[HN Gopher] Research reveals ways lead and cadmium in chocolate ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Research reveals ways lead and cadmium in chocolate may be reduced
        
       Author : maerF0x0
       Score  : 113 points
       Date   : 2022-12-16 14:01 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (candyusa.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (candyusa.com)
        
       | sphars wrote:
       | Well shoot, now I'm concerned. Me and my pregnant wife both drink
       | Crio Bru[1] which is roasted, ground 100% cacao and brewed
       | similar to coffee. This has me thinking twice about it. It sounds
       | like heavy metals may be present in this stuff too
       | 
       | [1]: https://criobru.com/
        
         | Alex3917 wrote:
         | If you're brewing it in a drip coffee maker, the paper filter
         | should filter out the majority of the lead.
        
           | daniel_reetz wrote:
           | Paper coffee filters do not effectively remove lead.
           | Distillation and reverse osmosis remove lead.
        
           | mint2 wrote:
           | That is incredibly wrong and dangerous advice. There were
           | studies that showed coffee grounds could be used to filter
           | substantial but not all lead, is that what you misremembered?
        
             | Alex3917 wrote:
             | I was remembering this:
             | https://www.wired.com/2000/02/coffee-is-your-friend/
             | 
             | "A group of international scientists found that coffee
             | filters can remove from 78 to 90 percent of dissolved heavy
             | metals such as lead and copper from tap water."
             | 
             | It looks like the quote is incorrect though, and it is
             | actually the the ground coffee and not the paper filter
             | that's removing the lead.
             | 
             | Regardless, brewing ground cacao in the same way would
             | likely also filter out some of the lead by the same
             | mechanism, even if not as much. (Since the source of lead
             | is embedded throughout the ground beans, rather than coming
             | from the water which enters at the top of the column.)
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | You shouldn't say things confidently that you don't know
           | anything about, someone might believe you.
        
       | ulnarkressty wrote:
       | How could one test for heavy metals in foods at home? Supposedly
       | Indian spices and other plant products coming from there contain
       | non-trivial amounts of lead [0] [1].
       | 
       | [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5415259/
       | 
       | [1] https://www.consumerlab.com/reviews/psyllium-
       | supplements/psy...
        
         | version_five wrote:
         | Many spices apparently have high levels of heavy metals, I
         | don't know that it's specific to India. There was a study, I
         | think maybe on HN, where they analyzed a bunch of grocery store
         | spice brands and found heavy metals in many.
         | 
         | I know it's not helpful but i get the impression it's not
         | something easy to analyze at home.
         | 
         | With all this stuff (mercury in salmon, toxins in liver,
         | radioactive potassium in bananas), my take is that too much of
         | anything is probably bad an everything is probably fine as part
         | of a varied diet
        
           | stevenwoo wrote:
           | Consumer Reports did a widely reported survey last year but
           | it was almost random which spice would be contaminated - one
           | source of herb x would be fine but from a different source it
           | was contaminated. https://www.consumerreports.org/food-
           | safety/your-herbs-and-s... Spices that are colored (i.e.
           | turmeric) are particularly vulnerable.
           | https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.9b00744
        
           | valarauko wrote:
           | At least with spices you also need very little, so exposure
           | to heavy metal contaminants through that route would be
           | relatively lower.
        
         | maria2 wrote:
         | An XRF spectrometer might work on food.
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | First you need to burn the food product for a while to make
         | sure that most of what is left is heavy metals in the ashes.
         | (you typically need a flask for that, and an apparatus to get
         | all the fumes from the burning process safely out).
         | 
         | then from the ashes you need to dissolve them in water (easier
         | said that done), and use reagents based on the type of metal
         | you want to detect from the sample (titration). If you measure
         | accurately the volume of water used to dissolve and the amount
         | of ashes coming from the food product, you can determine a
         | concentration for a specific heavy metal.
         | 
         | Sigma-Aldritch probably sells the reagents you need for heavy
         | metal testing.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | What actual dose are we talking about?
       | 
       | Like, if I'm an average chocolate eater, what proportion of my
       | total lead intake will come from chocolate, vs other sources?
       | 
       | If it's under 0.1%, it isn't worth talking about. If it's 1%,
       | it's worth a passing thought. If it's 10% it's worth some effort
       | to avoid/fix. If it's 50%, I'd probably give up chocolate.
        
