I've never had it. My dad used to have it as a kid (in another country). I don't see a problem with raw milk, as long as its kept locally. I mean, it would be hard to keep it well after travel--or so, I imagine.

I drink non-homogenized milk, and I do think it tastes better, so I can imagine that raw milk might be another step up for people with discerning tastes. At the same time, I like the milk I drink, and I don't really feel like raw milk is worth the extra price, so I don't buy it.

In New York, the law is that you can't buy raw milk at a store but you can buy it directly from a farm. I've made the effort to seek it out on a few occasions and it has always been worth it. The flavor is full and sweet, the texture rich, real raw milk is nothing like supermarket milk. I've also made ice cream with raw milk and raw cream, and it was awesome.

I won't argue taste, but raw milk is a great way to get sick. It isn't more nutritious than pasteurized milk. It's dangerous.

"But what raw milk is, above all, a source for infection. There have been outbreaks with Campylobacter, Salmonella, E. coli associated with raw milk and other organisms can be found in raw milk, some not common in the US, including Brucella, Listeria, Mycobacterium bovis (a cause of tuberculosis), Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Giardia, and norovirus. Some are found in cows milk, and some, such as Brucella, more common from goat’s milk. These outbreaks have lead to hospitalizations and a few deaths." from: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/raw-milk-in-modern-times/

When I was young my dad was a dairy farmer so we had raw milk. There is little comparison, the product is so different. It's not just about the taste, but the quality and nutrition benefit of the product. Sure regular milk will be cheaper, but your getting a watered down and processed product. I'm in Illinois, and now that my dad's farm is long no more (thanks big ag), I no longer have access to it.

@midnyghtchilde raw milk is dangerous if it's coming from an unclean source. If a farmer does not care for the health of their cows or the cleanliness of their equipment, infection is most certainly possible. I would never drink raw milk from a major production farm that has to pump the cows and milk with antibiotic. But there are many small farms where the farmers take great pride in the quality of their livestock and the milk. Just like anything, it's about the source.

17 sickened just last week near Portland, OR from a "herd-share" farm, 4+ children hospitalized.

Well consider this - pasteurization didn't exist for a long time and somehow people were drinking milk and surviving.

I think we should be able to make the choice if we want to drink raw milk. We can eat raw/undercooked meat, we can drink alcohol, we can smoke cigarettes. With proper labeling regarding the possible dangers, I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed to choose to take that risk.

ah it's so funny you say raw milk is like the new pot! i'm from wisconsin, where raw milk is VERBOTEN, thanks to big dairy lobby. for my high school graduation present, my daddy got me a gallon of raw milk on the "black market." he said he'd never felt like such a badass-- the farmer even handed him the bottle wrapped in a paper bag!

Funny how breastmilk is not pasteurized...and it is widely accepted...

I used to drink raw milk a lot when I lived in South America. It tastes very "wholesome." When I came to the US, I couldn't drink milk for a few months, because it tasted awful. Now I'm used to the processed milk, but I still miss my raw milk.

Anyways, for all those people who talk about contamination and infection, you have to always talk in percentage term rather than in an absolute number. In percentage term, the infection is very low. Seriously, America has this irrational germophobia that will stupefy the rest of the world. Humans are very resilient animals. We do not get sick easily. Of course, there will be people who get sick, even violently, from contaminated foods, but the percentage is very low. If you are scared of those infections, you wouldn't be able to do many things that you are doing every day. Eating sushi, driving, etc.

I really want some of these germophobic people to travel to some of the underdeveloped countries, and see how well the locals live despite their "underdeveloped" safety standards.

Bacteria are a necessary part of our eating and cooking. Try making yogurt or cheese with ultra-pasturized milk, and you'll see it is impossible. Cheese cannot exist in a bacteria-free environment. Yes, there are also negative elements, but a balanced risk is necessary within our food chain. And let's face it, if pasturization didn't exist, the industrial dairy farms would be making us all sick.

I have been drinking raw milk for 1.5 years now for the health benefits. It also tastes amazing. It is no less dangerous than spinach or PB - in fact, those things are statistically WAY more likely to get you sick than raw (real) milk.

I haven't been sick with a single infection or cold or sickness since I started drinking it. Before, I'd get sinus infections, strep throat, flu etc. 3-4x each year.

