This is a double-edged sword, I have an interesting discussion with John from TailoredPT.com about this exact topic. There are two sides to the argument, while whole milk does contain extra goodies that are missing from pasturised milk (certain enzymes and friendly bacteria). Whole milk also contains a higher fat content than most milk available “off the shelf”, remember fat is not the enemy like so many magazines would have us believe - just don’t overdo it. So it’s essentially understood that whole milk contains a better nutritional profile than pasturised milk. The issue (and argument against whole milk) is that there is a chance that the milk will contain a contaminant (usually bacterial) that will cause harm to you if you drink it, while the studies about the chances of contamination vary in their risk assessment we can assume that healthy cows will not have contaminated milk (this is the consensus).
The final consideration in this argument is the risk vs. benefit. Yes, the health risk associates with whole milk is very low, but what of the benefits? The best analogy I came up with last time this was discussed was to compare your body to a car. If (like most people) you drive a regular car, don’t really check the oil levels or tyre pressure like you should, you keep a load of
old junk in the back and don’t really care about the funny knocking sound every time you turn a corner – I’m not sure that putting high-octane fuel in the tank will make any difference (if fact it may just damage your engine). However if you drive a performance car, with a lightweight body, tuned engine and gearbox, sports suspension etc. and you add high octane fuel – you will notice a difference immediately.
It’s the same with your body, if you smoke 20 a day or finish each evening with a 6-pack of beer, or your idea of exercise is walking to the pub – I doubt whole milk will do a thing for you.