         | khiqxj wrote:
         | if you take the product they tested with the highest lead
         | concentration (2.4ug per serving), and ate 10 servings, you
         | would have 1/20th of the harmful concentration of lead,
         | according to my calculations:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34018344
        
           | hgomersall wrote:
           | It's cumulative, so you can't just take spot concentrations.
        
         | citizenpaul wrote:
         | I once read something and I don't remember if it was from a
         | good source. It said that one of the ways they can identify
         | bones from the last 100 year is that older bones have something
         | like 400x less lead traces in them. Basically everyone alive
         | has a degree of lead poisoning thanks to leaded gasoline.
        
       | khiqxj wrote:
       | initially this article read as a scam (lobbying corpo "non
       | profit" that claims to care about health and enviro but just
       | creates a worse net effect by wasting resources) and a bit of
       | research concludes:
       | 
       | CDC says [1]:
       | 
       | > Until 2012, children were identified as having a blood lead
       | "level of concern" if the test result was 10 or more micrograms
       | per deciliter (ug/dL) of lead in blood.
       | 
       | the lobbying corpo's very own charts [2] show no lead
       | concentration higher than 2.4ug per serving in any tested
       | product. if you ate a serving of chocolate that contains 2.4ug of
       | lead, you would have no more than 2.4ug/dL of lead, which is
       | lower than the CDC's previously stated harmful level. if the lead
       | was diluted through all the blood in your body (~5L = 50dL), your
       | blood level of lead would be 2.4ug/50dL = 0.048ug/dL, far below
       | the CDC's previously stated harmful level of 10ug/dL. with 10
       | servings, at which point you will have other issues, you will
       | have 0.48ug/dL, still 1/20th of the harmful level.
       | 
       | 1. https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/data/blood-lead-reference-
       | valu...
       | 
       | 2. https://www.asyousow.org/environmental-health/toxic-
       | enforcem...
       | 
       | disclaimer: i cant do science or math, maybe i calculated
       | something wrong
        
       | maerF0x0 wrote:
       | Via news article : https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dark-chocolate-
       | metals-lead-cons...
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | We must go deeper: https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-
         | safety/lead-and-...
         | 
         | This source article contains the key information that the heavy
         | metals are not contaminants introduced by the processors, they
         | are present in the beans.
        
           | kristopolous wrote:
           | That's what I was expecting.
           | 
           | Calling out for botanists to weigh in here - is there
           | something that makes chocolate uniquely susceptible to this
           | and if so, is it part of a class of other plants we typically
           | eat? And lastly, this is for food chemists, is there a
           | reliable way to remove such things in the manufacturing that
           | can be added?
        
             | Reason077 wrote:
             | Not a botanist, but this is not unique to cocoa. Rice, for
             | example, is known to take up arsenic, cadmium, and other
             | nasties from soils. But it varies significantly depending
             | on the rice variety and where it is gown. Basmati rice
             | grown in California, Pakistan, and India is known to have
             | low levels of arsenic compared to most other types of rice.
        
             | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
             | Bioaccumulation? It does happen with heavy metals and
             | plants.
             | 
             | Soil quality is the next question.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioaccumulation
             | 
             | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02652030500387
             | 5...
        
             | Semaphor wrote:
             | Your second question is answered in the article:
             | 
             | > For lead, that will mean changes in harvesting and
             | manufacturing practices, says Danielle Fugere, president of
             | As You Sow. Such practices could include minimizing soil
             | contact with beans as they lie in the sun, and drying beans
             | on tables or clean tarps away from roads or with protective
             | covers, so lead-contaminated dust won't land on them.
             | Another option is finding ways to remove metal contaminants
             | when beans are cleaned at factories, Fugere says.
             | 
             | > Solving for cadmium is trickier, though it is possible,
             | DiBartolomeis says. Carefully breeding or genetically
             | engineering plants to take up less of the heavy metal could
             | help, though that could take several years. Other potential
             | options include replacing older cacao trees with younger
             | ones, because cadmium levels tend to increase as the plants
             | get older, and removing or treating soil known to be
             | contaminated with cadmium.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | rhplus wrote:
             | Cacao grows in rainforests, so perhaps they're adapted to
             | rich soils that over time have become net accumulators of
             | heavy metals.
             | 
             | There's examples of other plants that thrive in the
             | presence of heavy metals, such as this one that "bleeds"
             | nickel rich sap:
             | 
             | https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45398434.amp
        
               | yyyk wrote:
               | Ah, so Tiberium is technically possible...
        
