organizations to help fix problems, I for one do not want to be on the receiving end of a thoughtless, automated data dump, especially on tasks that require real skill and deep thinking." 2. Legal disaster He also states, "When the cut and paste mentality makes its way into professional submissions, the risks to the organization are real and oftentimes catastrophic. Courts have made it perfectly clear: ignorance is no excuse. If your name is on the document, you own the liability. Recently, attorneys have faced severe sanctions, hefty fines, and case dismissals for blindly submitting fake legal citations made up by computers." 3. A warning for incoming talent For new graduates entering this environment, Mistry offers a warning: Do not rely on AI to do your deep thinking. "If you simply use AI to blast out polished but unverified drafts, you become a replaceable 'cut and paste' employee," he says. “To truly stand out, new grads must prove they have the discernment to review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes. The hiring edge is no longer just saying, 'I can do this task,' but 'I know how to leverage and correct AI to help me perform it.'" Four ideas to fix it To survive and indeed thrive with these new tools and avoid the unintended consequences of untrained staff, organizations should: 1. Reinforce the importance of fact-checking and editing: Adopt frameworks that teach employees how to show their work and log how they verified computer-generated facts. 2. Change the incentives: Stop rewarding busy work, useless reports, and massive slide decks. Evaluate employees on accuracy and results. 3. Eradicate superficial work: Don’t use automation to speed up ineffective legacy processes. Instead, use it to identify and eliminate them entirely. 4. Make time for editing: Give yourself and your employees the breathing room to actually review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes instead of accepting the first draft. Mistry is available to discuss: Why AI is causing an epidemic of corporate "workslop" (and how to spot it). The leadership failure behind the "cut and paste" employee. How to rewrite corporate incentives to measure impact instead of volume in the AI era. Strategies for implementing safe, effective AI policies at work. How new college graduates can avoid the "workslop" trap in their first jobs. To reach Mistry directly and arrange an interview, visit his profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested reporters can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

2 min

The science behind the blood moon: Understanding this lunar phenomenon ahead of march's event

March's celestial event – a blood moon – is just around the corner. This captivating lunar spectacle isn't just a cool sight to behold; it has some neat science backing it up. The blood moon phenomenon happens during a total lunar eclipse. "During a total lunar eclipse, the only light that reaches the surface of the moon is refracted through the Earth's atmosphere, which essentially acts like a lens. Light is a wave, and every color of the rainbow has a different wavelength – red the longest and violet the shortest," said Bennett Maruca, associate professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Delaware.  What adds to the excitement is the rare nature of total lunar eclipses. While partial eclipses occur more frequently, a full blood moon isn't an everyday event. Depending on where you live, the blood moon may only grace the night skies a few times a decade. "One of my favorite things about total lunar eclipses is that it's hard to know ahead of time quite what it will look like. The moon can take on a color ranging from burnt orange to red to grayish brown," he said. "The closer the Moon passes to the center of Earth's shadow, the darker the color will be."  Maruca is available to speak about the event, which takes place in the wee hours of March 3. He can discuss when to wake up to see the phenomenon and how to best capture it.  "For photographing the moon, I would recommend a camera with some optical zoom – the moon is only about 0.5 degrees across. Because of the low lighting conditions, a tripod or other support would be helpful since a longer exposure time will be needed," he noted.  He has appeared in a number of outlets including Mashable and The Philadelphia Inquirer. He can be contacted by clicking on his profile.  ABOUT BENNET MARUCA Bennett Maruca serves as an associate professor in the University of Delaware's department of physics and astronomy. His research focuses on the sun, the solar wind and other space plasmas. He is a recipient of the Antarctic Service Medal and NASA's Silver Achievement Medal. He also serves as an associate director of the Delaware Space Grant Consortium and is currently mentoring over twenty undergraduate students developing experiments to fly into space to observe Earth's ionosphere.

View all posts