Author: Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania
Published: 2025/03/14
Publication Type: Reports & Proceedings
Topic: Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) – Publications List
Page Content: Synopsis – Introduction – Main – Insights, Updates
Synopsis: Bird flu in raw milk poses serious health risks, yet many remain unaware. This article highlights the dangers and why pasteurization is crucial for safety.
Why it matters: This article titled “With bird flu in raw milk, many in U.S. still do not know risks of consuming it” emphasizes the significant health risks associated with consuming raw, unpasteurized milk, particularly in light of recent detection of the H5N1 bird flu virus in such products. Despite these findings, a substantial portion of the U.S. population remains unaware of the dangers posed by raw milk consumption. This lack of awareness is especially concerning for vulnerable groups such as children, seniors, and individuals with compromised immune systems, who are at higher risk of severe illness from pathogens present in raw milk.
The article underscores the critical importance of pasteurization – a process that effectively eliminates harmful bacteria and viruses – to ensure the safety of dairy products. It’s interesting because it reveals a current, evolving situation regarding a common food product and its potential to spread a serious virus, making it a valuable resource for anyone concerned about their health and the health of their loved ones. By shedding light on these issues, the article serves as a valuable resource for educating the public about food safety practices and the potential health implications of consuming unpasteurized dairy products. – Disabled World (DW).
Introduction
Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) located H5N1 bird flu virus in samples of raw, or unpasteurized, milk in tests in four states in April 2024, and bird flu has been detected in commercially sold raw milk, many Americans do not know that consuming raw milk and its products poses greater health risks than consuming pasteurized milk and its products, especially for children. Consuming raw milk can expose one to Salmonella, E. coli, Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium, Listeria, and Brucella – and, potentially, H5N1 bird flu.
Main Item
A majority of U.S. adults (56%) knows that drinking raw milk from cows, sheep, or goats is less safe than drinking pasteurized milk. But over 4 in 10 Americans either are not sure (25%), think raw milk is “just as safe to drink” as pasteurized milk (12%) or think it is “safer to drink” (6%), according to a recent survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania. The findings are statistically unchanged from APPC’s July 2024 survey. Almost a third of people (32%) know that drinking raw milk increases a person’s risk of foodborne illness, though 14% think it has no effect and 51% are not sure.
The survey, conducted Jan. 30-Feb. 10, 2025, among more than 1,700 empaneled U.S. adults, also finds that two-thirds (66%) do not know that children are more vulnerable than adults to getting sick from the viruses and bacteria that can occur in raw milk. (See the topline for data.)
“Consuming raw milk and raw milk products can make you sick and pasteurization reduces the risk of milk-borne illness,” said Patrick E. Jamieson, director of APPC’s Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute. “Looking for the pasteurization label before buying or consuming milk or milk products such as cheese is good practice.”
Continued…
Bird Flu
As of March 10, 2025, 70 confirmed U.S. cases of H5 bird flu have been detected in people in 13 states, nearly all from exposure to infected poultry or dairy herds, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). One death from bird flu has been reported, involving a patient in Louisiana. To date there have been no reported cases of human-to-human transmission.
From January 2022 through March 11, 2025, bird flu has been detected in nearly a thousand dairy herds in 17 states, and it has affected over 166 million poultry and wild aquatic birds, covering all states. Globally, according to the World Health Organization, from Jan. 1, 2003-Dec. 12, 2024, “954 cases of human infection with avian influenza A(H5N1) virus were reported from 24 countries. Of these 954 cases, 464 were fatal.”
Researchers have found that mice can be infected with bird flu by drinking raw milk. Although the FDA does not currently know whether H5N1 can be transmitted to humans through the consumption of raw milk, a study with mice suggests that the virus in “untreated milk can infect susceptible animals that consume it.” The National Institutes of Health says this suggests “that drinking raw milk may pose a risk of transmission to people.”
Continued…
Raw Milk and Bird Flu
Bird flu in raw milk:
The vast majority of U.S. adults do not know that bird flu has been detected to date only in raw milk, not pasteurized milk. Just 17% know that bird flu has been found only in raw milk. Two percent incorrectly say bird flu has been found only in pasteurized milk, 7% say it has been found in both, 7% say it has been found in neither, and over two-thirds of those surveyed (68%) are not sure.
Raw milk and your chances of getting bird flu:
Almost a quarter of people (22%) say drinking raw milk increases the chances you will get H5N1 or bird flu, up from 15% in July 2024, though this is unchanged from November 2024. An equal number (22%) say drinking raw milk has no effect one way or the other on whether you will get bird flu, though fewer people believe that today than in November 2024 (35%). Over half of those surveyed (53%) are not sure what effect drinking raw milk has on getting bird flu, up from 43% in November 2024.
The FDA has said that by heating milk to a specific temperature for a time pasteurization kills harmful bacteria and viruses, and that pasteurization will inactivate the bird flu virus if it is present in raw milk.
Raw milk and Health Claims
APPC’s survey, which included non-milk drinkers, finds a small proportion of respondents (4%) who report having consumed raw or unpasteurized milk in the past 12 months, unchanged from our July 2024 survey. Another 2% were not sure whether they had consumed raw milk.
Survey respondents are equally split between those who say raw milk has more nutrients than pasteurized milk (28%) and those who say it has about the same amount of nutrients (28%). Forty percent are not sure. The FDA says pasteurization kills pathogens in raw milk “without any significant impact on milk nutritional quality.”
