Slashdot Mirror
Beware Headlines Saying Chocolate Is Good For You
BarbaraHudson writes: Many news organizations ran stories last fall extolling certain health benefits of chocolate. But it turns out the studies that the articles were based on didn't go quite so far. The CBC is running a pair of stories debunking chocolate's benefits to the average consumer: "Scientists have zeroed in on a family of fragile molecules known as cocoa flavanols. Research suggests they can relax blood vessels, improve blood flow and, as Small found in his study, even increase activity in a part of the brain involved with age related memory loss. But those flavanols largely disappear once the cocoa bean is heated, fermented and processed into chocolate. In other words, making chocolate destroys the very ingredient that is supposed to make it healthy.
That’s why Small’s memory study used a highly concentrated powder prepared exclusively for research by Mars Inc., the chocolate company, which also partially funded the study. ... There are lots of foods that contain potentially healthy flavanols, along with other bioactive compounds in complex combinations. So the question is: Would academic scientists in publicly funded institutions be so interested in the cocoa bean if the chocolate industry wasn't supporting so much of the research?"
That’s why Small’s memory study used a highly concentrated powder prepared exclusively for research by Mars Inc., the chocolate company, which also partially funded the study. ... There are lots of foods that contain potentially healthy flavanols, along with other bioactive compounds in complex combinations. So the question is: Would academic scientists in publicly funded institutions be so interested in the cocoa bean if the chocolate industry wasn't supporting so much of the research?"
Researchers do sketchy science to shill for corporations?
That unpossible.
And that, kids, is precisely why there is not, and never will be, a free market.
Because buying your own science is so much more lucrative, and the populace is so damned gullible.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
What the media regurgitated as findings made by scientific studies were in fact PR releases by chocolate companies filled with half truths and misleading information. Of course the worst part is how people have been convinced that a Snickers and other junk food bars are actually chocolate.
Not always. If you want to give a grilled steak a beautiful dark-brown color, rub a little bit of unsweetened coco powder on it before you cook it. It also adds depth to the flavor. It also goes well in chili in small quantities.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Would academic scientists in publicly funded institutions be so interested in the cocoa bean if the chocolate industry wasn't supporting so much of the research?"
I love the idea that this somehow invalidates the research. The researchers investigated what they could get funding to investigate, there's no allegations that the research was non-rigorous or of any other improper practice. Presumably the results are valid and therefore valuable. Further, presumably this research wouldn't have been done otherwise so we've got some additional research we wouldn't have done otherwise. So what if it supports someone's interests? We all benefit because now we know more about the world around us and what is, and isn't, good for our bodies. Now go and take your ad hominems elsewhere.
Actually, no. Evolution has provided humans with taste buds to favor foods that will keep us alive, depending upon conditions. These conditions are key. Bears are a good example. Bears that need to survive hibernation will gorge themselves on any sweets they can find because it is key to their survival. Bears will eat all the honey they can find, but they don't find much. Bears eat a lot of salmon and they find plenty. Bears eat a lot of berries and they find plenty. Bears eat a lot of grubs and they find plenty. Bears will eat all the Hershey bars they can find, along with all the almonds, denim, and bear repellant that goes with it, but they don't find a lot. If bears did find a lot of Hershey bars, they would soon die of (insert disease here). Humans, in the recent 4000 years, have gained the ability to have any food from anywhere on earth within arms reach available to them at low cost. Foods that would be healthy to gorge on, if they were scarce, are now plentiful. That is the problem. Technology has given us the means, but our self control has not evolved to fit our environment. Our taste buds still control us. If it tastes good, it is because your ancestors relied upon it to survive. You, with your comfortable life and big screen TV, should know better. If it tastes good, enjoy in moderation.
Hershey's is the Walmart of chocolate. There are plenty of small companies making high quality chocolates.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
It's FUCKING CHOCOLATE.
Just enjoy it and shit can this stupid "corporations are evil" garbage.
