Rural residents are more likely to consider raw milk safe

Rural residents are less likely to worry about the health risks of drinking unpasteurized milk, but they are just as likely as other Americans to understand the effectiveness of pasteurization in killing germs without changing the taste or nutritional value of milk.

A public opinion poll conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Center for Public Policy found that only a third of rural respondents thought raw milk was less safe to drink than pasteurized milk. Among urban respondents, about half said raw milk was less safe to drink. The difference between urban and rural respondents was significant when the researchers controlled for other factors such as age and education level.

But the study found there was no statistical difference between rural and urban respondents’ knowledge that pasteurization eliminates bacteria and viruses transmitted through milk without affecting taste or nutrition.

“We found that people living in rural areas thought raw milk was safer overall than people living in suburban or urban environments,” Shawn Patterson Jr., a research analyst at the public policy center, said in an interview with The Daily Yonder.

Patterson said the center would conduct more research to see if it could determine the cause of the different attitudes toward pasteurization.

It is possible that rural residents understand the pasteurization process but believe raw milk is safer because they are more aware of livestock management and milk production, he said. They may also feel more confident about raw milk because they are closer to the source of the milk or raise the milk-producing animals themselves.

Patterson said he was not aware of any studies that confirm that consumers could mitigate the risks associated with drinking raw milk if they were more informed about its source. “But what we do know is that raw milk is still significantly less safe than pasteurized milk.”

A 2017 study found that unpasteurized milk was responsible for nearly all illnesses and hospitalizations related to milk-borne infections. While less than 4% of Americans drink raw milk and less than 2% eat cheese made with raw milk, these consumers experienced 96% of illnesses caused by contaminated milk, the study found.

Avian flu and raw milk

Although reported milk-related illnesses are low compared to other illnesses (an average of 760 reported illnesses per year and 22 hospitalizations, according to the 2017 study), milk safety has been in the news since an outbreak of H5N1 avian flu was reported in U.S. dairy cows earlier this year.

Infected cows can transmit the H5N1 virus in their milk, according to the CDC, and mice that consumed infected milk showed signs of influenza. This has raised concerns that raw milk from infected cows could transmit H5N1 flu to humans.

Currently, this flu is not transmissible between humans. Of the 14 cases of H5N1 flu reported in humans this year, four were in dairy workers and nine were in poultry workers.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prohibits the sale of unpasteurized milk between states. States set their own rules regarding milk that does not cross state lines.

Pasteurization has been the norm for a century. But Patterson said demand for unpasteurized milk has increased in recent years. He said social media could be one reason, and future research would test that hypothesis.

Healthline’s Beth Ann Mayer reported in June that social media producers’ profit motives are part of the push for raw milk.

Unpasteurized milk can transmit pathogens such as Listeria, Campylobacter, Salmonella and E. coli. People who are pregnant or have weakened immune systems are particularly vulnerable to these infections, according to the FDA.

Mainstream scientists have found no evidence that pasteurization changes the nutritional value of milk, but myths persist that it does, Patterson said.

“Pasteurization does not change the nutritional value of milk or its taste in any significant way,” he said. “So the risks do not outweigh the benefits.”

Other key findings from the public opinion survey on the safety of raw milk include:

• People over 65 were more likely than other age groups to think raw milk was less safe than pasteurized milk.
• Awareness of the health risks associated with unpasteurized milk has increased as education levels have risen.
• Men were more likely than women to think raw milk was less safe than pasteurized milk.
• Democrats were more likely than Republicans or independents to think raw milk was less safe.
• Non-Hispanic whites were more likely than Hispanics or blacks to think raw foods were less safe.

The survey was conducted in June 2024 using the SRSS Opinion Panel. Rural areas were defined as respondents who lived in a non-metropolitan county, based on the Office of Management and Budget’s Metropolitan Statistical Area System.