 |
| Retrieved from http://dyingforchocolate.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/chocolate-for-leaner-you.html. April 11, 2012. |
The point of this blog post is to bring attention to the public using their discretion in taking popular advice from published studies and health advocates. It is easy to jump on the bandwagon and follow the well-tread road, however it is more important to explore all alternatives and be critically literate with popular media. On one hand, the general public is recommended to consume chocolate due to its polyphenol content which can help alleviate inflammation and oxidative stress commonly associated with cardiovascular disease and atherosclerosis.² Consumption of chocolate is sometimes seen as an alternative to the recommendation of two glasses of wine daily. However, others bring to attention to the processing and manufacturing process which can alter the content of cocoa, thus reducing its effectiveness in cardiovascular health maintenance.¹ What many articles suggest is consuming pure cocoa, whether it be cocoa powder or cocoa liquor polyphenols. More often, people will purchase milk chocolate thinking the same benefits will be reached, not knowing the addition of sugar, milk and other ingredients lead to a calorie-rich manufactured chocolate product. It is not the scope of this blog post to explore every possible benefit and risk associated with chocolate consumption, but to bring to light the consumer’s responsibility to evaluate situations critically and realize what is best for them.
I must admit that I have become victim to this mentality and followed the doctor’s orders blindly. My naivety gets the best of me and I will do anything if you tell me it is “healthy." What I know now (mainly because of ALES 204) is to analyze every aspect of an article, i.e. author’s background, research funding, and peer reviewers to name a few. “Think outside the box” is a phrase that can apply to many settings as the truth is not always black and white and requires us to use a more in-depth sort of thinking. A popular marketing tool is playing up on key words to provoke a thought and feeling in the consumer, thereby prompting them to purchase their product. One such strategy is labeling a food product “natural.” The Globe and Mail outlines how food companies can get away with calling their product “natural” by finding an alternative to commonly-used preservatives. What many are not aware of is that these new alternatives may be just as destructive on your health. This is where it becomes our responsibility as a consumer to do our research before giving in blindly to published work and coy marketing strategies.
There are an endless amount of times when we, the consumer, have been brainwashed into believing what we are told. Lindsay Gervais, a fellow ALES student, updated a Wiki stub on “superfoods,” calling to attention how misconceptions are a frequent occurring phenomenon among food products. Products can be labelled as “superfoods,” giving the idea that there are superb benefits. My main message is not to scare you into not believing anything that we are told over the news or social media, but to be more aware of the origins and the advice. Do your homework!!
1. Andres-Lacueva C, Monagas M, Khan N, et al. (2008) Flavanol and flavonol contents of cocoa powder products: influence of the manufacturing process. J Agric Food Chem 56(14):3111–7.
2. Murga-Fernandez, L., Tarin, J.J., Garcia-Perez, M.A., and Cano, A. (2011) The impact of chocolate on cardiovascular health. Maturitas 69:312-321.
What do you find is the hardest part about researching both sides of these conflicts? With all of the research done on the benefits or risks of chocolate what information has most influenced your opinion on the issue? I really hope that the health benefits argument is most correct!
ReplyDeleteI agree Jessie, it's frustrating one day hearing one thing about something and the next hearing something completely opposite. Sometimes I think it is because of misinformation being reported by certain sources, but at times I think that is reflective of reality. Things are not simply black and white, yes chocolate might have some health benefits but it may have negative effects as well. The main problem is the bias of the article. If the article takes the stance of chocolate is good then they report on the positive effects of chocolate and vice versa. When reading information one must always maintain a neutral position until they have looked at both sides.
ReplyDeleteAlana Soderberg
I find myself in the same situation! I always find information that tells me one thing, then the next day hearing that it does something else! I agree with what Alana has said in her last comment, things are not black and white! There has to be a lot of research to find out if our interesting information findings are actually accurate! Until you know both sides of the story, you cannot make an informed decision about a topic. I think that this is for everything, and not just about chocolate! I really hope that there is a link to being healthy though, I really enjoy snacking on a Twix! hahaha:)
ReplyDeleteKelsey Rutar
I'm confronted with the same issues when given information about margarine vs. butter. Some strongly advocate that margarine is better because it contains less saturated fats while others claim that butter is better because margarine contains harmful trans fats although there are methods to avoid creating trans fats now or that it is a processed food and thus 'unnatural' while butter is natural.
ReplyDeleteI find that a good way to determine the motive behind some of these studies is to research the background of whoever is advocating or speaking negatively about a certain food group. They might have a vested interest in either promoting that food group or speaking out against it.
The fact that food companies can get away with calling their food "natural" by finding alternate commonly used preservatives is a little skewed. That changes my whole perspective on ingredients now. When I'm reading the ingredients and it mentions "natural" now instead of thinking good I am going to have to really critically think to myself if the word was just put there or if it is scientifically true. I won't be discouraged to eat it but I will be a little more wary after reading your post!
ReplyDelete