Today, the Mexican Government introduced its new chocolate bar, priced at less than $1USD. Made of 50% cocoa, powdered milk, vanilla. No refined sugar, no artificial flavourings.
Not to be outdone, Trump had the following announcement from the White House:
"Today, the USA introduced its new chocolate bar, priced at over $10. Made of 0% cocoa, hydrogenated corn syrup, and trans fats. No natural ingredients, no milk, no vanilla. It's bigly on flavor and very, very, tasty. We are taking pre-orders now at USAChocolate.gov."
Oh god why did I read that as trump fats 🤮
Are you sure they would use TRANS fats?
Since the traitors actually cut funding for transgenic scientific study because they don’t know what trans means, this is in the realm of realistic. That’s where we’re at.
They mean the rendered fat of the trans people they're planning to kill on an individual scale. Only half of that statement was a joke btw.
It must be packaged in a gold wrapper.
If we're using the hersey model, it would be 50% castor oil, and 50% butyric acid.
Oh, and it's gold. Not the wrapper, I mean, that is too, but the chocolate is a solid metallic gold color, like you are literally biting into a gold bar. It tastes nothing like chocolate.
The MAGA candy bar on a stick in a gold wrapper $49.99. On a stick because it is for suckers.
on a stick because it is for suckers
Excellent.
HAHAHA and they say having healthcare makes you feel freedom
bites into injection molded PFAS chocolate bar
They have NO idea what freedom tastes like.
spits out chewed candy bar
The best part is if you get the app subscription you can refill the taste for the next time you chew on it!
The lady doing the presentation said that it has 35% of cane sugar.
Also behind her you see "hecho con azúcar de caña" which means "made with cane sugar".
Cane sugar is generally at least a bit refined merely to purify it (so unlike High-Frutose Corn Syrup it's not made by chemically transforming something else).
That said, it's unclear if they use unrefined sugar cane, though that stuff is a complete total pita to work with hence I doubt it's not in the least bit refined.
Mind you I looked around and the info on this is all over the place: like for example saying "no added sugars" but then a bit further it turns out it has "cane sugar", which does mean that sugars were added (as the cocoa plant doesn't produce cane sugar, that would be the sugarcane plant).
Mind you, by all indications this beats almost all North American chocolates, but that hardly a tall barrier to overcome. It's pretty common to find similar stuff in European supermarkets.
What would sweeten it if it didn’t have added sugars? I’m not sure I fully understand what you’re saying.
He's saying its likely got cane sugar, which is basically "less" refined sugar. It seems unlikely it has no added sugars and likely what they are trying to say is: it has no high processed sugars/artificial sweeteners.
She also said it contains soy lecithin (just a little!) and salt
Hershey chocolate bar is rejected as chocolate because it doesn't have enough cocoa and is contaminated with lead.
Hershey's milk chocolate contains around 11% cocoa solids, meaning it doesn't meet the European standard according to some sources. Therefore, in some European countries, Hershey's is labeled as "chocolate-flavored" or "chocolate-flavored candy bar" rather than simply "chocolate".
The cadmium is actually part of a new marketing push: "Try Hershey's, they're Cadmiummy"
That actually made me want it a little, thank you
Makes me think of "American Cheese Product," "cheese" that is closer to plastic but tastes and feels like cheese.
contaminated with lead.
All dark chocolate is
Glad the quality chocolate and also coffee isn't wasted on the US.
Would be pearls before swines.
They don't know better anyway.
Oh yeah thanks for reminding me this is just another way the Government is taking money for the Lopez family
For reference, this is the legal definition in France (which still allows for some shitty chocolate BTW) :
Chocolat :
a) Désigne le produit obtenu à partir de produits de cacao et de sucres contenant, sous réserve du point b, pas moins de 35 % de matière sèche totale de cacao, dont pas moins de 18 % de beurre de cacao et pas moins de 14 % de cacao sec dégraissé.
Rough translation:
Chocolate is the product obtained from cocoa and sugars which shall contain no less (although see point b) than 35% of dry cocoa solids including 18% cocoa butter and 14% dry degreased cocoa.
Point b covers specialty chocolates, such as guanduja, etc.
