Eat Chocolate. Save the Planet.

img_8078

Guest essay by Charles Rotter aka “Charles the Moderator”

(Note from Anthony: Working behind the scenes all these years, Charles has earned the right for a little self promotion here, in my opinion. I hope readers will agree.)

One of the slightly lesser talked about issues in Climate Change discussions is the effect of methane emissions on the Global heat budget. This was recently discussed in several posts concerning recent California laws created to control methane emissions from the dairy industry, this being the latest.

California passes a new climate law to regulate cow farts

There are approximately 1.4 billion cattle on our planet.  That’s a lot of cows and a lot of potential methane.  Buuut…there are over 7 BILLION people on our planet.  That’s a much bigger pool of farting mammals to control if we are going to do our part to save the planet.

I’m Charles the Moderator also known as ctm.  Long time denizens of this site remember me from my more active days around here helping to spread truth.

Climategate the ctm story

A while back I decided I had to do my part materially as well as intellectually to improve the world for my fellow mammals.  I decided to take on the scourge of sugar alcohols and their devastating effects on well-being and methane production.

What turned sugar free candies into super laxatives

“The unhappy commenters mentioned stomach rumbles, ear-splittingly loud flatulence, and diarrhea.”

I have created a way for the sweet-toothed to have their figurative cake, and literally eat it too.

Introducing Crotters’ Best Radically Dark Chocolate.

prodshot01pis2

crottersbest.com

Facebook.com/crottersbest

Amazon.com/shops/crottersbest

I have created the only, (as far as I know), no added sugar bittersweet chocolate in the world, sweetened with Splenda Brand® sweetener and nothing else.  It contains no Maltitol, or any other Sugar Alcohols.  It also does not contain Stevia, also known to cause gastric distress for some.

Anthony has graciously given me the opportunity to humorously introduce my chocolate to this audience. If you’d like to try them out, see the links above.

On a more serious note, this product was created for diabetics and low carb dieters, it has an estimated glycemic load of zero, essentially the same as baking chocolate, and zero net carbs.

This rich, dark chocolate bar offers a complex chocolate flavor with just the perfect amount of acidity and a bright sweet finish.

If you are a diabetic or on a low-carb diet, or careful about your sugar consumption,  but actually like to eat a good amount, then this is the chocolate for you.

Buy some today.

 


 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
100 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
nn
January 6, 2017 11:18 am

The prophecy of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming will not be mocked.
Do I still receive credit for sequestering/Planning carbon-based [human] life forms?
That said, chocolate is the new indulgence. Delicious.

January 6, 2017 11:24 am

“Dark chocolate has benefits such as helping with weight loss, stabilizing blood sugar, controlling appetite and reducing cravings. It also tends to improve your mood, curbing your desire to consume comfort foods.” (wikipedia)

george e. smith
Reply to  vukcevic
January 6, 2017 1:39 pm

Well Chasmod, as far as I’m concerned you can eat all the darn chocolate you like. You’ve certainly earned it mate !!
George

Chemman
January 6, 2017 11:35 am

“Any excuse to eat Chocolate” (h/t to the bad guy in the Heidi follow-up movie Courage Mountain)

January 6, 2017 11:41 am

CTM thanks for the post. I will try some.

gnomish
January 6, 2017 11:43 am

will you be making a cannabis product any time soon?
Reply: Not in the current business plans but no objections. You’re only about the twentieth person who has asked. ~ctm

JohnWho
Reply to  gnomish
January 6, 2017 1:34 pm

Hmm…
would the cannabis product induce one to wish to partake of the planet saving chocolate product?
Just setting up a premise for your business model.

george e. smith
Reply to  JohnWho
January 6, 2017 1:42 pm

They don’t call it dope for no good reason !!
G

afonzarelli
Reply to  gnomish
January 6, 2017 3:15 pm

Mmmm! Fudge (hash) Brownies! Like WOW man!!!

