Raw milk, sashimi-grade fish, unpasteurised honey — raw foods have gained a cult-like following among health-conscious consumers. Advocates claim that pasteurisation and heat treatments destroy important nutrients, enzymes and probiotics, leading to poor digestion, weak immunity and decreased energy levels. While some raw foods have valid nutritional benefits, others can be a breeding ground for harmful bacteria, posing serious risks.
So, what’s the real deal with raw products? Why do some people swear by them, and do their claims hold up under scientific scrutiny? Let’s break down the facts, exploring the most popular raw foods — milk, meat, honey and more — to uncover whether this trend is rawesome or a little half-baked.
What are raw foods?
Raw foods are eaten in their natural state without being cooked, processed or pasteurised. Fruits and many vegetables are commonly eaten raw, and it’s perfectly safe to do so. However, some advocates allege that traditionally cooked and processed foods like meat, milk and honey, for example, are more nutritious when consumed raw. Proponents argue that raw foods contain more natural enzymes and probiotics than their cooked counterparts. There is also a perception that pasteurisation and other processing techniques, as well as cooking, reduce the nutrient content of food. And while this may be the case some of the time, it’s not always the case.
Are raw foods better than cooked foods?
Let’s look at lycopene in tomatoes as an example to best highlight the concept of bioavailability. Lycopene, an antioxidant shown to reduce prostate cancer in men, is better absorbed from cooked tomato than raw tomato. Interestingly, tomato sauce has a higher lycopene content than raw tomatoes. This is not to say that tomato sauce is nutritionally superior to raw tomatoes, but it highlights the nuances of nutrition science. So, while raw foods can be highly nutritious, the same can be said about cooked or even processed foods.
It is also important to address how food manufacturing has made food more highly accessible as well as safe. Some proponents of raw foods promote ancestral diets and believe modern technological advances or practices should be avoided in favour of eating foods in their natural state like our predecessors. Yet, this argument is a simplistic one. Cavemen did not have access to the range of safe foods that we have today, and their life expectancy and health outcomes were much poorer.
Dangers of raw milk
Meanwhile, raw food has gained even more prominence recently following the promotion of Robert F Kennedy Jr. to the U.S. Health Secretary. He has publicly supported certain traditional food practices, including consuming raw milk. RFK Jr. personally consumes raw milk and believes in its supposed health benefits.
Yet, the science reveals that there is no nutritional benefit or advantage to drinking raw milk. Nutrient losses during pasteurisation and homogenisation are negligible. These processes are essential to destroy bacteria and inactivate enzymes, and to ensure that the cream separates and does not rise to the top. Drinking raw milk not only presents a health risk to the consumer, but also has no therapeutic benefit. There have been documented cases of hospitalisation and death due to pathogens in raw milk. It’s concerning that the U.S. government is considering overriding the FDA’s authority on raw milk regulations.
In addition to raw milk, other popular raw products include raw meat and seafood, unpasteurised honey and raw eggs. Let’s take a closer look at these.
Raw meat
While advocates of raw meat claim it’s easier to digest, and the protein is more bioavailable, this is unfounded. Not only is cooked meat easier to digest, but it also reduces the risk of serious foodborne illnesses like E. coli and salmonella.
Raw eggs
Proponents of raw eggs claim uncooked eggs contain more protein and biotin. Yet, raw egg whites can inhibit the absorption of biotin. Plus, raw eggs can be a source of salmonella.
Raw seafood
Some claim that cooking seafood can degrade omega-3 fatty acids. This is true, however, eating raw seafood can be a source of parasites. For context, baking or boiling fish preserves the omega-3 content better than other cooking methods.
Raw vegetables
The claim that cooking vegetables will degrade vitamin C and folate is true. There are minor losses of these nutrients during cooking. However, the opposite is also true for other nutrients when cooked. See my earlier point about lycopene and bioavailability when tomato is cooked. My take: eat more vegetables – raw or cooked.
The appeal of raw foods is often rooted in the idea that they are more “natural” and nutrient-dense. However, the reality is usually more complex. While some raw foods retain more vitamins and enzymes, cooking can also enhance the bioavailability of key nutrients and reduce the risk of foodborne illness. The reality is that safety should outweigh any perceived benefit.
The take-home message is that a balanced diet that includes a mix of (safe) raw and cooked foods is the most practical and nutritious choice. So, by all means — blend, bake, blitz, or eat foods raw, but make sure your choices are backed by science, not just hype.
Joel Feren
Accredited Practising Dietitian and Accredited Nutritionist
Known as The Nutrition Guy, Joel Feren is an Accredited Practising Dietitian and Accredited Nutritionist with a background in biomedical sciences. His speciality area is men’s health. Joel works alongside the media and some of the biggest food brands in the industry and is helping to shape the current food landscape and nutrition conversation.
