Go enjoy paint chips and leave the rest of society alone. We prefer stopping brain damage, not saying it's something we have no chance to avoid

You can mandate what a specific amount, but you cannot ensure that something is 100% free of a certain chemical or defect or contamination. You can only mitigate the problem to an accepted level, whether that is set by a customer or mandated by the government. I would know, I'm an engineer who deals with quality control in a factory every damn day.

The problem isn't just aimed at consumers eating the food, but the workers exposed to the chemicals. Anyone arguing this is a bad thing is only upset because they snack on lead paint chips

I literally made a comment in the thread about Skittles how idiots like this argue that it's their right to be poisoned, and we shouldn't care about removing harmful chemicals where we can

Bruh, it's literally a controllable variable. You can force companies to remove harmful chemicals from their products, almost every other nation in the world has

They need to make sure removing the heavy metals wont destabilize the wax that makes up %40 of the "chocolate" bar.

Heavy metal poisoning is a thing, FYI. It’s why mercury concentrations in fish are a problem in the east. Lead is no exception. It builds up in your system because your body can’t eliminate it. “Some lead exposure” is fine, kind of like getting stabbed once or twice is ok, except the cumulation limit is lifetime, rather than over a few minutes.

And has anyone tested exposure at the levels of what's in the chocolate?

How does it compare to the impact from non-chocolate?

Edit: TODO(me): Get some numbers

ohhhhh what a burn. You are making Vermont sad.

If you wanted 100% pure anything, without any impurities you think you want 0% of, you'd have to stop eating. Hell, you'd need to stop breathing.

maple syrup sucks.

its probably being uptaken by the soil of their humanitarian nightmare plantations

I recall them petitioning to allow the name Chocolate on stuff because it tasted like chocolate even though it didn’t contain any chocolate. They lost iirc. Hersheys lost in my estimation and food regulation won.

WHO

> There is no level of exposure to lead that is known to be without harmful effects.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health

> The threshold that is safe for human consumption when it comes to lead is zero. Yes, there is a threshold - it is 0.

That sound wrong, please do elaborate. What is your definition of safe? Do you have any source for the safe level, matching your definition?

Notice I am not saying lead is healthy, I am saying there is some level below which it is not unhealthy enough to warrant regulation.

And if you consider chocolate, what is the difference it makes to your total amount of lead?

You must have had the "good" bar.

The threshold that is safe for human consumption when it comes to lead is zero. Yes, there is a threshold - it is 0.

No amount of lead is safe for human consumption. The amount of lead the FDA allows in food is to allow companies to sell you lead and make money, not because it is healthy.

[deleted]

Bruh that's life. There is never zero probability of anything. Therecis always a non-zero probability of contamination of any element.

Hershey’s sucks. Years ago they petitioned congress to allow them to reduce the amount cocoa butter allowed in chocolate. That’s when their candy started tasting like wax. And I stopped eating it.

I'd rather eat a block of cadmium than Hershey's

Hi everyone this is my cat I’m so happy to report that she is now home safe :) thank you for sharing this and spreading the word 🎉

Nailed it

Why?

That's not a great comfort.