gnomish
Reply to  gnomish
January 6, 2017 5:36 pm

if it follows the pattern of the casinos, prohibition will end abruptly as the country’s governors get damp from visions of dancing tax sugarplums.
i have to wonder why the Rezidents didn’t grab onto this yet…
anyway- visit lake county – a pleasant drive thru wine country and up into the hills.
you can grab all the obsidian u want from a cut in the road by mt konocti- they cut thru a river of it- big boulders.
and look for NO TRESPASSING signs.
whoever has most has the biggest grow-op
the clippings from the manicuring would be economical source for extraction.
otherwise it usuallly goes in the dark green bin for the recyclers to pick up.

ShrNfr
January 6, 2017 11:52 am

Everything in moderation I suppose.

Reply to  ShrNfr
January 6, 2017 12:44 pm

Aw you got ahead of me. I was going to ask if Charles eats it in moderation.

Ill Tempered Klavier
Reply to  ShrNfr
January 6, 2017 4:26 pm

NO!!!! Everything to excess. Moderation is for monks :):):)

Oldseadog
Reply to  Ill Tempered Klavier
January 7, 2017 2:42 am

Moderation is for Moderators.

January 6, 2017 11:55 am

The bad news is that if you are predisposed to calcium oxalate kidney stones, then the oxalate content of chocolate might be of concern to you. Also, nuts, in general are on the higher-oxalate side, but pistachios are one of the few lower-oxalate nuts.
CONCLUSION: Don’t fear chocolate, … just respect it.
On a separate note, I want to calculate the average global methane emission of humanity. Anybody got any figures on that ? (^_^)

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
January 6, 2017 12:18 pm

Well, according to one undocumented, rough estimate, human beings collectively release about 73 metric tons of methane and 1000 metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day just by farting, which is a trivial amount.
As for chocolate consumption:
http://blogs-images.forbes.com/niallmccarthy/files/2015/07/20150722_Chocolate_Fo.jpg

H.R.
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
January 6, 2017 3:46 pm

WoW! The U.S. and France are not doing their share to help save the planet.
We’ve got to up our game.

Eustace Cranch
January 6, 2017 11:59 am

About sugar- my granddad had a sweet tooth you wouldn’t believe. He literally put spoonfuls of sugar on his Jell-o. He was skinny as a rail and died in his sleep at 93, just a few weeks after climbing trees and picking apples.
It’s all in the genes, folks, the genes..

Reply to  Eustace Cranch
January 6, 2017 1:10 pm

My granddad, started every day with two glasses of brandy, drunk bottle of vine daily with his meals, ate lot of fatty food, grossly over-salted each meal, ate hot chily papers, drunk strong black coffee with no sugar, smoked until 90, frequently recalling events from his youth. He died in his sleep at age of 103, after regular afternoon walk around his vineyard.
… the genes, indeed.

Archer
Reply to  vukcevic
January 6, 2017 4:47 pm

My paternal grandfather didn’t make it past 60. My maternal grandfather made it to his late 70s, but he was riddled with diabetes and heart disease.
Enjoy it while you can, folks, for as long as you can. 🙂

AlanNM
January 6, 2017 12:05 pm

As an obligate low carber and also a chocolate lover, I am always looking for products like this. Just ordered some of both kinds. I imagine I would never have heard about these if not posted here. Thanks to Anthony for allowing that, even if it’s not a normal topic for the blog. And by the way I really hate all the fake “low carb” products with lots of sugar alcohols. That flatulence et cetera is a by-product of (some) sugar alcohols being digested by bacteria in the colon, and this releases enough sugar to allow significant absorption by the host. But they somehow get to count them as 0 carb on the label.

PapaBear
Reply to  AlanNM
January 6, 2017 1:31 pm

Well said. Having experienced exactly the same issues, I have avoided these sugar alcohol sweetened products like the plague. I am hoping that CTM will be able to ship these out to you (and me – I ordered both as well) today.
*CHARLES* if we enjoy these and want more, have you considered a quantity based discount? PS, I still have your book (personally signed – THANKS!).

