Could be a brand or just a type of chocolate

  • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I read the Consumer Reports article you linked, but honestly I can’t imagine lead levels in chocolate is something anyone would need to be concerned about.

    The testing methodology CR used boils down to ‘we sent the chocolate to a laboratory for testing and turns out there’s lead above the safe limit in each bar.’ Consumers aren’t going to do this.

    Also, the list on the article is flawed in my opinion. It shows the amount of lead and cadmium found in each chocolate bar, but doesn’t scale it to the size of the bar. CR estimates in their risk assessment the daily consumption of chocolate by looking at the portioning of the bars on the nutrition label, and the average by the FDA of 30g.

    In Tony Chocolonely’s case, these figures are the same. As their regular bar size is 180g and the portioning is 1/6 a bar - 30g. This means that the CR listing a Tony’s bar at 134% of the daily limit of lead, it would also mean eating 500% the amount of chocolate the FDA expects.

    If you adhere to the average of 30g, Tony’s is only 22% your daily lead limit.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’ve eaten a full bar in a day. But it’s far from a daily occurrence, and I’m certainly not thinking of the health ramifications when I indulge.

    Even at 265% the lead limit, the Hershey’s bar is 120g, so a portion is 66%. The most frightening thing about that bar is that it’s Hershey’s.

    • RainfallSonata@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      If you EVER limit yourself to a portion of a bar you’ve got to be the only person in the world who does that.

      Consumers aren’t going to do this.

      Of course not. That’s why consumer reports does it for them. You don’t believe samples are representative? That’s ridiculous.