             | passwordoops wrote:
             | Generally plants are excellent at removing metals from the
             | environment and concentrating them in different tissues,
             | depending on the species and metal. Poplar trees, for
             | example, have often been used for remediation of Mercury
             | contamination of souls
             | 
             | Not sure about the specifics of cocoa, but not beyond the
             | pale to see cadmium, for example, be concentrated in the
             | beans.
             | 
             | As for removal from food stuffs, it really depends on how
             | the metals are bound to the plant material. Could be as
             | simple as heating up in a vat with agitation, to requiring
             | something so drastic it changes the nature of the
             | chocolate.
             | 
             | Best way is to reduce the amount that can be integrated by
             | the plant, but good luck with that. The farmers would
             | probably have to import heavy-metals reduced soil
        
           | jt2190 wrote:
           | > metals are not contaminants introduced by the processors,
           | they are present in the beans.
           | 
           | That's true of the cadmium, but not the lead:
           | 
           | > ... [L]ead seems to get into cacao after beans are
           | harvested. The researchers found that the metal was typically
           | on the outer shell of the cocoa bean, not in the bean itself.
           | Moreover, lead levels were low soon after beans were picked
           | and removed from pods but increased as beans dried in the sun
           | for days. During that time, lead-filled dust and dirt
           | accumulated on the beans. "We collected beans on the ground
           | that were heavily loaded with lead on the outer shell,"
           | DiBartolomeis says.
        
           | Semaphor wrote:
           | Link for Europeans: https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
           | .consumerreports.or...
        
         | mistersquid wrote:
         | The referenced study treats dark chocolate but, since cacao is
         | cacao, wouldn't milk chocolate confected from these beans also
         | have commensurately elevated levels of cadmium and lead?
         | 
         | And, if so, shouldn't this extrapolation be communicated to
         | consumers?
        
           | Reason077 wrote:
           | Milk chocolate contains significantly less cacao than dark
           | chocolate. Typically 20-25% cocoa solids, where as dark
           | chocolate is in the 50-90% range. So it should have
           | proportionately _less_ cadmium etc per unit of weight.
        
       | dzhiurgis wrote:
       | Explains why only crazies like dark chocolate /s
        
       | hgomersall wrote:
       | Interesting that two different Lindt bars fall into different
       | categories. Do they really use different beans for those? It
       | feels like a sampling effect.
        
         | mjh2539 wrote:
         | Right, I get the impression that their sample sizes were very
         | small.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | I find it hard to believe that much lead sticks to the sticky
       | coco beans while they're being dried just out in the open air.
       | 
       | I go outside too - is the same amount of lead sticking to me and
       | my lungs?
       | 
       | Either we're talking super low lead levels here, or it's
       | something else about the processing that causes this - like for
       | example the fleet of leaded fuel powered tools being used to cut
       | the beans down.
        
         | spchampion2 wrote:
         | Many countries permitted leaded gasoline for a long time, and
         | many of the countries that kept it around the longest are also
         | places that grow a lot of chocolate. Lead from car exhaust
         | tends to stick around in the environment for a long time - as
         | part of the soil and the dust in the air.
         | 
         | In South America [1]:
         | 
         | > The first country in South America initiating the phase-out
         | of leaded gasoline was Brazil, moving toward alcohol fuels and
         | unleaded gasoline from AD 1975 on, and achieving a total phase-
         | out in 1991. On the contrary, unleaded gasoline in Bolivia,
         | Chile, and Peru was not introduced before AD 1990-1991, and
         | leaded gasoline was still in use until 1995 (Bolivia), 2004
         | (Peru), and 2005 (Chile).
         | 
         | In Africa [2]:
         | 
         | > But lead was still common in fuel in Africa and the Middle
         | East. In 2002, UNEP organized a coalition of African
         | governments and oil companies to promote the phaseout of leaded
         | gas, the supposed vehicular benefits of which have been found
         | to apply only to very old cars driven in extreme conditions.
         | Lead was history in sub-Saharan Africa by 2006, and by 2014 was
         | found only in Algeria, Iraq, Yemen, Myanmar, North Korea, and
         | Afghanistan.
         | 
         | [1] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4643815/ [2]
         | - https://qz.com/africa/2053227/leaded-gasoline-is-now-
         | banned-...
        
