Much buzz these days about raw milk. Raw milk is alleged to be far far better for you than ordinary homogenized pasteurized supermarket milk. Trouble is there is no evidence, none, that raw is better in any way. The problem is that raw milk is still milk and has just as much lactose and casein as any other kind, and those things are the primary bad actors, metabolically speaking. It's the lactose that raises blood sugar and the milk proteins that bollix our metabolisms. Butter, being almost lactose and casein free, is on the other hand a most excellent source of beneficial animal fats.
Cow's milk is an ideal food for calves. It is not remotely ideal for adult humans, but butterfat is in fact an ideal source of fatty acids for anyone. For those who respond poorly to even a few molecules of lactose, ghee (clarified butter) is unlikely to cause issues in even the most lactose intolerant. Ghee is essentially butterfat, a little water, and nothing else. Cheese is on the whole rather healthier than milk, the lactose having been mostly consumed by bacteria, and the casein proteins rendered less harmful by fermentation. But, it is extremely easy to eat too much of it.
I avoid milk altogether, and eat cheese only a few times a year, if that. And no I do not suffer from a calcium deficit. Eggs and meat are good sources of calcium. However, if it's milk you must drink, then don't waste your money on raw milk, or anything else raw for that matter. Rawness does not imbue anything with superior nutritional value. Drink raw milk if you want to be up-to-the-minute hip, but don't expect it to manifest magical properties. And don't even get me started on that modern abomination known as "skim" milk.
