okay ,okay many people have debated this elsewhere and i'm new here and do not know if this debate has been brought up here before, but, for once and for all, Is chocolate good for us to consume or not?

i read an article saying that jeremy saffron(sp) in which he did much research on cocoa before any other raw expert and found it to negatively effect your liver, ulitametly, like it's the worst thing that will happen to you if you consume it. He went on to say that animals won't touch it without milk or sugar in it and I dont know how much of an argument since i as a human love it plain.

He then said it was "addictive" I havent had much in my life but for the last three dyas ive consumed it everyday and i'll say i get an immediate boost from it, although I do add fruit and sugar to it. I assume if i was REALLY cleaned out from my past diet i might feel it's positve effects even more, without the sugar.

sugar or not, i love it.

and if TOO MUCH of it effects our liver, why can't we have it occasionally? Too much of anything may be harmful, even avocados, which arent argued about and loved and agreeed upon by all, I think. thats the vibe i get about the avo. there adored.no arguments there

so what have you found out about chocolate? would you consume it? if so, approximately how often? Do you think this is the key to taking cocao? on occasion? Thank you in advance.

How do you feel after the boost if over? The best way to see if something is working for you is to feel all aspects of eating the food - how it feels as you eat it, and how you feel afterward. If you pay attention to how you feel, especially after you come down from the high, you can get in touch with whether cacao works for you or not.

ive always been a mentally stable women, except for a few breakdowns, and never crash after anything. foods i avoid are breads, pastas, rice. those carbs tend to depress me. but as for sugar and stimulants, theyve never seemed to have me come down as i have heard many people speak of. I feel great from cocao, no burn, ever.

however my "intuition" does tell me to use cocao sparingly if im wondering if it's gonna be bad for my liver later on, to take precaution. maybe NO ONE knows the truth about cocao.ha.ha.

If I were you, I would listen to your intuition. I do that for myself.

Cocao is a very good source of copper, an essential nutrient, but it's possible to get too much copper. A (tolerable) Upper Intake (UL) of copper has been set at 5 mg/day by the European Economic Union.

"2.6 Typical intakes ... Vegetarian diets provided greater
dietary intakes of copper, approximately 2.1-3.9 mg/day."

[ec.europa.eu]

Cocoa powder has 0.2 mg copper/tbsp(5g) [www.nutritiondata.com] so eating 5 tbsp/day would add 1 mg of copper.

Eating 5 tbsp (25g) of dry cocoa per day, for the average vegetarian, would put copper intake at about 3.1-4.9 mg/day, which is below the UL.

Eating 1 cup (86g) of dry cocoa would add 3.3 mg/day of copper, which would put the average vegetarian over the UL for copper.

Your call...

What I like about cocoa is no animal has to die and it tastes good.

raw cacao is very good for you, has very high amount of antioxidents per weight, rich in minerals such as magnesium, contains mood boosting chemicals and precursors and most of all is tasty. It does contain caffiene and theobromine though so for anyone with weak adrenals may want to give it a miss.

I agree with Bryan; listen to your intuition. I would rather eat something and let my own body determine if it is good for me rather than emotionally batter myself because of food that others tell me not to eat.

You will find the answer through your own means. Bruce Lee has this amazing quote applicable to your situation. I apologize if its out of context. It goes like this:

"Don't get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water." -- B.L

Some people have a genetic intolerance to the main chemical in cacao, theobromine. It can toxify the liver of such an individual, and there aren't specific accurate tests for the intolerance, so you really have to go by how you feel over time on cacao.

They say that cocoa contains oxalic acid in amounts that would decrease absorption of calcium. Some say it deletes magnesium, also.

[jds.fass.org]

I am not pleased to have to quote a study that uses animals. Psychopaths at work, but, hey, it does appear that we should think twice, perhaps, about ingesting chocolate regularly?

On the other hand, maybe if a person has a buildup of calcium in the soft tissues, eating chocolate would undo that, same as the intentional, deliberate consumption of phytic acid for this purpose. But for those who are not stuffing themselves with dairy products, chocolate should be a once-in-awhile thing.

I don't eat a high-Ca diet, and when I have chocolate I get cramps in my legs, so while that is considered merely anecdotal, it's plenty "scientific" for me.

However, Norman Walker says in his juicing book that only heated oxalic acid is bad for you. So raw spinach, etc. is "good". Geeze, it does get complicated, doesn't it! I also was under the impression that there is no such thing as raw cocoa; it is all heated somewhere along the line. Anybody know for sure?

I used to have a big bag of cacao powder and used to use it for chocolate mylks etc. I started to go overboard with the amount and even though it tasted ok, i didn't feel so good afterwards.

The way I feel right now, if I had the time and the ingredients, my sweet tooth would have me making a chocolate mylk for breakfast everyday... Though sweet tooths aren't always to be trusted

IMO, the only redeeming quality of "raw" (i.e. fermented) cacao is that it is "less bad" than cooked, processed chocolate.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2010 05:51PM by Omega.