           | dehrmann wrote:
           | > Many countries permitted leaded gasoline
           | 
           | Avgas is still leaded in the US.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | And if I were the president, I would ban avgas tomorrow.
             | 
             | The planes can all stay grounded till a replacement is
             | available. The damage caused far outweighs the benefits of
             | using it.
             | 
             | Yes, I know ambulance planes probably use it... Yes I know
             | farmers use it for crop dusting. Yes I know some remote
             | alaskan communities rely on flights for supplies. But
             | spreading lead dust throughout the whole nation is worse
             | than not having those things.
        
               | benlivengood wrote:
               | > Yes I know farmers use it for crop dusting.
               | 
               | In this context that takes on a very different meaning. I
               | wonder how much lead is directly from crop dusting. Avgas
               | is ~1g/liter of lead and 100LL is 0.5g/liter. A small
               | plane burns ~50 liters per hour.
        
         | soco wrote:
         | Are the beans cut down with chainsaws? _very confused_
        
           | sva_ wrote:
           | Chopped open with machete usually. It's a rather delicate
           | process, as you must chop through the outer shell, but not
           | into the beans, as it would make them extremely bitter.
        
       | croisillon wrote:
       | Cad(mium )buri(ed in it)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | chronicsonic wrote:
       | Cannabis has this problem as well, processing it with certain
       | types of stainless steel can cause chromium to be absorbed into
       | the cannabis.
       | 
       | Source: https://www.analyticalcannabis.com/articles/what-the-
       | cannabi...
        
       | passwordoops wrote:
       | Looks like chocolate is a known source of heavy metals. Here's
       | just one study I found in Google Scholar:
       | 
       | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S08891...
        
         | davidmurdoch wrote:
         | So the raw beans have heavy metals? Or does the processing
         | introduce them?
        
           | passwordoops wrote:
           | From the OP article, some metals are exclusively from the
           | beans (cadmium), others are introduced later (lead).
           | 
           | But yeah, every time you're eating plant material, there will
           | be some trace level of heavy metal. And it just increases up
           | the food chain.
           | 
           | Bioaccumulation is pretty cool as a phenomenon
        
           | dr_orpheus wrote:
           | The article says that cadmium is in the beans (because it is
           | in the soil). But lead is likely introduced in processing.
        
       | specialist wrote:
       | Avoidance seems increasingly difficult. Mercury, lead,
       | microplastics, herbicide, whatever. We're living in the toxic
       | soup.
       | 
       | I hope someone(s) are working on detox solutions. Hopefully safer
       | than the current chelation therapies used for life threatening
       | cases.
        
       | davzie wrote:
       | I swear this site will make you a nervous wreck about eating or
       | bringing anything into your home if you took it too seriously.
        
         | sekh60 wrote:
         | I try not to stress too much. One has to die of something after
         | all.
        
       | zzzeek wrote:
       | here's the actual brands and products:
       | 
       | https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-safety/lead-and-...
       | 
       | or better:
       | 
       | https://www.asyousow.org/environmental-health/toxic-enforcem...
       | 
       | I go through the Equal Exchange 80% dark product about one bar
       | every few weeks so I will be researching cadmium a bit
       | 
       | (later)
       | 
       | So after some research on cadmium and the specific data
       | California has on it
       | (https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/chemicals/cadmium), I think
       | my general take on the Equal Exchange chocolate I eat quite a lot
       | of is that the saturated fat (15g) is still orders of magnitude
       | more dangerous than the cadmium.
       | 
       | Interestingly, the product itself seems much less appealing to me
       | knowing it has this trace level of cadmium that will likely not
       | affect me in any way, vs. the saturated fat that I already knew
       | contributes towards directly life-threatening LDL cholesterol.
        
         | UniverseHacker wrote:
         | Saturated fat increases LDL by increasing the particle size,
         | whereas it seems to be increases in particle number that are
         | associated with increased cardiovascular risk. This is likely
         | why studies fail to find any real world increase in risk, and
         | the saturated fat heart disease theory, while still under
         | debate, is mostly out of favor nowadays.
        
           | Georgelemental wrote:
           | Yes, saturated fat is unjustly maligned. And from an
           | evolutionary perspective, it doesn't make sense that it would
           | be so harmful; pre-agricultural diets had lots of saturated
           | fat so human metabolisms should have evolved to handle it
           | well.
        
