This book was interesting!

But, I wish it was more clear about which studies used raw milk, and which used standard commercial pasteurized/homogenized (bastardized) milk. Only a few were clear about this.

Since raw vs altered is I think the main issue here, I am not sure which conclusion to draw from most of the points made.

Big problem with this thesis is that all the healthiest long lived populations historically relied primarily on either dairy or seafood. There are pros and cons to all foods, and it’s not as simple as this book suggests.

There seems to be clear genetic differences about lactose intolerance after the age of ~1, which is the main thing I can get on board with. We don’t usually make a big deal about dairy but I can’t count how many people have told me they needed to eliminate it to get better.

Quick points: butter seems to be the LEAST problematic dairy product, believed to be because of less protein. Yogurt and cheese has much of the lactose eliminated, regardless if raw or commercial. Goat, camel, zebu cattle, and other milk producing species are near-unanimously better tolerated than the standard American breeds (angus, charolais, hereford, longhorn, etc.).

We should hear both sides of an argument regardless, but I can’t really recommend this book because it wasn’t long enough or thorough enough for me.

A much more thorough book that I DO recommend is The Raw Truth About Milk by William Douglass.

It’s worth eliminating milk if you have a health problem that hasn’t been fixed with other food/nutrient changes (i.e. gluten-free, our supplements, carnivore/keto).

I would never personally buy milk from a store, especially in North America. Pasteurized milk has zero value to me, OR negative value (harm).