In defense of chocolate

How an FDA review process has sparked outrage, confusion, and debate

By
June 14, 2007

In April, a grassroots group of chocolate lovers (including me) stood up to Big Food and demanded that American chocolate not be adulterated by the use of cheap and unpalatable vegetable fats in place of cocoa butter. And we won.

That is, we won the right to continue making comments to the FDA for an additional two months, until June 25.

The whole process is paralyzingly bureaucratic. And the resulting grassroots campaign for pure chocolate is composed of an overwhelming mishmash of information, some accurate and some inaccurate, some reserved and some reactionary. But all this banging on the chocolate pot might help us hammer out a definition of chocolate that everyone can agree on. Right now, the government, the chocolate makers, and the consumers all have different ideas. It’s time to start making sense of the labels.

A cacao pod sitting atop a bag of cocoa beans.

Executives at Bay Area chocolate maker Guittard (a 139-year-old family-owned business) have turned this chocolate controversy into a cause célèbre. Guittard’s “Don’t Mess with Our Chocolate” website (which links to press coverage everywhere from National Public Radio to a forum on socially responsible investing) helps individual consumers get involved by instructing them on how to register official “Consumer Comments” at the FDA website.

Confusingly, the document that these comments are intended to respond to is a standard form filled out by the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) under the name “Citizen’s Petition.” So the dossier of comments logged by Guittard’s supporters essentially comprises a petition against a petition.

It may seem trite for me, as the founder of a blog called Chocolate in Context, to argue that we put this matter in context, but that’s what I’m going to do. The GMA petition (which is undersigned by 11 other food-industry organizations ranging from the Chocolate Manufacturers Association to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association) is a rambling and repetitive, though largely reasonable, 35-page document pertaining to general food standards and describing specific processed foods like canned tomatoes and breaded shrimp. It mentions chocolate only in an appendix.

The reference to chocolate is vague and broadly drawn, though it is cause for alarm. The current U.S. standards for chocolate production are stricter than those in the European Union, where products labeled “chocolate” can contain up to five percent non-cacao vegetable fat. But the GMA petition’s wording could be interpreted as promoting a much more lax standard in the U.S.

However, it’s important to understand that the proposed changes are more about labeling than manufacturing. American candy makers can already produce foods with cocoa-butter substitutes (such as Butterfingers and Whoppers). But they can’t call them chocolate.

So what are we really talking about? Mostly, we’re talking about cocoa butter, an ingredient known for the cholesterol-lowering properties of its natural stearic acid and, more importantly, for its unusual tendency to melt at body temperature. So where does cocoa butter come from and how does it get into our chocolate? The FDA is unnecessarily confusing about the substance, referring to it as “cacao fat” and sending those who wish to learn more to the archives in a Washington, D.C., office instead of simply publishing the definition on its website.

Advertisement
How to Cook Everything Vegetarian ad

Even blogger Cybele May, whose “Keep it Real” campaign on Candy Blog inspired more than 100 mentions of the proposed FDA changes on the Internet, gives a misleading description of the ingredient in an editorial that was syndicated in New York Newsday and the Los Angeles Times:

Cacao pods are fermented and then roasted and ground into a fine paste that can be separated into two components: cacao solids (commonly called cocoa powder) and cocoa butter. Each chocolatier uses different proportions but generally blends sugar, cocoa solids and cocoa butter plus the optional ingredients — emulsifiers, flavors (typically vanilla) and milk solids (to make milk chocolate) — and molds that into a chocolate bar.

Actually, it’s not the pods but the beans found within them that are fermented and roasted. And while May’s description of how cocoa butter is separated from the solids that become cocoa powder is accurate, she misrepresents the role of that process in the transformation from bean to bar, since the base of processed chocolate is not cocoa powder but the paste she mentions (arguably more gritty than fine), which is commonly called “chocolate liquor.” Chocolate liquor naturally contains approximately 50 percent cocoa butter.

Making the process even more confusing, most modern chocolate bars contain extra cocoa butter to increase their smoothness.

Displaying page 1 of 2.

First Page Previous Page 1 2 Next Page Last Page
Subscribe
Comments
There is 1 comment on this item
Add a comment
1. by junglegirl on Jul 8, 2007 at 12:36 AM PDT

There is ‘coco butter’, ‘cocoa butter’ and ‘cacao’ butter. Coco butter is the oil from pressed coconuts, that also easily solidifies and then looks AND sounds simular to cacao butter, but it is a completely different thing. Cocoa and Cacao butter are the same thing: the oil/butter pressed from the cacao beans which looks like a waxy lump and remains solid at much higher temperatures than coco butter, which liquifies at a warm room temperature. I think these simularites are one reason for the confusion. It’s not so complicated, really.

Add a comment

Think before you type

Culinate welcomes comments that are on-topic, clean, and courteous. For the benefit of the community we reserve the right to delete comments that contain advertising, personal attacks, profanity, or which are thinly disguised attempts to promote another website.

Please enter your comment

Format: Bare URLs are automatically linked; use this style: [http://www.example.com "place text to be linked here"] for prettier links. You may specify *bold* or _italic_ text. No HTML please.

Please identify yourself

Not a member? Sign up!

Please prove that you’re not a computer


Opinion

The opinion page provides a forum for discussion of ideas and issues in the food world that we feel are relevant to Culinate’s readers.

Got a well-written opinion about food? Seen a great Culinate-worthy editorial? We welcome submission of op-ed pieces.

Want more? Comb the archives.

Advertisement
Our Table

The Joy of Cooking app

A new tool for the kitchen

The latest in our collection of cooking apps.

Subscribe
Graze: Bites from the Site
First Person

The secret sharer

A father’s legacy

The Culinate Interview

Mollie Katzen

The vegetarian-cooking pioneer

Reviews

Down South

Barbecue, tamales, cocktails, and more

Local Flavors

A winter romesco sauce

Good on everything

Editor’s Choice