There is still a lot of discussion in the public about the potential advantages of raw milk intake, which is becoming more popular. Regulatory, or public health, agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the other hand, are concerned about the danger of acquiring milk-borne diseases if raw milk is contaminated with human germs. This article explains why milk was pasteurized more than a century ago, how it helped to decrease the frequency of diseases related with raw milk intake, and the presence of bacteria in raw milk. Even when obtained from clinically healthy animals or milk that seemed to be of high quality, up to a third of all raw milk samples had pathogens in certain tests. This study examines some of the widely held claims about raw milk's health advantages. The claims that raw milk intake improves nutrition, prevents lactose intolerance, or provides ‘‘good" bacteria have no scientific foundation and are myths. There is some epidemiological evidence suggesting children growing up in an agricultural environment have a lower incidence of allergies and asthma; however, a number of environmental variables may be at play, and raw milk intake is not directly linked to any ‘‘protective" impact.