Holy Fuck, does there have to be some evil conspiracy behind everything?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Guess what, American beers and wines are winning contests in Europe.
Yes, but not the beers and wines that Americans in general actually consumes.
Sure, you can go to a craft microbrew bar in San Francisco and drink a beer the equal of anything coming from Europe's best breweries. But in 99% of the country and at the price range that 80% of the country can afford you can only get Budweiser, Miller or Coors.
Compare this to any country in Europe where you can be in the most backwards, rural town and get something good served to you just by walking to the bar and asking for "beer".
America is a huge and populous country and it stands to reason that there will be a little bit of everything happening there. But nobody cares what you and your hipster friends are drinking and it doesn't change the fact that American beer is shit.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
"Wasn't it the EU who didn't want Cadbury's chocolate to be labeled real chocolate?"
If by the EU you mean a handful of vested interests in countries like France and Belgium lobbying a handful of EU representatives and failing in the EU as a whole then yes. Otherwise, if you mean what most people would assume to be the EU, as in, the political organisation as a majority or whole, then no.
"You're probably talking about Hershey's, which is net the entirety of American chocolate."
No, even Cadburys and Nestle chocolate tastes shit in America - Dairy Milk bars, Smarties, M&Ms and so on, they're all just awful in the US. They use different recipes. All American main-brand chocolate is just plain terrible. It tastes like wax with chocolate flavouring as someone else said. Letting it melt in your mouth feels like you've just slurped up part of an oil slick with a bit of flavouring added to it. I was told too this is because the ingredients they use are less likely to melt in the heat of America's hottest states whereas the bars would turn to liquid if they used Cadbury's UK recipe and they were shipped to Florida or whatever, but I don't think it was added sugar that was the recipe. What I do know is that chocolate in America (and Canada) just tastes awful though compared to equivalent bars in Europe. Last I checked orange Smarties don't even taste of orange chocolate in North America either, which is a crime worthy of your death penalty, so find who is responsible and deal with it please.
If you start going upmarket to places where you can get real chocolate like Hotel Chocolat, Thorntons, or proper Belgian chocolatiers then the disparity between European and America chocolate becomes even more embarassing.
It isn't just "Europe is better than America crap", and the fact you said that implies to me that you don't have the benefit of experience and are just speculating. I'm British and my partner is Canadian, we travel between both continents regularly and the sheer amount of British confectionary we're asked to cart over with us for friends and family (and the complete lack on the way back - though we do cart back other things; maple syrup, various steak spices and so forth) is a fine example of how much people realise European chocolate really is just so much nicer. It's not about childhood memories, it's simply that when you've had both people seem to consistently opt for the European versions where they can.
There are a lot of areas where North America has it's advantages, and there are areas where Europe has it's advantages (you still get films, and games before us, and get most things at much more reasonable prices). For example, until the Smartphone wars starting in 2007 North America looked practically prehistoric in terms of cellphones, Europe (and Japan) were clearly superior in this area for a decade or so - I was like a guy from the future back in 2004 when I went over with my colour screen Nokia that could play MP3s, install apps including games like Doom, take photos and so on and so forth. This is in fact why the first iPhone wasn't even released in Europe - a phone with no MMS, no GPS, no mapping, no apps, no 3G and so on and so forth was always a joke in the European market and the fancy touch interface just couldn't make up for those glaring deficiencies. It was only really by the 3rd iteration that it even began to matter in Europe where it finally began to catch up on having the bare minimum required feature set (the second iteration didn't even outsell Nokia's non-touch screen flagship at the time).
I think what you're really saying when you say "This sounds like just more "Europe is better than America" crap" is that you can't stand the idea that some places might actually be better than America at some things. Tough shit, American exceptionalism is nonsense, it's not superior at everything in every way - chocolate is one of those ways in which it simply does a terrible job. Don't let it upset you though, you get awesome other things, like meat products. Tr