             | idiotsecant wrote:
             | Evolutionary arguments here don't make much sense - the
             | vast majority of human history we had average lifespans on
             | the order of 25 or 30 years. If the negative effects of
             | something (like heart disease) typically fail to manifest
             | within that window there is no selection mechanism by which
             | this kind of eating has an effect on long-term evolution of
             | the species.
        
               | robcohen wrote:
               | I thought that was only true if you included infant
               | deaths. I haven't researched it but that's what I as a
               | layman thought.
        
               | UniverseHacker wrote:
               | As others have mentioned, this is true, but is a great
               | illustration of how averages are extremely misleading
               | when representing non-normally distributed data, and are
               | used excessively in popular culture and media. Modal
               | (most common single digit) lifespan of hunter gatherers
               | is usually in the 70s, despite low averages (mean) due to
               | high infant mortality [1]. Modern health care massively
               | reduced infant mortality, but doesn't change mortality
               | much in middle years, when most people don't actually
               | need any healthcare.
               | 
               | [1] https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/
               | 978-3-3...
        
               | stjohnswarts wrote:
               | That's also incomplete knowledge. If you made it to adult
               | hood your chances of living to 50 or 60 are way
               | underestimated by "pop culture ancient humans" knowledge.
               | Kids are kind of weak compared to adults immune system
               | wise (in most cases!).
        
               | Georgelemental wrote:
               | You are off by a factor of 2. If you exclude deaths in
               | early childhood people regularly made it to their 60s
        
               | Swizec wrote:
               | But if everyone is done having kids by their mid 30's,
               | the increase in heart disease risk in their 50's still
               | wouldn't show up as an evolutionary pressure. Especially
               | when you consider humans are tribal animals and parental
               | survival is not critical to offspring survival as long as
               | the tribe keeps going.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | UniverseHacker wrote:
               | One interesting hypothesis I've heard is that there is
               | actually a huge selection pressure for long human
               | lifespans, to preserve cultural knowledge and skills
               | necessary for survival, as well as to help with child
               | care. The parenting age adults can't exactly hunt and
               | gather if they have to watch babies all day long- yet
               | human children are pretty helpless and need almost
               | constant care for years.
               | 
               | As a dad, even in modern times I couldn't work at all
               | without someone to help with parenting... however if I
               | can work, I could bring in enough resources to support an
               | entire family.
        
               | pbhjpbhj wrote:
               | >The parenting age adults can't exactly hunt and gather
               | if they have to watch babies all day long- yet human
               | children are pretty helpless and need almost constant
               | care for years.
               | 
               | Gathering food or light manual work? You just stick 'em
               | in a papoose (we used a shoulder sling). Heavier work,
               | hang the papoose in a tree. Once they can walk they can
               | gather food and do light work.
               | 
               | I'm not saying grandparents wouldn't make it easier, but
               | babies/toddlers are quite adaptable.
               | 
               | I think for hunting (with weapons) you'd want them to be
               | at least 5.
        
               | stjohnswarts wrote:
               | I would imagine having pepaw & memaw around to watch the
               | kiddos while mom and dad were out gathering food would be
               | a huge boon as far as keeping your progeny alive to
               | reproduce again.
        
           | khiqxj wrote:
           | well chocolate is high in calories and much more so when you
           | buy a product that adds a bunch of sugar. this is relevant
           | because people who eat a lot of chocolate have bad health but
           | still probably dont have any lead problems aside from subtle,
           | low dose related ones, which will be hard to distinguish from
           | having unhealthy calory intake
        
             | UniverseHacker wrote:
             | Most "chocolate" products really have little, if any
             | chocolate. Google says Hershey's milk chocolate is only 11%
             | actual cacao. Still, plenty of people eat 85-100% cacao
             | dark chocolate, or even savory chocolate foods like Mole in
             | Mexican food, which I think should be considered separately
             | from, e.g. chocolate flavored candy. Interestingly, cacao
             | is one of the best dietary sources of copper, and it seems
             | plausible that getting more copper this way would overall
             | reduce risk of cardiovascular disease [1-3].
             | [1] https://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/11/chocolate-what-
             | is-the-optimal-dose/        [2]
             | https://perfecthealthdiet.com/recommended-supplements/
             | [3] https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/204871/dark-chocolate-
             | cuts-heart-deaths-australian-study
        