Joel Snider
January 6, 2017 12:07 pm

‘One of the slightly lesser talked about issues in Climate Change discussions is the effect of methane emissions on the Global heat budget. ‘
That’s because it’s really more about destroying targeted industries. The beef industry is not as big a target as the oil and coal companies, but they’re getting around to it.

AndyG55
January 6, 2017 12:52 pm

The really big question…
Is it “Carbon Free” chocolate !!!

JustAnOldGuy
Reply to  AndyG55
January 6, 2017 1:01 pm

Well, the raw material for its production came from a carbon sequestering life form.

Reply to  AndyG55
January 6, 2017 1:03 pm

As carbon free as carbon free sugar!
Carbon free sugar. A Limerick.
The Settled Science of Carbon Pollution has reached a new level. Now there is certified carbon free sugar.
Rejoice, diabetics, hear hear!
The Carbon free sugar is here!
No more Splenda for me
I’ll take sugar in tea
It’s Domino’s sugar this year!
(Disclaimer. Maybe, just maybe that is not what they meant?) https://lenbilen.com/2016/02/26/4707/

January 6, 2017 12:58 pm

Long, long ago as I entered a Swiss Matura (Baccalaureate) preparatory school, I was astounded to see some of my classmates open up a Swiss chocolate bar, sandwich it in a breakfast roll and eat it. Turn out, during WW II when food was short it started, and is now a national staple. It actually tastes pretty good, more like Nutella on steroids.

Editor
January 6, 2017 12:58 pm

Sounds great. I will happily seek this out. Wishing you success!

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 6, 2017 1:13 pm

Most of the chocolate eaten in Britain is a disgustingly slimey milk chocolate packed with extra sugar and almost entirely devoid of any health benefit. But then you are talking about a country complaining about rising obesity rates while the BBC screens a cake eating programme in prime time and actually devotes 5 minutes of its peak national news whinging about losing the programme to a higher bidder. Critters’ Best rightly boasts of being made of healthy dark chocolate. Good product by the looks of the information.

Juliana
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 6, 2017 4:14 pm

Don’t you at least get to have chocolate in it though? I recall seeing that europe only allowed to call something chocolate if, well, it actually is chocolate and isn’t over half hydrogenated fat. Here in South America we have “chocolate” with no chocolate in at all. Or with only a little bit of cocoa powder. And most others are over half sugar with a big part of the other half being hydrogenated fat, which not only tastes like you’re eating wax but is terrible for your health.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 7, 2017 1:06 am

The best chocolate I have ever eaten was in Belgium and New Zealand, both dark and milk. All others simply do not compare (Ignoring diet needs/issues of course).

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 6, 2017 1:15 pm

Auto correct slipped “critters” by me – sorry!

JohnKnight
January 6, 2017 1:18 pm

(Note from Anthony: Working behind the scenes all these years, Charles has earned the right for a little self promotion here, in my opinion. I hope readers will agree.)
Well, sure, but aren’t you worried about this playing into the hands of the climate alarm potentates, who will accuse you of being funded by Big Chocolate?

commieBob
January 6, 2017 1:19 pm

My favourite sugar alcohol is xylitol. I’ve used it for a few years now to promote dental health.

… can result in temporary gastrointestinal side effects, such as bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea. Adaptation (that is, an increase of the laxation threshold) occurs with regular intake. link

In other words, after your guts get used to xylitol, it no longer causes flatulence. I don’t think I’ve ever had stomach upset from consuming xylitol but I ramped up slowly to maybe two teaspoons per day.

January 6, 2017 1:23 pm

These days, I have a very, very small chocolate footprint.

Gerald Machnee
January 6, 2017 1:45 pm

**It also tends to improve your mood,**
I did not see anyone pick up on this.
Should we test some samples on the CAGW types who are freaking out a bit??

dp
January 6, 2017 1:48 pm

It’s green, and it is a flatulicious dessert delight! What isn’t to like?

