I would be concerned about the rate of Hormones used. It is one of the reasons I have used non- pasteurized milk in the past from a farm. Oh and never once have I gotten sick. ^.^
Yes, hormones, more specifically antibiotics I think, have been talked about since I was a teenager. 'Course, Pasteurization would likely not affect additives content but is intended to destroy Tuberculosis bacteria. Maybe more significant than intentionally-added materials are radioactive isotopes consumed as cows ate (eat?) grasses contaminated by fallout from bomb tests. When I was a kid, the news broadcasts daily mentioned the current levels of Strontium-90 being found in local milk supplies. Since little could be done about it, beyond halting dairy product consumption, the worries gradually subsided, either by design, or attrition, I don't know which. Is Sr-90 still measurably present? Who knows. Here is a blurb about it:
[SUP]
"90[/SUP]Sr is a product of
nuclear fission. It is present in significant amount in
spent nuclear fuel and in
radioactive waste from
nuclear reactors and in
nuclear fallout from
nuclear tests. For
thermal neutron fission as in today's nuclear power plants, the
fission product yield from
U-235 is 5.7%, from
U-233 6.6%, but from
Pu-239 only 2.0%."
See, thing here is, as old folks who were children in the '50s and '60s, we were then exposed to Sr-90 routinely in milk we consumed. Immediate threat, no, but Sr-90 is mistaken by the human mechanism as being Calcium, so similar are the two chemically, and took it up to be stored as part of our bone structures. Thus, that stored Sr-90 irradiated our little bones for many years. An immediate thought might be bone cancer incidence mid-1900s vs. now......imp