Full text here(fr)
Edit: better formatting
What is the objective behind selling the chocolate bars? I will have to delve deeper into the topic.
I would presume it's because they're low in sugar. Due to exploding diabetes rates, Mexico has been making a concerted effort in the last few years to stem the consumption of sugary foods, drinks and snacks, particularly amongst kids. You can't have a cartoon mascot on a box of cereal, for example. They put big stickers over Tony the Tiger before changing the packaging completely. And the cost of snack foods has skyrocketed, making it largely unaffordable for lots of Mexican families. A bag of chips there costs more than it does in North America.
My guess is that this is part of that effort.
Makes sense. I recall watching a documentary showcasing how children were drinking from 2L soft drink bottles.
Mexico is in North America
She said it has 35% cane sugar, which pretty much means 35% of hydrocarbons just from that (if the sugar is refined, down to 32% if it's totally unrefined) plus about 8% of the powered milk is also hydrocarbons, so let's say it's 40g hydrocarbons per 100g of product which is very bad for diabetics.
And this is without going into the total caloric level, which must high, not only from all that sugar but also because cocoa butter is pretty caloric.
There's 100%-cocoa chocolate (or even the 90% one) and that stuff is very sour, so totally different.
This is fine for kids, because it avoids artificial ingredients, but it's not for diabetics.
Kind of ironic. Chocolate is naturally high in saturated fats, which hypothetically might contribute more toward diabetes than the sugar. On the other hand, high fat plus high sugar will certainly do a lot more damage than just one or the other.
American government: Builds concentration camps
Mexican government: Develops brand new chocolate bars
I'm happy to see there are still some governments out there who rule in the interest of the people.
The MEXICAN government ruling in the interests of the people? This is absolutely delusional. Mexico is one of the most corrupt, dangerous, and unstable places in the world. The country is quickly turning into a warzone because of the cartels, and both the current and previous presidents and their government aren't doing anything about it because they're bought.
A government making a chocolate bar to distract from the crippling poverty and crime is not good governance, it's the opposite.
Mexico's murder rate per 100 000 is 24.9, meaning you're on average safer in Mexico than in Newark, Memphis, Cleveland, Kansas City, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore or St. Louis.
Never mind that murders in Mexico are generally committed using American firearms, and for American money over drugs that are to be sold in America. Mexico's problem is America. So while we wait for America to selfdestruct, I guess they might as well get to work on public health issues.
Obviously not saying that cartels are not a huge fucking problem. It's hard to get good politicians when they murder anyone who resists them. But the cartels are in large part a product of America's failures. Europeans are not innocent either - fuck every coke snorting upper class brat who is having their pathetic highs at the expense of a whole fucking continent.
/rant
You say that like most governments are acting like the US, which is just so dumb. Your comment reeks of "I only know about the US government and nothing else".
if chocolate goes extinct I dont think im gonna make it, man
Not objecting, but what is the motivation of the Mexican government to do this? Have they done similar things before?
I don't think they've done something exactly like this, but they have aggressively tackled obesity in recent years, going as far as labeling all foods with excess fats, salt, and sugar. It's very visible on the package and it does influence what I buy.
But this is the way I found out we're doing this now. 😅
Government should probably provide the cheapest food and set the standard.
However ideology like this leads to issues in reality.
If a competitor gets lower prices would hint at some questionability. Government correction becomes suppression. Suppression leads to . . .?
However ideology like this leads to issues in reality.
Issues for who? The consumer? Or the capitalists?
If a competitor gets lower prices would hint at some questionability.
It would hint that it's a shitty product, presuming no foul play by the government and the product is not overpriced (doesn't appear to be).
Government correction becomes suppression. Suppression leads to . . .?
Government correction how? From suppression I think you mean lowering their price? The scenario you're laying out doesn't make sense.
The point of this kind of product is to be the baseline, no capitalist should be able to afford to offer the same product for less, because the government already has the lowest possible margin.
You start by making a better product, and you can charge whatever people decide the improved product is worth. It's a good thing that an asshole capitalist can't market a $7 bar of chocolate when a very good quality one is $1. At that price difference, your chocolate better be amazing.
Less profits for shareholders? And that is unacceptable!
/s
They sneak in just a little of that fentanyl. It's to die for.