We love our milk and the small family that goes far beyond what's legally required, to keep their supply safe. They test every single batch of milk before they sell it. (As in, every single time a cow gets milked.) Pasteurization certainly needs to happen when dairy cows are kept in confinement. I would NOT drink CAFO milk raw. Those cows are sick and dirty (and pumped full of meds to keep them from dying) and yes, you'll get sick if you don't pasteurize that thin milk.

Also, pasteurized dairy has always given me stomach troubles, but raw doesn't.

If the government was as upset about giant outbreaks of salmonella and ecoli was it was about raw milk sicknesses, there'd be a lot less industrial food around because they would all get shut down.

Indeed, industrial dairy would be making us sick without pasteurization - but people were getting sick and dying from contaminated milk long before industrial dairy farming was possible. Industrial dairy farming has its own problems, but it's not the root cause of potentially unsafe cow's milk.

My take on this issue? If people want to risk their own safety by drinking raw milk, I don't have a problem with it. I eat raw fish and the occasional steak tartare, after all. But I'm really disturbed by the amount of misinformation that holds up raw milk as a better, more nutritious product than pasteurized milk - particularly the nutrition benefits, which are contested to say the least - and fails to acknowledge that while good farming practices can reduce the risk of infection, they can't eliminate it. For me, any potential benefits associated with raw milk are too negligible to be worth that risk.

I wrote a research brief on this topic for work that people may find helpful: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb/pubs/wb/10wb1.pdf

Bought a bottle of raw milk in Philly last week at the Reading Terminal Market. It was delicious and gorgeous. It was a beautiful cream color, my other container of milk looked anemic next to it! It was also NOT homogenized, so yes it had what my son referred to as "chunks". The bits of butterfat were luscious little specks and there was the cream at the top of the container. Reminded me so much of the milk that the "milkman" used to deliver to our house in Brooklyn.

I think it should be legal but I would never serve it to a child. It is ridiculous to say that it is safe if you have a "good farmer." Very sick children are hospitalized EVERY YEAR from the work of "good farmers" and " good parents making choices for their families". You cannot perfectly control bacteria, even with good dairy practices.

At least in my state every batch must be tested.

Oh, also a myth that all raw milk tastes wonderful. SOme of it is seriously funky. It depends on the breed and the cow. One of our farmers has much better tasting milk than the other.

My favorite right now is the grass fed Clover available in the Summer. Lovely tasting.

Dan Barber may be in favor of raw milk but Anne Barber (me) says NO WAY IN HELL.

The risk of contaminated milk has nothing to do with how humanely or carefully a cow is raised. There are deadly pathogens present in the soil and water; contamination can come from those sources or from cow poop or infected wounds on the cow. Even the most responsible and ethical farmers make mistakes or overlook things sometimes. There is a good reason why the USDA enforces the standard of pasteurization - because it prevents serious disease outbreaks. Of course if you really want to drink raw milk, nobody is going to stop you, but it makes you three times more likely to land in the hospital due to food poisoning than from any other food source.

The reason why Louis Pasteur developed this method is because people were contracting tuberculosis, scarlet fever, Salmonella, and Listeria from milk. If you've ever read Dickens, you know how scary and deadly TB was (and would be now if we haven't figured out how to control it).

And this opinion is coming from the point of view of a Biologist, which might be why I'm taking it so seriously. My boyfriend is just finishing up a degree in Medical Laboratory Technology, and let me tell you! Some of the freaky things in his Microbiology textbooks are enough to make you thankful for pasteurization, antibiotics, and sterilization!

I had raw milk nearly every day of my life up until I was probably about 13. I never got sick from it. It was delicious (from Guernsey cows). I had however, on at least two occasions, gotten sick on store bought milk. Go figure. So tell me again how dangerous it is?

I agree that it should be labeled, and consumers should be allowed to chose. Buyer be ware, just as with any other product. Pasteurization was put into effect with the rise of industrialized farming, which is, without argument, not safe. Sicknesses that arose before that were often bred from lack of proper refrigeration. Millions of people from the beginning of settled culture have drank non-pasteurized milk, and suffered only the same risk as from the meat that they ate and the crops they harvested.

I'm not strongly against the sale of it, but don't seek it out myself. Sure, people drank it in the day, but a lot of them did get sick and die!! Certainly not all from milk, but advances in hygiene and pasteurization have brought the infant and child mortality rates down by a lot. I agree with previous comments that even a very trustworthy farmer could still let some bad milk through the cracks unintentionally.
Also, the breast milk comment is ridiculous and offensive to me as a nursing mother. First of all, I don't have to worry about breast milk cause my baby drinks it from the source! Probably most of the dairy milk contamination comes from the processing equipment - milkers, tubing, etc. I also used to donate some excess breast milk to a local milk bank which DOES pasteurize it before its given to premature babies who desperately need it. So I'm not sure what's "funny" about your comment.

