A routine federal quality-control program for milk laboratories is on hold, raising fresh questions about whether the gallon in the refrigerator remains safe. Federal officials and food-safety scientists say the answer is yes. That reassurance rests on three distinct safeguards that continue to function even while the Food and Drug Administration restructures the proficiency-testing lab it uses to audit state and industry laboratories.​USA TODAY

This article explains each safeguard — daily plant testing, state oversight and the FDA’s now-paused proficiency testing — and why consumers should expect the same level of protection that has kept Grade A milk one of the safest foods in the United States.​IDFA

Every load of raw milk that arrives at a processing plant faces a series of mandatory checks. Tankers are screened for antibiotics, pesticides and other drug residues using rapid tests approved in the Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, the model code that governs interstate shipment. Pasteurized product is then sampled for bacteria, coliforms, somatic cells and alkaline phosphatase, an enzyme whose absence confirms that heat treatment reached the required temperature. Batches that fail are rejected, repasteurized or, when contamination is severe, discarded under inspector supervision.​U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Plants also perform additional pathogen testing under their own hazard analysis plans and hold finished product until results clear. Large processors run polymerase chain reaction assays for listeria and salmonella, methods that return answers within hours. These in-house controls stayed in place after the FDA’s notice because they are written into state permits, private contracts and company quality manuals, not the proficiency-testing calendar. Industry representatives note that the tests occur many times each shift, far more often than the audit samples sent by Washington.​IDFA

Numbers illustrate the scale. A Midwestern cooperative processing 4 million pounds of milk each day performs about 600 individual quality checks before pasteurization and another 250 afterward, according to plant logs reviewed by the International Dairy Foods Association. Those figures add up to more than 300,000 data points per month — all independent of the federal proficiency panel.​IDFA

Milk safety is a shared duty, and state agencies form the second firewall. Public-health inspectors visit plants, pull independent samples and review sanitation records on a rotating schedule laid out in the ordinance. State laboratories run the same antibiotic and microbial screens used by processors, providing an external check. When results exceed legal limits, states can issue recalls, suspend permits or order corrective training for plant staff. Because these inspections are funded through state budgets and cooperative agreements with the FDA, they continue regardless of a federal hiring freeze.​The Greenville News

States also submit raw data to the National Milk Drug Residue Database, which the FDA maintains to spot regional trends and trace any violations that reach commerce. The underlying residue program remains active because it relies on routine samples, not proficiency rounds. In fiscal 2024, laboratories analyzed 3.9 million tanker samples for β-lactam antibiotics, with a violation rate below 0.02 percent. Offending loads were discarded before bottling.​U.S. Food and Drug Administration

State enforcement has teeth. In January inspectors in Vermont found elevated bacteria counts at a plant after a refrigeration compressor failed. The facility recalled two production lots, sanitized equipment and passed three test-of-cleanliness runs before shipping resumed. That corrective process would have occurred even if the federal audit program were operating normally, underscoring the independence of the tier-two safeguard.

Twice a year the FDA’s Moffett Center laboratory used to send “blind” samples spiked with known levels of bacteria, antibiotics and enzymatic markers to every accredited milk lab. Analysts would run the samples alongside ordinary work, report the numbers and receive a score. Passing grades kept the lab on the Interstate Milk Shippers list; a failing score triggered retraining or suspension.

On April 21 the agency told states that budget cuts and staff departures forced it to suspend the shipment of those blind samples until the function can move to a new location. Officials said existing lab approvals remain valid and promised to restart the program by the 2026 fiscal year.​USA TODAY

The proficiency program is best compared to a calibration audit. It verifies that instruments in dozens of laboratories match federal reference values, but it is not the test that tells a pasteurizer operator whether yesterday’s production lot is safe. Daily plant checks and state monitoring provide that information. Experts interviewed by the dairy industry and several news outlets stressed that the pause does not change the frequency or scope of routine safety testing.​IDFA

How Pasteurization Fits In

Pasteurization is the pivotal kill step. High-temperature short-time treatment, the method used for most retail milk, heats product to at least 161 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 seconds. Research shows that condition inactivates common pathogens, including the highly pathogenic avian influenza virus detected in some dairy herds last year. The FDA reaffirmed the finding after social media rumors surfaced this spring.​IDFA

Even so, regulators still require phosphatase testing on each batch because enzyme activity is a sensitive indicator of incomplete heating. Those phosphatase screens occur at the plant and at backup state labs, independent of the proficiency program.

Many processors already buy commercial proficiency panels or participate in inter-laboratory exchange programs run by land-grant universities. The National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments has indicated that results from those programs can satisfy state rating officers until the FDA panels resume. The flexibility helps prevent accreditation gaps for labs that add new analysts or replace equipment during the federal hiatus.​U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Uncertainty about federal oversight can erode confidence, and rumors of “untested milk” spread quickly on social platforms. A viral video posted April 25 urged viewers to avoid certain brands, drawing more than two million views before moderation. Food-safety physicians countered the claim, explaining that the pause covers audit samples only and recommending ultra-pasteurized milk for anyone worried about immune vulnerabilities.​New York Post

Trade associations have posted their own explanations, emphasizing that farmers, truckers and processors still face the same legal limits on bacteria, antibiotics and somatic cells. Several state agriculture departments have begun posting short explainer videos on their websites and on YouTube, walking viewers through a tanker screening line and illustrating the antibiotic strip tests that have been routine for decades yet rarely shown outside professional meetings. The clips also explain phosphatase checks.​IDFA

Historically, fluid milk has logged few outbreaks relative to other refrigerated foods. During the past decade, reported illnesses tied to pasteurized milk averaged fewer than one incident per year, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention summaries. Officials attribute the record to the multilayered testing model and to the rapid corrective steps enforced when problems do emerge. The temporary pause in proficiency shipments does not alter those enforcement powers.

What Consumers Can Do

Food-safety specialists recommend buying pasteurized milk, keeping it at 40 degrees or colder and discarding any container aged beyond the sell-by date or held unrefrigerated for more than two hours. Those steps remain best practice and are unaffected by the federal staffing issue. For households with immunocompromised members, experts suggest ultra-pasteurized or shelf-stable options, which undergo higher temperatures and carry a longer unopened shelf life.

Looking Ahead

The FDA’s human foods reorganization merges several offices into a single program with authority over inspections, laboratory services and outbreak response. Agency leaders say the new structure will allow better coordination and faster hiring for critical lab roles. Congress will review the plan during fiscal 2026 appropriations hearings. States and industry groups have urged lawmakers to fund the relocated proficiency lab to avoid another gap two years from now.

The National Milk Producers Federation and the International Dairy Foods Association have asked the agency to publish a timeline for the next audit panel, citing the importance of uniform national scoring. In the meantime, they say the existing two-layer defense of plant tests and state oversight continues to protect public health.

Key Takeaways

— The routine safety checks that decide whether a batch of milk ships to stores occur at processing plants and state laboratories and are still running.
— The suspended proficiency-testing program is an audit of those labs, not a front-line pathogen screen.
— Pasteurization and daily antibiotic, bacteria and enzyme tests remain mandatory under state permits.
— Industry and state alternatives will substitute for the federal audit until the FDA relaunches its panel.
— Experts and regulators agree that the milk supply remains among the safest foods in the grocery cart.

In a year characterized by layoffs and reorganizations across several agencies, the milk example shows how layered systems can absorb a single break without losing their primary function. For now, consumers can follow standard food-handling advice, confident that the daily safeguards have not changed.

---

This is an expansion of a previous article…

Public Health Experts Warn Oversight Unraveling