Raw Milk Illness Rate Per Consumer: Updated Data from 2022
A 2022 FDA study provides the most recent published estimate of raw milk consumer prevalence in the United States, updating a figure that has been cited in policy discussions and legislative hearings since 2014. The findings suggest the consumer base is larger than prior estimates, and that the true per-consumer illness rate is closer to 1 in 15,000 than the 1 in 14,250 figure derived from older data.
The most recent consumer prevalence data
The per-consumer illness rate cited on this site comes from Costard et al. 2017, which used a 2014 FoodNet survey putting raw milk consumers at 3.2% of the US population, or approximately 10 million people. That figure has been used in per-consumer illness rate calculations published since, including the comparison data on this site.
Lando et al. 2022, published in the Journal of Food Protection by researchers at the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, provides a more recent estimate. Drawing on the 2016 Food Safety Survey and the 2019 Food Safety and Nutrition Survey, both nationally representative surveys of US adults, the study found that 4.4% of US adults reported consuming raw milk at least once in the past year. Applied to a US adult population of approximately 260 million, that represents roughly 11.4 million consumers.
The difference between 10 million and 11.4 million is modest. It does not materially change the per-consumer illness rate or move the bar on the chart. What it does confirm is that the consumer base was somewhat larger than the FoodNet snapshot suggested, which means the per-consumer illness rate derived from Costard’s 761 annual illness estimate is closer to 1 in 15,000 when an adult-only denominator is applied rather than total population.
It is worth being precise about what this calculation means and does not mean. The Costard illness estimate and the Lando consumer prevalence figure come from different time periods and methodologies and cannot be cleanly combined to produce a definitive updated rate. The 1 in 15,000 figure is an approximation based on applying a more appropriate adult-only denominator, not a finding from a single unified study.
What this data does not capture
Lando 2022 is based on surveys conducted in 2016 and 2019. It predates the significant growth in raw milk consumption that has occurred since 2020, driven by expanded retail legalization, increased availability through grocery chains, and broader public interest in food sourcing.
The scale of that growth is documented in retail sales data. According to Raw Milk Institute data, retail raw milk sales increased 27% from $12 million in 2021 to $19.4 million in 2022. Weekly raw milk sales in 2024 increased by a further 21% compared to 2023. The pandemic accelerated the trend, with supply chain disruptions and infant formula shortages pushing more consumers toward direct farm sourcing and unprocessed foods.
No national consumer prevalence survey has been conducted since 2019. The 4.4% figure from Lando 2022 is therefore best understood as a floor established before this growth accelerated, not a ceiling. The actual current consumer base is very likely larger than any published estimate, which would further reduce any per-consumer illness rate calculation derived from fixed illness counts.
How raw milk compares to other foods
The per-consumer illness rate for raw milk remains far below other commonly consumed foods regardless of which denominator is used. Leafy greens are associated with illness in approximately 0.69% of consumers per year, chicken approximately 0.30%, and raw oysters approximately 1.5%.
Show Image
The full methodology and sourcing behind this comparison is covered in Comparing Raw Milk Foodborne Illness Data with Other Foods.
Scrutiny, attribution, and the limits of outbreak surveillance
The illness count used in the comparison is also worth contextualizing. Raw milk operates under a level of regulatory and investigative scrutiny that most other foods do not. When a raw milk consumer becomes ill, the product is a known focus of public health attention and is more likely to be identified as the suspected source than a comparable illness linked to produce or poultry.
A documented example of the attribution problem is the 2025 Keely Farms case in Florida, in which a raw milk dairy was publicly named as the source of a bacterial outbreak without an on-farm test, site visit, or notice to the farmer. The dairy’s milk tested negative. The lawsuit that followed was dropped. Cases like this illustrate that outbreak attribution for raw milk does not always meet the evidentiary standard applied to other foods.
Why raw milk illness rates are low
The per-consumer illness rate for raw milk is not low by accident. Raw milk producers operate under stricter regulatory requirements than most food categories, including mandatory pathogen testing in states where retail sale is legal. Many farmers go further, conducting their own on-farm testing before milk leaves the property, a practice documented and encouraged by certification programs like RAWMI, which establishes individual farm risk analysis plans and testing protocols for member dairies.
Lettuce, chicken, and oysters are not subject to the same farm-level testing culture that has developed in the raw milk community. The low per-consumer illness rate reflects that reality as much as it reflects any inherent property of the product.
For those sourcingĀ raw cow milk,Ā raw goat milk,Ā raw sheep milk, or otherĀ raw dairy productsĀ from clean, well-managed farms, the data tells a consistent story: per-consumer illness rates for raw milk are low in absolute terms and lower than several foods most people eat without a second thought.
For the full per-consumer comparison across food categories seeĀ Comparing Raw Milk Foodborne Illness Data with Other Foods. To find raw milk sources near you, use theĀ GetRawMilk.com searchĀ orĀ world map.