If you are getting clean milk, it totally fine. No worse than going out and picking your own veg, or butchering your own meat.

When milk is pasteurized, the pre-pasteurized milk is allowed up to 100,000 cfu/mL.
Raw is allowed an UPPER limit of 10,000 cfu/mL.

Then consider the sanitation of the cows, the milking process, the equipment, the collecting containers, the general health of the animal and the artificial feed and medicine the cows are given in a regular big operation dairy farm, vs a smaller farm where one is most likely to attain raw milk (I know, this is a bit of a blanket statement). Due to all the factors, the innate bacterial profile in the milk can be vastly different from healthy cows and big dairy operation cows.

Then consider that when you pasteurise, you are literally breaking up the cells in the sample (remember at least 10x more than in a raw sample) and while the somatic cells and bacterial can no longer grow, produce products or make enzymes they can still affect us.

Intracellular bacterial contents are immunogenic, AND any bacteria that are still alive are bound to be nasty ones! AND certain types of milk proteins are oxidized during this process and oxidation= no bueno.

I guess its clear what side I fall on here, but I think we are a society of crazy germophobes when it is mostly unneeded. Raw milk appears to be healthier in general, and yes... you can get sick from it. Just like you can get sick from any other food. I mean seriously... if you guys say the bacterial counts of bagged lettuce... OMG I would rather eat ANY raw meat than a prebagged salad. Oh the CFU on those is just shocking!

As an aside, raw milk tastes much, much better too!

My husband's family have a dairy farm in Wisconsin. His uncle drank raw milk every day of his life and lived to be 90.

I'll stick with my non-dairy milk and leave the raw cow's milk to the calves it is biologically produced for. Just as I wouldn't be interested in drinking human breast milk.

We milk our own goats and drink the milk raw. Personally I think there are health benefits to drinking it raw, and it tastes great. It's true that raw milk can harbor pathogens, but so can many other foods. Sprouts, for example, and lettuces, have been implicated in outbreaks a number of times.

Careful milk handling is essential. I'm not sure I would drink raw milk that came from an outside source unless I knew the farmer personally and saw how they handled it. Who knows what protocol the farm in Oregon followed?

Hmm. What a curious question. I can dismiss all of the comments about "I drank pasteurized/homogenized milk and got sick" outright - they are anecdotes, not evidence. At any rate, it's a correlation and not necessarily a causation - it could have also just been the digestive tract responding grumpily to a different food, just like going on a sugar binge makes me feel like crap.

I think the real question is more of a risk/benefit scenario: how serious are these risks, and what kind of situation would we be looking at in a worst-case scenario. Considering that we let thousands upon thousands of people die in the U.S. ever year to tobacco-related diseases (after all, we give consumers the agency to kill themselves with tobacco if they choose - even I have been known to enjoy a hookah or the like from time to time). Comparatively speaking, the risk of a few hundred people becoming ill or hospitalized seems like small beans, to me.

It also, I think, is a pretty good view of how Americans view food as some sort of combatant to contain and control. Scrub that thing clean! There was never any dirt on it! All of the apples need to be perfectly uniform! And the potatoes! And the carrots! And the celery! To hell with flavor and nutrition - SAFETY is our primary concern!

And that's the thing - I can't tell if I'm being protected from actual diseases, or if it stems from a hyper-vigilance that NO CONTAMINANTS MAY EVER ENTER THE FOOD SUPPLY!

Keeping populations healthy is critical to our species well-being, but I think we need to have a long view of "health" instead of a definition that means "never getting sick".

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

Agree that you should be able to buy/drink it if you want, but then don't make your insurance pool pay for any resulting infection. Also, you leave yourself open to prosecution if your little kid dies from drinking raw milk. As long as the responsibility falls firmly on the shoulders of the one making the decision, fine by me. My two cents: raw milk is not magic, but pasteurization sure must have seemed like it when we suddenly didn't have to worry about pathogens in our milk anymore.

Barbieq- as a breast milk bank board member and breast milk donor, I can tell you that donor breast milk is absolutely pastuerized! now of course when I fed my own daughter, my milk wasn't pastuerized, but the source was identifiable and controlled at every step, so it's not really the same.

anyway, I have NO problem with people drinking raw cow's milk if they want. I can't imagine anyone opting for it who hadn't first considered the "risks."