Americans have such a shitty life that they're addicted to drugs and can't stop buying them, but sure, it's Mexicans sneaking it in.
American slop producers in shambles
If you haven't had chocolate with vanilla in it, consider trying it. It's my favorite chocolate additive. You need to purge ideas about vanilla being sweet or creamy. It's a tobaccoy rich flavor that adds some depth even to dark chocolate.
Just about all spirits that are aged in a wooden barrel gets a hint of vanilla flavor, hence i consider it a wood flavor.
Fun fact - Nilla Wafers stopped using real vanilla decades ago to cut costs, and the replacement vanilla-like flavoring is a wood derivative.
Since I discovered dark chocolate ice cream, I've been dying for someone to make a dark chocolate and vanilla twist soft serve.
We have government cheese! Why not.
Lol I don't know whether that's cool or uncool. "Government cheese" does sound epic though.
It's very good.
I've had it, its good...lardy, but good.
Thats why every fast food place has some kind of cheese stuffed cheesy cheese topped cheese (thats right we put cheese in it) cheezy meal
I'd love to have a taste.
Too bad I live in Northern Europe...probably not worth buying via the Internet even if it was possible...
Not the news I was expecting but kind of a cool way to address a variety of issues, like obesity, imports from US, generating revenue, subsidizing a national crop, etc.
Don't hold your breath, the Mexican government makes the American government under Republican rule seem competent. Just like how the American government is bought and paid for by corporations, the Mexican government is bought and paid for by the cartels.
Why'd they ruin it with powdered milk? 😣
Probably to make milk chocolate? They'll probably make dark chocolate too if they aren't already.
Milk chocolate is ruined chocolate.
Edit: I'll elaborate. The primary health benefit of chocolate is the high antioxidant levels. So if a chocolate producer wants their product to lean on the health-promoting side, the last thing they want to do is include an ingredient that eliminates the primary benefit that a thing is known for. Dairy literally acts as an antinutrient in this sense, blocking the absorption of antioxidants in chocolate. It's been shown to do this to coffee, tea, and berries as well.
Soy milk would be a relatively better choice, but then again, like dairy, soy is one of the most common allergens. So I would argue oat milk would be the best choice for "milk" chocolate.
I prefer my chocolate bars in liquid form!
50% is a little low for my taste. I wish it was more like 40 60 80. I'd be going for the 80. Or maybe just 50 & 70. I can live with 70.
I'm pretty sure this is being aimed at broke kids and parents so there are sacrifices
You have the privilege of being able to afford artisanal sea salt fair trade dark chocolate squares in a shiny foil bag, let these kids have a treat ok?
Don't get me wrong, I don't Mexico to sell mind Mexico selling chocolate but why are they thinking this is part of their job as government??
Citizen morale is probably the most important job of government but people like you want to make us forget that
I don’t Mexico to sell chocolate
Well I do Mexico to sell chocolate.
Comedy aside, I think its to address the extraordinary obesity issues that Mexico has faced in the past 20 years. Mexico is in my top 2 of countries I'm moving to as the US collapses, but they have real issues with refined foods and especially added sugar.
Mexico is 25th on this list with 36.1% of its population obese. The US is 13th at 42.9%.
It is. They've got you conditioned to accept that government is just there to hurt you, it's supposed to make society worth living in.
Try chocolate that wasn't made in America... Then imagine living a country with some of the best ingredients for chocolate making, and only seeing American chocolate on your store shelves... If capitalism is breaking stuff, the government is pretty much the only ones that can fix it. Though when the government is the thing that capitalism is breaking, I can see why you might not want them to do more than they currently do.
Government is supposed to be about pooling money so it can be more efficiently and effectively spent. Economies of scale. Even if the government only half does what you want and half does stuff you don't care about, you are still getting better bang for your buck than if you tried to use your own tiny amounts of money to buy the half you do want.
I only eat US made chocolate. Good stuff. Sometimes I'm tempted to buy some German garbage like Ritter Sport out of nostalgia from living there but then I slap myself and remember I don't have to eat out of a trash can.
Cacao is a national treasure, and America floods Mexico with Hershey's, Snickers, and other subpar "chocolate" and destroys local competition with cheap prices.
