5 Critical Facts About The US FDA's Suspension Of Milk Quality Tests And What It Means For Your Dairy

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suspended a critical component of its national milk quality control system in April 2025, a move that immediately sent ripples of concern across the dairy industry and among public health advocates. This suspension did not halt all milk testing nationwide, but rather paused the federal Proficiency Testing (PT) program for Grade "A" milk, which is the system designed to ensure that the state and local laboratories performing the daily safety checks are accurate and reliable. The timing of this decision—amid heightened public attention on the safety of the milk supply due to the spread of H5N1 Avian Influenza in dairy cattle—has amplified the scrutiny on the agency's capacity to oversee food safety. The official reason for the suspension, as communicated by the FDA’s Division of Dairy Safety, was not a sudden safety crisis but rather a severe reduction in the agency's internal laboratory capacity. This reduction is directly linked to major federal workforce cuts and budget constraints within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which the FDA falls under. While the FDA maintains that the commercial pasteurized milk supply remains safe, the halt of the PT program removes a vital federal oversight layer, raising questions about the long-term consistency and reliability of milk safety testing across the country.

The FDA's Proficiency Testing Program: What Was Suspended?

The program that the FDA suspended is the Proficiency Testing (PT) program for Grade "A" milk and milk products. This is not the day-to-day testing of milk for pathogens or contaminants, but rather the system that ensures the reliability of the labs that do that work. * Program Name: Grade “A” Milk Proficiency Testing (PT) Program * Date of Suspension: April 21, 2025 * Function: The program provided state and local laboratories with standardized, blind samples of milk. These labs would test the samples for various parameters (like bacteria count, antibiotic residues, etc.) and report the results back to the FDA. The FDA would then assess whether the lab's results were accurate and within acceptable limits. * Goal: To ensure that all laboratories participating in the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS) program are using validated methods and producing consistently accurate results. * Scope: It covered testing for Grade "A" raw milk and finished dairy products, which represents the vast majority of milk consumed in the US. The suspension means that, as of April 2025, the FDA is no longer able to administer this critical quality control check on the laboratories responsible for milk safety. This creates a gap in the federal oversight of the dairy testing infrastructure, potentially allowing for variability in testing accuracy across different states and jurisdictions.

The Real Reason: Budget Cuts and Workforce Reductions

The suspension was a direct consequence of internal resource depletion, not a sudden change in milk safety status. The agency cited reduced lab capacity as the primary driver for its decision. The root causes are systemic and tied to broader governmental challenges: * Major Federal Workforce Reductions: Reports indicate that significant staff cuts and lab closures within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had severely curtailed the FDA’s ability to conduct its proficiency testing program. * Budgetary Constraints: The lack of sufficient funding and resources made it impossible for the agency’s Division of Dairy Safety to maintain the administrative and technical demands of the PT program, which requires constant preparation, shipping, and analysis of standardized samples. * Historical Context: Some reports have linked the reduced capacity to layoffs and budget decisions stemming from previous administrations, creating a cumulative effect that finally forced the suspension in 2025. The decision highlights a critical vulnerability in the US food safety system, where federal oversight programs can be compromised by budget shortfalls and staffing issues, even for essential public health functions like ensuring the safety of the nation’s dairy supply chain.

Impact on Dairy Safety: Separating Fact from Fear

While the suspension of the federal oversight program is concerning, experts caution against assuming that the nation's pasteurized milk is suddenly unsafe. The food safety system has multiple layers, and the primary testing responsibilities remain in place.

The Continuing Safety Net: State and Local Testing

The most important fact to understand is that the day-to-day testing of milk has not stopped. * NCIMS Program: Milk safety is primarily governed by the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS), a cooperative program involving the FDA, state regulatory agencies, and the dairy industry. * Mandatory Testing: State-certified laboratories continue to test raw milk before it is processed and finished dairy products for contaminants, bacteria, and antibiotic residues as required by the NCIMS program. * Pasteurization Efficacy: The FDA remains confident that the process of pasteurization is highly effective at killing harmful bacteria and viruses, including the H5N1 Avian Influenza virus, which has been detected in the raw milk of infected dairy cattle.

The Long-Term Risk: Consistency and Accreditation

The major risk introduced by the suspension is not immediate product contamination, but a degradation of testing consistency and accreditation integrity over time. * Variability in Results: Without the FDA's PT program, there is no federal mechanism to quickly identify and correct a state or local lab whose testing methods have become inaccurate. This could lead to a wider variation in the quality of testing across different states. * Accreditation Uncertainty: The PT program was integral to the accreditation process for these labs. Its absence complicates the renewal and validation of lab credentials, potentially leading to a less rigorous regulatory environment for fluid milk and other dairy products.

The H5N1 Context: A Perfect Storm of Public Concern

The suspension came at a particularly sensitive time, coinciding with the first-ever detection of the Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) H5N1 virus in dairy herds across several states and its subsequent detection in retail milk samples (specifically, viral fragments were found). * FDA’s H5N1 Response: The FDA has been conducting its own intensive, separate sampling study of commercial milk to monitor for the H5N1 virus. This separate testing initiative confirmed the presence of viral fragments in some samples but also affirmed that pasteurization successfully inactivated the virus, meaning the milk was not infectious. * Public Perception: The simultaneous news of H5N1 in milk and the suspension of a key federal quality-control program created a crisis of confidence for some consumers. Although the two issues are technically separate—the suspension was due to budget cuts, not H5N1—the proximity of the announcements fueled public anxiety about the overall safety and oversight of the food supply chain. * Raw Milk Debate: The situation has also intensified the debate over raw milk consumption. Given that the H5N1 virus was found in the raw milk of infected cows, and raw milk is not pasteurized, health officials continue to strongly advise against its consumption. The lack of federal PT oversight further stresses the importance of stringent, reliable testing for all dairy, especially unpasteurized products. The suspension of the PT program is a clear signal that federal agencies require robust and consistent funding to maintain the layers of oversight that underpin public health and safety. While the dairy farmers and state regulators continue their essential work, the absence of the FDA’s federal proficiency check leaves a visible, and concerning, gap in the nation's milk safety architecture.