Many people dream of chocolate, consider it an aphrodisiac and even legitimate food group. Chocolate lovers and supporters of its anti-oxidents may have reason to become concerned about a new chocolate debate in the U.S. that challenges the definition of chocolate itself. Should % cocoa in production mean some candies will be unable to be called "chocolate" food? Would this cause you to reflect more on the ingredients of what you consume? Or, do only the after-effects matter?

Currently, the U.S. rarely allows vegetable fats as ingredients of products labeled as "chocolate." BUT, this may be about to change. An industry trade group called the Grocery Manufacturers of America, has combiend with the Chocolate Manufacturer's Association of America, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) and a variety of groups. They desire to incorporate cheap veggie oil and lower chocolate food value. This curious effort to lobby the FDA to weaken chocolate standards has won allies among industrial-meat interest groups. They include the National Cattlemen's Beef Assn., the National Meat Institute, National Fisheries Institute, the National Meat Canners Association. Why might such groups suddenly take an avid interest in chocolate?

Consolidated buying enables large cocoa users to wield a significant impact in economies. Big profits mean its easier for companies to take advantage of poorer nations, that rely on cocoa production as a key element in foreign exchange. ADM is a key producer of cocoa, cocoa butter and chocolate, as well as products from livestock feeds to distiller's grains and processed foods. This suggests the company is seeking a wider market influence than we imagine. As the result of ADM's efforts, Congress is leaning toward considering the latest docket agenda that would replace cocoa butter and dairy components of chocolate with cheaper vegetable fats or PGPR. This means reducing quantity of actual cocoa in the finished product and creating an unknown result. So much for encouraging public health awareness?

It's as yet uncertain if repercussions of this debate will affect companies that choose to use real cocoa butter and high quality cocoa. If markets are flooded with low-quality chocolate, the price of 'good stuff' may sky-rocket because of its increasing exclusivity. How many people realize major chocolate makers profit from unsustainable growing practices and slavery to bring you those one-dollar bars? Free trade chocolate is not the only kind that protects farmers.

Rather than eat chocolate meat because you think any chocolate is good for you, or your consumer choices don't matter, think again. The cheap stuff may become worse for your health than ever. Eating it may not support sustainable business that will positively influence the destiny of chocolate you know. Read labels! Many people hope higher cocoa % and cocoa butter content chocolate stays available. Fake chocolate is over-modified with emulsifiers and questionable sources of ingredients. The simpler the product, the less fillers, the tastier and more nutrititious it is. Chocolate lovers have the power to shape the confection's destiny.