@Kkatmpls on that logic, then also maybe insurance companies shouldn't have to pay for disease or cancers stemming from smoking, obesity, etc considering they are (at least in many cases) our own choices leading to those ails as well.

My story is, of course, anecdotal. But I will share it anyway.

I was one of the 135+ people here in PA that got sick this January from raw milk. The farm is widely considered (in the raw milk circles around here) to be one of the best to buy from - they have some of the best testing protocol in the state, they treat their animals with the utmost care and love, and are in constant communication with their customers.

I was in the hospital for nearly 3 days. I legitimately thought I was going to die. I had to wear diapers (and I am 30 years old), that's how sick I was. My husband, a former EMT, who has seen quite his share of sick people, said he has never seen someone so sick before. It was unbelievably heinous.

Of course, I could have gotten sick from spinach, or peanut butter, or ground beef, or any number of things.

But after that experience, I won't be drinking raw milk again. The difference in safety between raw and pastuerized milk is small, but there's no way I can get past it.

My Grandfather raised on the farm with raw milk didn't have a cavity until he was 65 years old. My mother raised on the farm with raw milk until early adulthood didn't have a cavity until she was 33. I, raised on pasteurized milk, had several cavities by the time I was 14. Notice the progression. I have been drinking raw milk again for six years from a reliable source with no problems and practically no incidence of contagious disease.

@Alann: I have to ask: was raw vs. pasteurized milk the only difference between your diet and your mother's and grandfather's?

If we're going to throw out anecdotes, I'll simply note that I haven't had a cavity since I stopped drinking milk altogether, began eating much more spinach, and started getting my teeth cleaned regularly. As has been noted, correlation is not causation, and anecdotes are not data.

Good discussion, thank you. The Raw Milk Association of Colorado (my home state) also provides some interesting (obviously, opinionated) information.

While I would be absolutely scared to feed raw cow, sheep or goat milk to my young daughter, I don’t think it should be illegal – the fact that it is smacks less of a public health concern and more of a very American -style organized and monied industrialized-food-production lobby (in my opinion).

I wish that pasteurized but NON-homogenized milk was more readily available. From what I’ve read, the homogenization process is another area of vitamin-stripping that leads to an inferior product.

I drank pasteurized milk until I was 14 when my family started raising cattle and we started drinking raw milk. When I went to college at 20, I went back to drinking pasteurized. I never noticed a difference, never felt like I was getting any different nutrients. There are inherent risks in all our food handling and production. I do think that pasteurization kills good bacteria, as well as bad, but there are other products on the market that can fill those gaps.

Here are my thoughts on "allowing" raw milk. There is a relatively small group of people who create a demand for raw milk. Most of the people who seek it are receiving it now, whether through legal or illegal courses.

The rate of infection is very low. It is lower than that of pasteurized milk, though comparing the numbers simply side by side is biased because MANY more people drink pasteurized milk vs. raw. There have been 143 outbreaks from raw milk since 1987. There have been 422 outbreaks in pasteurized milk after 1987. In the year 1987 they had 16,000+. I removed that since that is obviously atypical.

The other problem I have with raw milk being illegal is the costs that the federal government incurs from preventing the sale of it. Raiding dairy farms for selling raw milk with hordes of federal agents is not something we should be spending tax dollars on. Does that seem okay to you?

My view is that it is the person's choice to put what they want in their body. Such a novel thought in a "free" society.

As a veterinarian, I feel the need to comment.

People should absolutely be able to choose whether or not they want to buy and/or drink raw milk. But they should also be made aware of the risks they take in doing so. Unless you're pasteurizing the milk yourself in your kitchen (very easy to do, by the way), you're significantly upping your chances of getting sick. And from some pretty nasty things, things that can be particularly dangerous and deadly for anyone who has a poor or immature immune system (for example: children, elderly, pregnant women, people who are already sick). Salmonella, Listeria, E. coli, among others (MidnyghtChilde had such a good link, I'm going to repost it: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/raw-milk-in-modern-times/). No matter how clean the facility, these are bugs that can be found on just about any cow you can find. It's inescapable and why pasteurization was created in the first place.

And for the person who commented on breast-feeding, you made me laugh a little bit, I have to admit. If women didn't bathe on a regular basis and had a penchant for laying around in their own poo, I think I'd be a bit hesitant about breastfeeding too.

