Chocolate's bittersweet health effects
Plus: Simple tactics to avoid overeating at work
By Kristen Gerencher, MarketWatch
Last Update: 7:06 PM ET Feb 13, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- If chocolate will be a part of your Valentine's Day, consider this treat: the dark variety especially is believed to have heart-health benefits.
The cocoa in chocolate contains antioxidants known as flavonoids, which studies say may prove beneficial in reducing age-related blood-pressure increases by loosening up blood vessels that have gotten stiff, nutrition experts said.
But not all chocolate is created equal. Dark chocolate tends to have significantly more antioxidants than milk chocolate, which some may find tough to swallow, said Joe Vinson, a chemistry professor at the University of Scranton in Pennsylvania. Because it doesn't contain any cocoa, white chocolate has no antioxidants.
"Pretty much you've got to go with dark and you have to go with dark with a lot of cocoa, i.e. very bitter," he said. "You have to get used to the taste."
There's an even bigger catch. People have to weigh the beneficial plant chemicals against the calories, fat and sugar that can tip the health scale in the opposite direction if they consume too much.
"The calories are working against you for heart disease," Vinson said. "Obesity is not what you want for eating chocolate because that will defeat all the benefit."
The American Heart Association (AHA) doesn't take a position on chocolate's supposed health benefits mainly because the fat content is too high, said Penny Kris-Etherton, a registered dietician who serves on AHA's nutrition committee.
"It's a plant food, and we know that fruits and vegetables have all these wonderful effects associated with them," she said. "The problem with chocolate is it's not eaten as a plant food....We eat it as a confectionery product. We add often times butter fat, cocoa butter and sugar to it."
To get the maximum possible health benefit, consumers should look for chocolate made up of at least 70% cocoa, said Jeannie Moloo, registered dietician in Sacramento, Calif., and spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association.
Consumers also should look out for partially hydrogenated oils in the ingredient label, which are generally added to processed foods and contain trans fats that are harmful to cardiovascular health, she said. "You may find those partially hydrogenated oils in chocolate chips, for example, which would then certainly counterbalance any positive effect."
As of this year, companies are required to post trans fat content on products' nutrition panels. But the U.S. Food and Drug Administration allows firms to list zero trans fat on the label if the contents have less than half a gram of trans fat per serving.
Trans fat consumption should be kept to the lowest possible levels, Moloo said, noting the ADA recommends keeping total fat to fewer than 30% of total daily calories and saturated fat to fewer than 10%.
Many fruits, vegetables, whole grains and tea also provide antioxidant benefits, she said. "There certainly are other less caloric foods that are going to give you just as much of an antioxidant punch -- maybe more in some cases -- for fewer calories."
Avoiding chocolate-popping
And if surplus Valentine's candy makes its way into your office, a recent study offers a way for deskbound workers to trick themselves into avoiding the chocolate temptation.
Making sweets less visible and out of reach can help control the amount of mindless eating workers engage in, said Brian Wansink, professor of marketing, applied economics and nutritional science at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y.
Wansink and his co-authors supplied 40 female faculty and staff with 30 Hershey Kisses and varied the treats' placement in clear and opaque containers both on their desks and six feet out of their way. He tracked their daily consumption after they left at night and refilled the jars.
Not only did participants eat less when the candy was invisible and the jars were farther away, but they were more accurate in estimating their behavior when obtaining the candy required them to move around.
When the chocolates were in clear containers on their desks, the women ate an average of 7.7 each day, according to the study. They gobbled 4.6 pieces when the treats were in opaque containers on the desk, 5.6 when in clear jars six feet away and average 3.1 when in opaque jars placed at the same distance from them.
"It wasn't inconvenience that was restricting how much they consumed those six feet away," Wansink said. "It was that it gave them a chance to ask themselves if they were really hungry."
"People pretty grossly underestimate how much they eat if it's convenient, but if it's inconvenient they're more accurate," he said.
"People who have to get up are reasonably accurate in estimating how much they've eaten. But if it's just an arm's length away people say 'I think I had five.' 'No no, you had nine!'"
The findings may seem simple, but applying such tactics may help people stave off weight creep and related health risks, Wansink said.
"If you eat 150 extra calories every day for the next year, you're going to be 15 pounds fatter 12 months from now." End of Story
Kristen Gerencher is a reporter for MarketWatch in San Francisco.
