The war is a test of their freedom to choose to drink a rich-tasting beverage full of beneficial bacteria, enzymes, vitamins and amino acids, that are mostly destroyed through pasteurization, the proponents say.
But to the FDA, it's a basic health issue: "Raw milk is an inherently dangerous product, and it really should not be consumed by anyone at any time for any reason," a representative from the FDA tells TIME.
Unfortunately, if the FDA sergeants get their way, they'll win the war with help from Congress and the proposed Food Safety Modernization Act.
Meanwhile, a federal court has struck down Ohio's law banning labels on dairy products that say they're made with milk that's free of hormones.
As reported on NPR.org, that means companies that want to say their products are "rbGH free" and "rbST free" and "artificial hormone free" are now free to do so.
"But the bigger deal might be that the ruling challenges the FDA's 17-year-old finding that there's "no significant difference" between the milk of cows given growth hormone and those that aren't," NPR said.The Court of Appeals also listed the reasons why there is a difference between milk from cows given growth hormones and those that don't get hormones – and one was that there is more pus in the hormone-treated cows' milk than in hormone-free.
"Just that sort of distinction, or lack of it actually, is part of the ongoing debate about how to label genetically engineered salmon."
Other states have already given permission for special labels on milk, but NPR.org speculated that if the FDA approves genetically modified salmon (GM), consumer groups may use the court's ruling to label non-genetically engineered salmon.