I'm lucky enough to live in Washington where it is legal to sell raw milk in grocery stores. It travels about 45 miles from the farm to the store. I can tell you definitively that it does taste better. I think the person who mentioned pasteurizing it at home had an excellent point. Most of the (non-raw) milk in stores is ultra pasteurized, and has sacrificed some of its nutritional benefits for the sake of shelf life.

My dad bought raw milk and we drank it for years without getting sick. That said, I sincerely doubt it's any healthier than regular milk except possibly for the better animal feed and lack of hormones, and if improperly handled it comes with a certain risk factor. I really wish I could find a source for milk from pastured animals that isn't raw, but it seems to be all or nothing everywhere I look.

@LAE- I live in Colorado, and drink non-homogenized pasteurized milk. The brand is called Kalona Supernatural, and I get it at a store called Natural Grocers. It tastes amazing, the cows are organic and grass-fed, and they also sell the best chocolate milk I have ever tasted. It's pricey at about $4.50 for a half-gallon, but well worth it in my opinion. Sooo good.

QUOTE: Do you drink raw milk? Why are you for or against it?

I do not drink raw milk or any milk, actually, with the exception of a few ounces to 'wet' my cereal for a late night snack. Just plain tastes nasty to me *shudder* plus it leaves me feeling nauseated. And as much as I love ice cream, even that leaves me feeling queasy.That said, I'd have to say I am 'for' one's right to choose to drink it - or not - for two reasons

(1) I am not a germophobe. Studies mentioned above are valid & legitimate.
(2) Federal regulations are just another way for the govt to pick one's pocket.

On another note....have you ever pondered the fact that only humans consume another creatures milk as part of their daily diet? (and no, it's not a great source of calcium despite advertising strategem to the contrary).

We just began consuming raw milk this past year with no problems whatsoever. You can haggle over safety all you want. I'm staggered by the PRICE! After our first-year experiment, we're done. It costs an average of $7 a gallon, and we have to share a two-hour round trip with four other families to make pick ups and deliveries.

Also, the yogurt made from our milk is slimy. The farmer said it's the fat content. His wife has had better luck by skimming most of the cream off. The cream is excellent in coffee, however. We never get enough to make butter, though.

Just my 2 cents.

"Well consider this - pasteurization didn't exist for a long time and somehow people were drinking milk and surviving." (Posted by Tazer on 04.25.12 at 12:30PM)

Some of them survived. Many of them died, particularly the children.

Have you ever heard of summer complaint? Cholera infantum?

"The diarrheal diseases of childhood have several names; acute enteritis, fermentative diarrhea, cholera infantum, cholera morbus, enterocolitis, summer complaint, virus enteritis, etc. The physicians and nurses who signed death certificates before 1900, frequently used nomenclature of their own, employing the terms "teething," "diarrhea and convulsions," "dysentery," "canker and diarrhea" and "inflammation of the bowels." They are practically all caused by digestive disturbances arising from infection carried in food and water. The principal offender is milk. Breast fed infants are rarely affected. The weaning period is particularly hazardous. Most of the deaths from the disease occur during the first and second years. The second summer is the most dangerous time.

"Fortunately few people under fifty years of age have had occasion to see victims of this disease. Once seen, in its serious form, it can never be forgotten. Excessive thirst, vomiting, and frequent movements are the most constant symptoms. A child affected with disease may be restless and excited in the beginning but as the fluid loss progresses the patient takes on a peculiar ashen pallor, the eyes are sunken; listlessness and later coma supervene. At any time during the attack convulsions may occur. Fever is usually moderate but may be very high during the terminal stages. In fatal cases the child seems just to 'waste away' for several days though death may come within twenty-four hours." (Of Medicine, Hospitals and Doctors, Ralph T. Richards, 1953.)

Examination of the 19th century death records in one community showed that ten percent of all deaths were due to infantile diarrhea.

The story of milk pasteurization, beginning around the turn of the 20th century, is one of the great, largely unknown stories of the public health movement. It mirrors the vaccine movement, and like the vaccine movement, is a victim of its own success. When parents aren't familiar with diphtheria and polio and other largely eradicated diseases, they may be more likely to decline vaccinations. When they aren't familiar with the historical fatalities associated with non-pasteurized milk, they may be more likely to feed their children raw milk.

Definitely not something I care about nearly enough to pay what raw milk costs, or to put the effort into finding it. If I or my neighbors had some cows, that would be one thing, but until then I will pass and not put a second thought into it.