Horsea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They say that cocoa contains oxalic acid in
> amounts that would decrease absorption of calcium.
> Some say it deletes magnesium, also.
>
> [jds.fass.org]
>
> I am not pleased to have to quote a study that
> uses animals. Psychopaths at work, but, hey, it
> does appear that we should think twice, perhaps,
> about ingesting chocolate regularly?
>
> On the other hand, maybe if a person has a buildup
> of calcium in the soft tissues, eating chocolate
> would undo that, same as the intentional,
> deliberate consumption of phytic acid for this
> purpose. But for those who are not stuffing
> themselves with dairy products, chocolate should
> be a once-in-awhile thing.
>
> I don't eat a high-Ca diet, and when I have
> chocolate I get cramps in my legs, so while that
> is considered merely anecdotal, it's plenty
> "scientific" for me.
>
> However, Norman Walker says in his juicing book
> that only heated oxalic acid is bad for you. So
> raw spinach, etc. is "good". Geeze, it does get
> complicated, doesn't it! I also was under the
> impression that there is no such thing as raw
> cocoa; it is all heated somewhere along the line.
> Anybody know for sure?

Horsea,
I actually find these old studies interesting, like a history lesson. The one linked to is fairly typical of animal studies. In this case, one group of 4 week old rats are fed a milk diet and another group a cocoa milk diet. Both groups are supplemented with an unquantified mineral drink --

"All rats were fed daily a mineral mixture consisting of iron, copper, and manganese salts, as recommended by Elvehjem et al. (4). The salt solutions were mixed with a 10 per cent sugar solution and fed in supplement dishes. The rats consumed it greedily as soon as it was placed in the cages." (page 3)

The cocoa group got about 10% of their calories from cocoa, which is a little like humans eating a whole cup of cocoa powder daily, plus they were getting the copper/mineral supplement, cocoa already high in copper. It is quite an abrupt change of diet for a little rat, the study lasting for 5 weeks then times up... It's difficult to apply the results to humans, as the study admits, though it's interesting nonetheless.

The cocoa used in the study had an oxalic acid content of 0.54% by dry weight. I'm not sure how that compares to other foods, particularly raw foods, so sorry can't answer your question.

I don't consider it a 'superfood'cos it doesn't make me feel that great afterwards -after the initial high I can get palpitations and a bit jittery. But I do like it cos it's so tasty... and therein lies another problem though; when I have it in I'm tempted to make lovely choc smoothies, when otherwise I'd be making a green juice or smoothie... so my green intake goes down then...

if I make stuff with it I tend to mix in carob with it, still tastes great but 'dilutes' it a little.



Free Newsletter: [bit.ly]
Facebook: [www.facebook.com]
Instagram: [www.instagram.com]
Blog: [RawFoodScotland.co.uk]

lisa m Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't consider it a 'superfood'cos it doesn't
> make me feel that great afterwards -after the
> initial high I can get palpitations and a bit
> jittery.

Me too. The last time I ate it I got heart palpitations the next day – pretty scary.

I think it's great for specific purposes - ceremonial use & use to boost energy temporarily. I sometimes use it before a chess tournament. However, not too much because I don't want to get jittery, just focused & alert.

Results from animal testing are useless, IMHO.

the palpatations are because like i say cacoa contains caffiene and theobromine which are both stimulants if you have weak adrenals you'll likely get over-stimulated, palpatations and jittery.

doesnt mean cacao isnt healthy though.

Thanks for your interesting comments, loeve. I wonder, also, about all that copper.

I agree with c.b.- cacao works best for me when used for specific purposes. I can go through periods when I will take a bit each day, and then be totally off of it for months. But once, when I was feeling a bit off-balance, I consumed a whole bunch of cacao after eating an avocado. Whoa! Talk about a nauseating lunch-- way too much fat, and just wrong overall. Never again.

Speaking for myself, I have to be a bit careful with it, as attracted as I am to the strong, bitter taste...

powerlifer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the palpatations are because like i say cacoa
> contains caffiene and theobromine which are both
> stimulants if you have weak adrenals you'll likely
> get over-stimulated, palpatations and jittery.

Stimulants are toxic, and my body is simply reacting correctly to the ingestion of this toxin marketed as "cacao" or "raw chocolate."

"However, Norman Walker says in his juicing book that only heated oxalic acid is bad for you. So raw spinach, etc. is "good".

Horsea,
I was just reading that oxalic acid occurs in many plants as salts of calcium and potassium. Heating might brake down the fiber and dissolve the salts??? or we can chew and digest the plant dissolving the salts. Either way there's oxalic acid wanting to be bound with something? Still don't really know...

Here's a table. Cocoa, if at 0.54% oxalic acid, is about half as strong as spinach--

[www.nal.usda.gov]

Omega Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Stimulants are toxic


How so?

..more on oxalic acid in cocoa --

"The recent work of Mitchell and Smith ('45), who studied
the calcium balance of a group of seven women students
receiving diets low or borderline in calcium (225 to 700mg
per day), showed that no deleterious effects could be detected
when cocoa was fed up to levels of 35 gm daily. Since cocoa
contains 0.5-0.6% oxalic acid, the highest level would cor
respond to 175mg of oxalic acid daily."

[jn.nutrition.org] (page 9)

..it is said cocoa has "moderate" amounts of oxalic acid. In the work of Mitchell and Smith, a group of seven women fed up to about (7 tbsp) of cocoa daily showed no "detectable" negative effects on calcium balance.