Fun fact:
The word "chocolate" is derived from the Nahuatl word Xocholatl (chikola-tl).
Governments subsidize foods all the time. Yours probably does, too.
Mexico already has Welfare Stores, and this bar is being made in co-op with Food for Wellness.
I’m barely old enough to remember government cheese.
Mexico has been trying a lot to reduce obesity through various product labeling. This looks like a step in that direction; a snack that uses an indigenous ingredient (chocolate) in a manner that complies with federal guidelines.
I did notice that the Mexican coke that I occasionally buy as a treat (in the US) got new labels printed on the bottle instead of just a sticker.
For some reason it doesn't taste as good as it used to though. Feels like even more sugar than previously maybe? I should look it up.
I don't follow Mexican politics closely, but this could be part of an effort to curb obesity. I've heard they introduced taxes on sugary drinks for this, so this might be another avenue.
If people are wanting cheap snacks, and private companies are only making unhealthy ones, you can introduce regulations to micromanage what they can produce, or you can introduce a complex taxation process to disincentivize sugar snacks. Or you can introduce your own product that meets a perceived unmet demand in an underserved market.
Government is the things we choose to do together. If the people choose healthy chocolate, then that's the job.
Totally agree, didn't mean to apply i'm against it but it just felt random. Thought maybe they were inspired by the donalds merchandise ¯(ツ)/¯
That might be one of the best bang par buck moves possible from their health care department.
If I had to guess, it's likely due to the obesity problem they were having
Because they tried leaving it to the private sector and people got unhealthy from eating cheap refined carbs?
so when do we see nestle/mars/whoever try to kill this?
Ehhh I mean I don't see how. Nestlé is the absolute scum of the fucking earth, but idk what they could do to stop the Mexican government. Nestlé's a bunch of fuckers, the lot of them, but they're not going to sell stuff cheaply or at a loss.
It starts with a right-wing conspiracy fueled media ecosystem, I imagine the "best" minds are already working on that
I always wondered what darker chocolate would be like when first ingredient on the list isn't sugar... Powered milk is sweet by itself, but without all the sugar I think 50% cocoa content might be more powerful than in 50% chocolate we have here in Europe.
Do you really not have dark chocolate bars where you are? It's pretty easy where I'm at to get 70% chocolate bars, and even 80% and 90%. You might have to go to a specialty shop for them but they're just in the grocery store where I'm at.
It's delicious, complex and depending on the origin or blend it can be fruity, dark, earthy, bitter, slightly spicy or taste like coffee. Proper dark chocolate has a kick of caffeine in it too. Hope you get a chance to try it!
I definitely want to eat this bar right now.
To be clear, this product is still 35% (natural cane) sugar (by weight, I assume).
Why does this post read like some kind of advertising bot posted it
Because we are used to anytime someone mentions a product name, they were paid to do so.
But this is just an interesting and useful government intervention to correct a capitalism-derived problem.
Waaaat? Keep big government out of my addiction!!!!
But has 3 seals, what the fuck.
Now I don't really know that much about their system, but I would assume that almost every sweet would get at least one seal unless it's made very healthy and not a sweet anymore? I don't really speak Spanish, but in the link you sent there is an illustration of a girl smiling and holding a bag of cookies with two seals and with sparkles on the bag. Maybe the point is to choose the ones with fewer seals, and not to try to go for none?
You are right! The less seals the better, and we do activily look for products that have less than 3 seals. This being a "healthy product" with 3 seals is a red flag, because there are non healty products that do have 3 seals too. May be 2 seals can be more acceptable, but 3?? Non-sugar Coca-Cola has 0 seals, it only has labels, which says that the product have caffeine and endulcorants.
Edit: I post the Coca-Cola example to make you see the irony, because is real.
This is a really neat system for making your uneducated populace healthier. People can't be bothered to read so a single number to indicate something is unhealthy is rad.
Between 14 and 96 pesos, or up to $5.15 usd
Oh, I’d really like to try that
My guess is check for people to start reselling it within a few months tha
Vanilla?!? Disgusting
How much lead?
For those who don't know: toxins in chocolate.
I was thinking about lead in Mexican candy in general, but apparently they have improved quite a bit since the early 2000s.
substitute the milk then it'll be cheaper and healthier