One should not misappropriate the concept of intuitive eating to justify extremely restrictive and potentially risky diets, such as the exclusive consumption of raw milk and raw meat, which stem from the appeal to nature fallacy rather than true bodily wisdom.

noli's read

Abbey Sharp’s warning regarding the health risks associated with raw milk and raw meat rests on extremely solid scientific foundations. According to a meta-analysis by Claeys et al. combined with CDC surveillance data, unpasteurized milk presents a significantly higher risk of causing bacterial digestive disorders than its pasteurized counterpart. Furthermore, a systematic review of research (such as that of Brett et al.) confirms that pasteurization decreases the overall nutritional quality and vitamins of milk only in a quite negligible way, invalidating the idea that raw milk is an intrinsically superior wellness choice. Regarding raw meat, risk assessment reports from Public Health Ontario emphasize that no preparation or farming method can guarantee the total absence of undesirable bacteria. Finally, associating these extreme restrictions with intuitive eating is scientifically inconsistent: this psycho-behavioral model, validated by numerous observational studies, encourages a flexible relationship with food and listening to internal needs, far from the rigid rules of dietary exclusion.

the sources

No named source held this one up — that absence is part of the verdict.