               | khiqxj wrote:
               | you get enough copper (to meet national recommendations)
               | just by eating anything, no need to seek it out.
               | 
               | what i want to know is how to correctly interpret all
               | these studies that claim some food substantially
               | increases health outlooks.
               | 
               | while those are spam websites (buy this, buy that,
               | amazonamazonamazonamazonamazon), its still possible for
               | them to be correct
        
           | Rury wrote:
           | I've heard that, for the most part, small dense LDL is what
           | is mostly found in cardiovascular disease.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | stjohnswarts wrote:
         | You might want to look up more recent research on saturated
         | fat. there's still no doubt that hydrolyzed fats are horrible
         | for you though.
        
           | zzzeek wrote:
           | my cholesterol goes up proportionally to saturated fat
           | intake, the link between saturated fat and LDL cholesterol
           | (and LDL cholesterol and heart disease) is quite clear
           | despite a huge desire from the public for there to be other
           | "studies" that somehow make it OK to down any amount of
           | dairy. I spent many years hoping for such studies all the
           | while my 300-level cholesterol was lining my arteries with
           | plaque until I finally had to get on statins (not a vegan
           | here).
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | And that's in the food supply which is supposedly regulation and
       | monitored (not).
       | 
       | You should see what they ALWAYS find in supplements which are not
       | at all regulated and definitely not monitored no matter what
       | anyone thinks or claims.
       | 
       | https://www.consumerreports.org/food-safety/your-herbs-and-s...
       | 
       | Those are spices but it's in every vitamin, mineral, etc.
       | supplement you've ever taken. There are allowed limits but they
       | blow right through them because there's no testing and no
       | oversight and no penalty for doing so.
       | 
       | And yes lead is a forever chemical and yes it is making everyone
       | stupid, this is well proven science beyond all argument, average
       | IQ went way up when leaded car gas was finally banned but lead
       | still sprayed everywhere around airports from aviation fuel.
        
       | CincinnatiMan wrote:
       | As someone who eats about 1-2oz of dark chocolate (usually 85%)
       | per day, this is concerning. However I have found the dark
       | chocolate to be a great stimulant, giving me motivation without
       | anxiety the way caffeine does. Now I'm unsure what to do.
        
         | Tenoke wrote:
         | Supposedly the stimulating effect of chocolate mostly comes
         | from PEA (Phenylethylamine) which people just buy in pills to
         | use as a nootropic. So you can just try that if it's only about
         | the effect. Though you'd likely need maois and maybe something
         | else to better recreate what you get from chocolate.
        
         | trashface wrote:
         | You could try caffeine with L-Theanine supplements. Though I
         | guess those could have lead too. The site I get mine from (bulk
         | supplements) does have a lead warning when you buy, but as I
         | understand it, they do that because lead testing is so
         | expensive its easier to just put up the warning (which they
         | need to be able to sell in California). Of course it could also
         | be laden with lead for all I know. You can get L-Theanine from
         | lots of places though and its most true teas (black, green,
         | white, matcha, etc).
        
         | paulbaumgart wrote:
         | Some brands source their cacao from less contaminated areas:
         | https://www.consumerlab.com/news/best-dark-chocolate-and-coc...
        
       | Semaphor wrote:
       | Directly related and possibly of interest, the 381-page "As You
       | Sow" report "Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate
       | Products" [0] that "Details Simple, Safe, and Low-Cost Solutions
       | to Reduce Levels of Lead and Cadmium in Chocolate" Requires an
       | email address to download though.
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.asyousow.org/blog/2022/8/17/new-report-
       | explains-...
        
         | derbOac wrote:
         | One thing that's apparent from that report is the year effect.
         | Older, pre-2022 tests were much more likely to have very low
         | levels of heavy metals; more recent, 2022 tests are more likely
         | to have high levels. This is true within brand as well. At
         | least it strongly looked that way with many of the brands I
         | saw.
         | 
         | I don't know if that's due to testing effects, or agricultural
         | or processing changes, or shifts in regional supply (maybe due
         | to the pandemic?), or something else. But some of those results
         | make it look like it's a relatively recent, and sharply growing
         | problem.
        
       | cosmicradiance wrote:
       | I am yet to discover anything healthy produced at large-scale by
       | profit earning companies.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-16 23:02 UTC)