DON’T MESS WITH OUR CHOCOLATE!

Student Contributor: Shelly Malgee
Baking & Pastry Arts Degree Program:
A.O.S. in Baking & Pastry Arts

As many of you are aware, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) controls the legal definitions of foods for sale in the United States. For example, “tomato soup” must contain tomatoes, “cranberry juice” must actually contain cranberries, etc. Legally, the American public has to be accurately informed of what is contained within the product they’re purchasing.

In spring of 2007, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), in conjunction with a number of trade associations including the U.S. Chocolate Manufacturer’s Association, submitted a “citizen’s petition” to the FDA. This petition addresses hundreds of food products, but it is the proposed amendment to the Standard of Identity of chocolate that has many in our industry up in arms.

As it stands, the law dictates that the fat used in “chocolate” must be cocoa butter. With this petition, the GMA is asking the FDA expand the standard to allow any vegetable fat to be used. The implication? Inferior products, currently labeled “chocolatey” or “chocolate-flavored,” could legally be sold as real chocolate.

It is the cocoa butter that gives chocolate its smooth melt and silky mouthfeel, so a chocolate-like substance made with vegetable oil will feel greasy on the tongue and can even have an objectionable aftertaste. I can find no reason that consumers would want the standard lowered; it’s all about the big candy companies’ desire to lower costs—as vegetable oil sells for a third of the price of cocoa butter.

In addition to the cheating of the American consumer, a switch away from cocoa butter would also have a dramatic impact on cocoa growers in Central and South America, the Caribbean, Africa, and Southeast Asia. For years, the American chocolate industry has been aiding these developing countries to improve working and economic conditions for cacao farmers. Decreasing the demand for cocoa butter now would have a disastrous economic impact on their livelihoods, since market prices would plummet as more and more American manufacturers chose cheaper fat alternatives.

However, a handful of artisan chocolate companies have spoken out in opposition of the GMA’s proposal. Guittard Chocolate Company led the fight to give “a more complete picture of the severe impact [it] would have on the pubic and the entire industry.” Their “Don’t Mess with Our Chocolate” campaign urged consumers to petition the FDA in protest, and the FDA did in fact lengthen the “public response” time period as a result. (To learn more about the campaign, visit www.dontmesswithourchocolate.com).

It may seem a frivolous concern, but consider a world in which you find yourself tasting an unpleasant change in your favorite candy bar—you know, the one you’ve enjoyed for years—without any notice at all. It’s got the same wrapper. You’ve just paid the same premium price. But the product is clearly inferior. That world may seem far off, especially since the FDA will probably take years before granting a decision, but it’s still a disturbing trend that we as professionals, as well as consumers, should be aware of.