Promoters of raw milk have made many claims about its health benefits – but the FDA has categorized a number of them as misconceptions, as is explained here (current as of March 5, 2025). Though minorities believe in these claims, the survey finds that many more people – about half of U.S. adults or more – are not sure whether the claims are true or false:
- Bone thinning (osteoporosis): About 1 in 4 people (26%) believe that raw milk is “about as effective” as pasteurized milk at preventing osteoporosis, although 10% incorrectly believe raw milk is more effective and 59% are unsure. The FDA says raw milk is not more effective than pasteurized milk at preventing osteoporosis.
- Lactose intolerance: 40% believe that it is false to say that regularly consuming raw, unpasteurized milk cures lactose intolerance. But 10% incorrectly say this is true and 50% are not sure. The FDA says raw milk does not cure lactose intolerance.
- Asthma: 39% believe it is false to say that regularly consuming raw milk reduces the symptoms of asthma, but 7% believe it is true and 54% are not sure. The FDA says that raw milk does not cure or treat asthma and allergy.
- Immune system: 30% believe it is false to say that regularly consuming raw milk enhances the human immune system, but 23% think it is true and 47% are not sure. The FDA says raw milk “is not an immune system building food and is particularly unsafe for children,” who are usually more vulnerable to pathogens in raw milk than adults.
- Children’s vulnerability to sickness: About a third (35%) know that children are typically more vulnerable than adults to getting sick from the viruses and bacteria that can occur in raw milk. But 5% incorrectly think they are less vulnerable, 16% think they are “about as vulnerable,” and 45% are not sure.
Continued…
Government Regulation of Raw Milk
The FDA has prohibited the interstate sale of raw milk since 1987, but 30 states in the United States allow its sale in some form, according to the FDA. Survey respondents were asked for their views on government regulation of raw milk sales and sellers:
Interstate raw milk sales
Nearly a quarter of those surveyed (24%) favor the interstate sale of raw milk, and a slightly larger group (28%) opposes it, statistically unchanged from September 2024. Nearly half of respondents either are not sure (18%) or neither favor nor oppose it (29%).
Raw milk sales within a state
Nearly a quarter (24%) favor the unrestricted sale of raw milk in the state in which they live, and another quarter (25%) say the sale of raw milk should be banned, except for farmers selling from their own dairy herds on their own land. Fourteen percent say the sale of raw milk should be banned in their states, and 37% are not sure.
Government intrusion
Nearly a third (32%) agree that federal government regulations of raw unpasteurized milk are “another example of unnecessary government intrusion in people’s lives,” while a like number (34%) disagree. A third (33%) neither agree nor disagree.
The rights of raw milk sellers
A quarter (25%) agree that state laws prohibiting the sale of raw milk violate the constitutional rights of raw milk sellers, while a third (34%) disagree, and 41% neither agree nor disagree. (Asked of a random half-sample.)
Warning labels
Over half (56%) do not think that state laws requiring labels on raw milk containers warning about the risks of consuming raw milk violate the constitutional rights of raw milk sellers, while 14% think the state laws do violate their rights. Nearly a third (30%) neither agree nor disagree. (Asked of a random half-sample.)
USDA testing of raw milk
Asked in how many of the states the U.S. Department of Agriculture is testing raw milk for bird flu virus, 74% are not sure. Two percent say “none,” and a quarter of those surveyed say either “some” (10%), “most” (9%), or “all” (5%). As of Jan. 8, 2025, the USDA says its National Milk Testing Strategy has enrolled 28 states, accounting for nearly 65% of the nation’s milk production.
Continued…
APPC’s Annenberg Science and Public Health Knowledge Survey
The survey data come from the 23rd wave of a nationally representative panel of 1,716 U.S. adults conducted for the Annenberg Public Policy Center by SSRS, an independent market research company. Most have been empaneled since April 2021. To account for attrition, replenishment samples have been added over time using a random probability sampling design. The most recent replenishment, in September 2024, added 360 respondents to the sample. This wave of the Annenberg Science and Public Health Knowledge (ASAPH) survey was fielded Jan. 30-Feb. 10, 2025. The margin of sampling error (MOE) is ± 3.4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All figures are rounded to the nearest whole number and may not add to 100%. Combined subcategories may not add to totals in the topline and text due to rounding.
The policy center has been tracking the American public’s knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors regarding vaccination, Covid-19, flu, RSV, and other consequential health issues through this survey panel for nearly four years. In addition to Jamieson, APPC’s team on the survey includes research analysts Laura A. Gibson and Shawn Patterson Jr.; Ken Winneg, managing director of survey research; and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the director of APPC.
Editorial Note: Food safety isn’t just a matter of personal choice – it has public health consequences. While some people advocate for the benefits of raw milk, the science is clear: unpasteurized dairy can carry dangerous pathogens, and now, potentially even bird flu. The risks far outweigh any perceived benefits. As outbreaks and health scares continue to emerge, it’s critical that consumers, policymakers, and health officials take this issue seriously. The current situation with avian influenza in raw milk serves as a stark reminder that our food systems are constantly evolving, and vigilance is paramount.
While the debate surrounding raw milk consumption often centers on personal choice, the potential for widespread public health consequences, especially for the most vulnerable among us, demands a renewed focus on informed decision-making. It’s not about dictating dietary habits, but ensuring everyone has access to clear, scientifically-backed information to navigate these emerging risks. The responsibility falls on both public health agencies to communicate effectively and on individuals to seek out reliable sources, fostering a collective understanding that protects the health of our communities. Making informed choices isn’t just about individual well-being; it’s about protecting the broader community from preventable illness. – Disabled World (DW).
Attribution/Source(s): This quality-reviewed publication was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World (DW) due to its relevance to the disability community. Originally authored by Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and published on 2025/03/14, this content may have been edited for style, clarity, or brevity. For further details or clarifications, Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania can be contacted at annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org NOTE: Disabled World does not provide any warranties or endorsements related to this article.
