Paul Saladino· MD
It's pretty amazing stuff, better consumed raw to preserve bioactive components (exosomes, miRNA, peptides, immunoglobulins etc.).
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
It's pretty amazing stuff, better consumed raw to preserve bioactive components (exosomes, miRNA, peptides, immunoglobulins etc.).
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
So, exoomes are sort of these membrane bound vesicles that contain really blueprints of the human body, including microRNA and other signaling molecules.
And the pasteurization process might decrease viable exosomes or usable exosomes
And the reason I like raw milk is because it just feels better for me. It digests better for me. It's mostly anecdotal, although there are multiple trials showing that kids who grow up on or off farms drinking raw versus pasteurized milk have lower rates of asthma, eczema, and allergies. I have asthma, eczema, and allergies. There are actually exoomes. So, these are membranebound vesicles that our cells secrete. They're associated with stem cells. It's probably part of the value of stem cells is the exoomes those stem cells secrete. And there are exosomes in milk. The value of these proteins and the peptides, the microRNAs in the exosomes appear to cross species. So this is a theoretical reason that drinking raw milk with more intact exosomes could be healthier for humans than a pasteurized milk, which is almost certainly going to destroy some of those milk derived exoomes.