Corporate Interests and the Fight Against Raw Milk

It’s no secret that conventional dairy farmers often consume raw milk themselves, bottling up what they plan to drink before sending the rest off to industrial processors for pasteurization. This behind-the-scenes practice shows that the actual producers aren’t overly concerned about raw milk. Instead, it's the large corporate entities that are determined to keep it off the shelves, protecting the profits of their processed dairy products.

When you buy conventional milk from brands like Dairygold, Organic Valley, or Shamrock, you’re not buying directly from a farm. These companies act as middlemen, processing and packaging the milk they source from farms to sell under their corporate label. These corporations have vested interests in pasteurization, which not only extends shelf life but also gives them control over the dairy market.

What Makes Milk “Processed”?

While raw milk goes through a certain level of handling, it doesn’t undergo the extensive procedures that define processed milk. Processed milk refers to milk that has been sent off-site for various treatments like pasteurization, homogenization, and sometimes the addition of vitamins. Raw milk, on the other hand, comes directly from the farm, either sold on-site or through permitted retail channels in states where it's legal.

Big Dairy’s Opposition to Raw Milk

Contrary to what some might believe, Big Dairy is not backing the growth of raw milk sales. In fact, large dairy corporations are the main opponents to raw milk legalization. While grassroots movements advocate for consumer choice, Big Dairy interests lobby vigorously to maintain bans on raw milk, using medical experts and public health advocates as their spokespeople in policy discussions.

This opposition isn't necessarily because raw milk threatens to upend their business, but it does represent unwanted competition. By keeping raw milk off the market, these corporations can maintain their dominance over dairy sales. The introduction of raw milk would create a more diversified market, which these large processors seek to avoid.

A History of Suppression

Raw milk bans in the U.S. trace back to the early 20th century, with Chicago leading the charge in 1909. At the time, public health concerns dominated the narrative, especially following the publication of Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle and the Swill Milk Scandal. Over time, large dairy corporations that once opposed pasteurization began to see its benefits—realizing that the costs and regulations associated with pasteurization created barriers to entry for small farmers, thus protecting their market share.

Since 1987, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has upheld an interstate ban on raw milk sales, largely influenced by pressure from dairy processors and manufacturers. While raw milk legalization is mainly a state issue, the FDA's policy remains in place to prevent raw milk from crossing state lines and disrupting the uniformity of pasteurized milk in interstate commerce.

The Politics Behind Raw Milk Bans

The raw milk debate isn’t just about food safety; it's about corporate influence. In 2018, when an amendment that would have expanded access to raw milk was proposed, the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) applauded its defeat. These organizations, representing the interests of large dairy processors, argued that the amendment posed an “unnecessary risk to consumer safety and public health.” They leaned on selective statistics, citing studies that suggest raw milk is far more likely to cause foodborne illness than pasteurized milk.

However, a closer look at the numbers reveals that raw milk-related outbreaks are exceedingly rare. According to a 2020 report, 3.2% of Americans, or more than 10 million people, consume raw milk regularly. Of those, an estimated 761 individuals get sick each year, with 22 requiring hospitalization. This puts the risk of falling ill from raw milk at approximately 0.007%, with a 0.0002% chance of severe illness. These risks are comparable to, if not lower than, the risks associated with consuming leafy greens.

The Real Motivation: Stifling Competition

Ultimately, Big Dairy’s resistance to raw milk is less about public health and more about eliminating competition. The complexity and costs of pasteurization serve as a built-in barrier that prevents small farmers from entering the market. By keeping raw milk illegal or difficult to access, large dairy processors can continue to dominate the industry without fear of being undercut by small, local producers offering a product with growing consumer demand.

The push for raw milk legalization continues to gain traction at the state level, as more people advocate for their right to choose. Despite the efforts of industrial dairy groups to stifle this movement, the growing interest in raw milk reflects a broader desire for transparency, local sourcing, and consumer choice in our food system.

Conclusion

Raw milk’s journey from farm to consumer is fraught with legal and corporate roadblocks, driven largely by Big Dairy’s desire to maintain control over the market. As the conversation around raw milk evolves, it’s clear that many people are willing to accept the risks for the potential benefits, including supporting local farms and consuming a more natural product. The fight for raw milk legalization is part of a larger struggle to reclaim the food system from corporate interests, and that battle is far from over.