ET ISSUE 2146 Tuesday 10 April 2001

Dark secrets of the pleasure zone

With the chocolate frenzy of Easter almost upon us, Ian Marber weighs up the dietary pros and cons of this tempting treat

THERE are only eight desperate days of Lent left for those of us who have forsworn chocolate. On Easter Sunday, we will - at last - be able to indulge thoroughly our passion for the dark stuff: be it bunny, egg or chick-shaped.

Chocolate is the perfect food for the senses of vision, taste and smell. We appreciate the velvety surface with its varying glistening coatings and shades of brown; the sweet distinctive smell; the satisfying crack as we bite into it, followed by the transformation of the chocolate from a solid state to a warm, rich, viscous liquid that coats the inside of the mouth.

Researchers have identified almost 400 chemicals in chocolate, some of which may be responsible for its appeal, along with the taste and texture. Chocolate always heads any list of food cravings, not least because it contains phenylethylamine, which increases the levels of the neurotransmitters serotonin and dopamine in the brain - and this makes us feel good.

Chocolate is a mixture of potentially beneficial and harmful elements, yet it is not uncommon for manufacturers to single out and trumpet a few minor constituents. For example, it is widely acknowledged that chocolate contains several substances, such as polyphenols, that have antioxidant effects. These are needed to quash free radicals involved in the initiation of cardiovascular disease and cancer. But is it fair to say that eating chocolate can reduce our chances of being affected by heart disease or cancer?

Chocolate starts life as the fruit of the cacao tree, which grows mainly in the West Indies and South America, but is also found in central Africa and Sri Lanka. The tree produces brightly coloured cocoa pods filled with a white, sticky substance. Embedded into this are the seeds, which are used to make chocolate. Each cacao tree produces 50 or so pods: these are cut open and the beans are removed - each pod yields about 30 - and left to dry in the sun before being lightly roasted.

The outer shell is removed, revealing the cocoa "nib", which is bitter in taste, so sugar is added to make the finished product more palatable. The "nibs" are then roasted, which enhances the colour and flavour, before being ground into cocoa mass (often referred to on labels as cocoa solids).

The amount of these solids - together with the addition of milk - dictates whether the chocolate will be dark, milk or white. Because the cocoa bean is a fruit and the benefits of chocolate come from the cocoa, it follows that the greater the cocoa content, the greater the potential benefits. The milk chocolate we tend to grab at the petrol station or at the newsagent's is about 50 per cent refined sugar and only 15-20 per cent cocoa solids, so its benefits are limited. In fact, such high levels of sugar could be considered detrimental to health, as refined sugar has many negative effects on the body, not least in the suppression of the immune system.

Nor does this take into account the calorie content of regular milk chocolate, most of which is derived from the vegetable oil that is included in the recipe. The level of vegetable oil used in British chocolate incited some of our European counterparts to suggest that our daily confectionery be renamed "vegelate", as it contained such a poor ratio of cocoa to fat.

Chocolate was long considered a source of saturated fats. However, the University of California recently found that chocolate contained stearic acid, which the body transforms into oleic acid. This does not have the same harmful effects as the saturated variety. Whatever its biochemical name, fat still contains nine calories per gram, so chocolate that has a high level of fat is guaranteed to be equally rich in calories.

The weight issue goes further still. Look at the label on the commonly available brands and you will see that sugar is either the first or second ingredient on the list. Eating sweet foods causes sharp rises in blood glucose levels, which the body tempers by producing insulin to deal with excesses of glucose. The presence of insulin in the blood interferes with insulin-sensitive lipase, which can mean that eating sugar can increase body fat.

Here lies the problem with chocolate. The day-to-day variety - the bars and snacks that are used to brand Easter eggs - are low in cocoa but high in sugar, fats, oils, salt, and yet more sugar hiding under different names. There is little or no nutritional value, so do not be fooled into thinking otherwise. However, by moving to the dark side, it is quite possible to enjoy chocolate in a relatively guilt-free way.

The value in chocolate comes from the bean, so if you want the health benefits choose the darkest, richest variety you can find. It seems obvious, but if chocolate is 80 per cent cocoa, then that leaves only 20 per cent for the sugar and fat. The pleasure we derive from eating chocolate, in which our dopamine receptors are affected in much the same way as they are thought to be during an orgasm, also comes from the bean and not the sugar. In addition, cocoa contains caffeine, which adds to the potential high that many people report.

The taste of dark chocolate is not an acquired one, simply one that has been overtaken by the sickly sweetness of cheap milk chocolate. A few squares of the good stuff will satisfy even the strongest cravings, whereas it takes at least a whole bar of the other to have the same effect.

The phenylethylamine content of chocolate comes from the cocoa, so it follows that the darker the chocolate, the greater the pleasure.

I should confess my own love for chocolate - I cannot see a film without eating some. This Easter, I will be eating the darkest eggs I can find. I will do so in the privacy of my own home, perhaps with other consenting adults, perhaps alone, but definitely with pleasure and just a tiny bit of guilt.

The Food Doctor in the City by Ian Marber (Collins and Browns) is available through our retail partner, Amazon. Click here to order a copy online.

-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001

Answers

mmmmmmmm me want some choc-o-late!!!!!

-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001

"The taste of dark chocolate is not an acquired one, simply one that has been overtaken by the sickly sweetness of cheap milk chocolate. A few squares of the good stuff will satisfy even the strongest cravings, whereas it takes at least a whole bar of the other to have the same effect."

Surely the author gests. Why would I stop at only one bar?

-- Anonymous, April 11, 2001