SERIOUS NEWS ONLY

So "raw milk" is just unpasteurized milk. The pasteurization process is just heating milk to kill the bacteria and other contaminates.

The argument is that the pasteurization process,

(A) changes the taste, which is generally true although which one is "better" is going to come down to personal preference.

(B) kills the "good bacteria". AFAIK there is no data to support that claim. The idea being that if you are never exposed to bacteria your immune system is weaker. That does have some supporting data. However raw milk just isn't really the best way to go about it and the contaminates that survive in milk, things like Bird Flu (H5N1), are not worth the risk.

Extending that I'm sure there is an idea that "raw milk" is natural. And my father, fathers father, fathers fathers father, etc didn't pasteurize their milk and they turned out just fine. This of course ignores all the people who died and the fact that as a result of things like pasteurization we (society as a whole) are healthier/less sick.

(C) is a requirement of the government and the government can't tell me what to do. I don't know how big this crowd is, but whenever there is a rule, someone is probably trying to break it. If you passed a law saying "Don't eat dirt" I'm sure someone would get on TV and eat dirt.

In general, for the individual, there isn't really a big problem with drinking raw milk. If you find a reputable seller you probably won't get sick and you probably won't die. But if everyone drank raw milk we'd likely see an increase in the spread of diseases and long term that leads to an increase in death.

The fix (pasteurization) is simple and easy. Milk as a flavor is... fine. There are lots of foods out there that I want to find the best version of, milk isn't one of them.