I think people are confusing the whole issue. I've had non-homogenized PASTUERIZED milk and it is totally different from processed milk (even "organic" brands which I love). The milk has a totally different quality and mouthfeel. It tastes more "original" and in some cases it is a bit much - almost too creamy for my taste, with just the slightest funk or "raw" taste. I can see where people prefer that milk, and I think THAT is what they prefer. I was surprised how different the non-homogenized milk is. I suppose that is what most people are experiencing as "different", rather than the lack of pastuerization. Has anyone else had my experience? If so... I'd say this is the best of both worlds. Non-homogenized milk without the risks of non-pastuerization.

One more thing.... the milk I spoke of came in an old fashioned glass bottle and had all the lumpy butterfat too. Just like the raw milk in the picture above. I think people should have non-homogenized milk readily available to them. They'd probably choose it over even the organic brands at the supermarket. I myself found it to be a little to heavy tasting. I'd like to get it occasionally though, because it is a different product entirely. But it was pasteurized.

@PLEIOVN: Do you mean the USDA that allows your young children to eat and drink sugar-filled, processed crap in school? Hmm.

I grew up on a dairy farm drinking raw milk and am lucky enough to live close by so I still have my 'source'. I'm not going to give any anecdote about how healthy I/my family are; that could be from genetics or overall diet or pure luck. But I figure I can get sick from many, many foods. Sushi, the packaged spinach I always buy, my medium-rare steak, my runny egg yolks, etc. I love the taste of raw milk and I know that non-homogenized milk IS proven to be healthier. As for unpasteurized...I think it's healthier because the good bacteria haven't been killed off along with the bad, but that's just my opinion and not based on actual data.

I think raw milk should be an available choice, just like things like tobacco, which HAS been proven to be unhealthy (no 'chance' of illness with tobacco, you're definitely harming yourself every time!) I don't have a lot of faith in the USDA. They struggle with a lot of politics and red tape, and it biases them beyond trust.

. THE FDA
TOP TEN RISKIEST FOODS
REGULATED BY FDA ARE:
LEAFY GREENS: 363 outbreaks involving 13,568 reported cases of illness
EGGS: 352 outbreaks involving 11,163 reported cases of illness
TUNA: 268 outbreaks involving 2341 reported cases of illness
OYSTERS: 132 outbreaks involving 3409 reported cases of illness
POTATOES: 108 outbreaks involving 3659 reported cases of illness
CHEESE: 83 outbreaks involving 2761 reported cases of illness
ICE CREAM: 74 outbreaks involving 2594 reported cases of illness
TOMATOES: 31 outbreaks involving 3292 reported cases of illness
SPROUTS: 31 outbreaks involving 2022 reported cases of illness
BERRIES: 25 outbreaks involving 3397 reported cases of illness
www.cspinet.org
real milk drinkers here; we introduced it slowly and have had no problems.
interesting article:
Farm life grows healthy kids
http://www.dairyherd.com/e-newsletters/dairy-daily/161612865.html

I live in California, and I only drank raw milk for about 2 years. Not only did it taste better, but my allergies cleared up completely, and in those two years I seemed to be healthier then ever before (no colds, no flu, etc...) Its pricey, but definitely worth it.

It seems trivial that government should actually concern itself with laws whether we should or should not be allowed to drink raw milk considering the following deadly items that are allowed by law and even promoted:
1) antibiotic overuse both in medicine and food production, a major threat to public health
2) Genetically Modified (toxic) foods, banned in Europe over a decade ago are stacking the shelves of our grocery stores and we don't even know it (not labeled).
3) Award winning advertising campaigns promoting the HPV vaccine Gardasil (with a whopping 675 micrograms of toxic aluminum) secured maximum sales, bringing us to a tally of 106 girls dead from the vaccine as of November 2011 and thousands disabled, some severely. (Suggest reading former Canadian vaccine and drug regulator's book "Corrupt to the Core" by Dr. S. Chopra)
4) Prescription drugs now outnumber traffic fatalities in the U.S.A. Fatalities are fueled by overdoses on pain and anxiety medications.
5) Some eye opening statistics of medical intervention in this country:
Annual deaths from -
Adverse drug reactions 106,000
Medical error 98,000
Bedsores 115,000
Infection 88,000
Malnutrition 108,000
Unnecessary procedures 37,000
Surgery related 32,000
Depending on which source you look at, these figures are conservative.
6) Americans spend more on health care than citizens of any other country but we rank 50th in life expectancy and 47th in infant mortality. Dismal for the most expensive system in the world!
Who is worried about whether we should be "allowed" to drink raw milk?