What Happens When the FDA Stops Testing Your Milk?

I wasn’t planning to write today. But the news that the FDA has quietly suspended its milk quality control testing program gave me pause, and then sent me digging. As an infectious diseases physician, part of my job is detective work. I ask patients what they’ve eaten, where they’ve traveled, and what they’ve been exposed to. Sometimes, the answer is in the fine details: a piece of fresh cheese brought home from travels, a glass of raw milk, a dairy product that slipped through the cracks. So when I hear that a cornerstone of the dairy safety infrastructure has been put on hold, it grabs my attention. What exactly is milk quality testing? And why should anyone outside of food regulation or medicine care that the FDA has stepped back from it? Let me explain what’s at stake.

The FDA confirmed it has suspended its Milk Laboratory Proficiency Testing Program a cornerstone of how we ensure that milk sold in the U.S. is safe, properly tested, and uniformly regulated. The reason? Budget and staffing cuts. The agency’s Moffett Center Proficiency Testing Laboratory, which ran the program, has been closed. And with it, the FDA’s ability to run the quality-control checks that keep milk safety consistent across the country has been paused possibly until 2026. Most people will never hear about this. There’s so much in the news already, it’s hard to keep up.

Milk safety depends on layered safeguards that catch problems before they reach consumers. Under the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) which is adopted by almost every state milk is routinely tested for:

• Harmful bacteria like Listeria, Salmonella, and E. coli

• Somatic cell counts, which reflect cow health and milking hygiene

• Antibiotic residues, which can slip into milk if drug withdrawal times aren’t followed

• Any adulteration or contamination from handling or storage

These tests rely on labs doing the work and on the FDA verifying that labs are doing it right. The FDA ensures that results are accurate, reliable, and comparable across states and systems.

Without the FDA’s oversight, state labs have no unified system to benchmark their testing, and inconsistencies are likely to creep in. False negatives will become more likely, and contaminated milk could make it into the food supply undetected. Smaller or under-resourced jurisdictions will be hardest hit, widening existing inequities in food safety. Accountability will weaken. And if testing falters, there will be no federal backstop to identify where and how. The FDA has said the program likely won’t resume until at least FY2026. That’s a long time to fly without instruments.

The last case of listeriosis I managed was a few years ago. The patient was a pregnant woman in her twenties who came in with fever and confusion. The only revealing part of her history? She had eaten fresh cheese (queso fresco) brought to her as a gift by family visiting from Central America. Listeria monocytogenes is one of several pathogens that can be transmitted through contaminated dairy products. She made a full recovery with prompt diagnosis and antibiotics, though she spent several days in the ICU. Tragically, she lost the pregnancy. Fortunately, we don’t see these cases very often but not because these pathogens have disappeared. We don’t see them because the systems designed to detect and prevent them have worked quietly and reliably for decades.

Besides Listeria, pathogens like Salmonella, E. coli, Brucella, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis can all be transmitted through contaminated milk. The reason we don’t worry about that risk when we pour milk into cereal or hand a yogurt cup to a child is because we trust the regulatory process. As if this weren’t enough, we’re currently in the middle of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1) in U.S. dairy cattle across multiple states. Viral fragments have already been found in commercial milk samples. This adds a new layer of concern especially for unpasteurized milk. The idea of a zoonotic virus making its way into the food supply isn’t hypothetical. That risk increases when quality checks are suspended.

This news is part of a larger evolving story: the steady disinvestment in public health infrastructure, which is eroding the backbone of the programs that keep our food, water, and medications safe. Most Americans don’t realize how many of these systems exist or that they’re quietly being hollowed out. But when something goes wrong, we all feel it. If milk, one of the most closely monitored foods in the U.S., can lose federal oversight without widespread notice, what else are we not watching closely enough?

If the suspension of milk safety testing leaves you feeling uneasy, you're not alone. This isn’t a call to panic, but it is a moment to reflect on your personal risk and how we collectively uphold public health protections. In the absence of strong federal oversight, switching to non-dairy alternatives may be a more prudent option for individuals who are immunocompromised, pregnant, or simply more risk-averse. Plant-based milk options like oat, soy, almond, and rice are not immune to safety concerns, but they’re not subject to the same risks as animal-derived dairy products (Listeria, Salmonella, Brucella, E. coli, Mycobacterium bovis). This isn’t a blanket recommendation just a a reminder to make informed choices, especially for those with underlying vulnerabilities.

I hope this crucial program for public health food safety is quickly restored. In the meantime, there are actions you can take:

📞 Call your representatives and urge them to fund the FDA’s milk testing program and reverse the cuts to the workforce which have resulted in its suspension.
🛡️ Support food safety advocacy groups working to protect these systems.
📤 Share this post to help others understand what’s at stake.
🥛 Choose wisely, especially if you or your loved ones are vulnerable.

The safety of our food shouldn’t be up for debate. Let’s keep it that way.