Editor
January 6, 2017 2:19 pm

Charles, congratulations on you new venture, and much more so, our thanks and appreciation for your endless volunteer hours moderating the website.
Well done, that man!
w.

Pop Piasa
January 6, 2017 2:25 pm

That looks excellent. Dark enough to kill a canine, I always say. The purer the better.

January 6, 2017 2:47 pm

A lot of fiber = good
Never realized how much there was in cacao
A lot of saturated fat = bad
Hard to believe no one ever thought of this before.

Archer
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 6, 2017 4:52 pm

They changed their minds about saturated fats several years ago. They’re good for you again.

Reply to  Archer
January 7, 2017 10:31 am

I’m going to start eating more bacon.
My Dad lived on bacon, and lived to be almost 98 — was living on his own — no assisted care — no nursing home ever.
Based on the “science” of nutrition — I expect bacon will someday be known as a miracle food !
In anticipation of that — I’m eating bacon with every meal !

Goldrider
Reply to  Archer
January 7, 2017 1:35 pm

And along with all that, if there is ONE meme that should DIE in 2017, it’s that annoying “Save the Planet” thing.

bamse
January 6, 2017 3:10 pm

No shipping to Aus? 🙁

Editor
January 6, 2017 3:11 pm

Crotter ==> The Amazon site lists the chocolate bars for 17.94 — but it is unclear how man one gets for that price.
Can you clear that up both for me here and there?
Thanks,
Good luck with your product — my wife is a seriously dark chocolate eater.
Reply: It’s six. I’ll try and clear that up.~ctm

afonzarelli
Reply to  Kip Hansen
January 6, 2017 3:22 pm

Is there such a thing as an “un”seriously dark chocolate eater? (☺)

Editor
Reply to  afonzarelli
January 6, 2017 3:47 pm

Some people are not serious about eating dark chocolate — they do so with frivolously abandon and lack of attention to the artistic, literary and spiritual implications. Shocking!

Ill Tempered Klavier
Reply to  Kip Hansen
January 6, 2017 4:34 pm

Chocoholics Unanimous meeting, Godiva’s at five 🙂

Barbara Skolaut
January 6, 2017 3:20 pm

4 gm. carbs; 11 gm. fiber – that’s minus 7 grams carbs. I can live with that. Will order some of the pistachio bars to see if I can eat it (I’m not really big on dark chocolate, but willing to experiment in the name of science). Thanks, Charles, and best of luck with your new venture.
Anthony, considering Charles’ contributions to this blog, I think it’s exactly the right thing to do – thanks.

January 6, 2017 3:23 pm

I prefer aspartame. I no longer like Pepsi products because they switched to sucralose. Both are artificial sweeteners, so I couldn’t see any advantage at all to the sucralose unless one has PKU. Anyway, guess it’s a great choice for those who do like the sweetener.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Reality check
January 6, 2017 10:10 pm

Be careful to avoid MSG while consuming aspartame, I understand the two combine to form a poison.

Sheri
Reply to  Patrick MJD
January 9, 2017 10:17 am

Didn’t see your comment until now. No worries—MSG gives me migraines, so I am already avoiding it.

JackWayne
January 6, 2017 3:32 pm

Most chocolate used as finger food has a small amount of paraffin in it. The paraffin usually comes from oil wells. You get the trifecta if your Cacao has paraffin in it.

Gunga Din
January 6, 2017 3:47 pm

Charles the SuperMod,
As Anthony said, you deserve this personal “spotlight”. (Does it “melt in your mouth and not in your hand”?8-))
I couldn’t resist this quote from “The Warning Label Book”,
(Absolutely no reflection on your product!!)

FDA Proposed warning label for packages of Frito-Lay’s new Max potato chips, made with Olestra fat substitute:
This product contains Olestra.
Olestra may cause abdominal cramping and loose stools.
Olestra inhibits the absorption of some vitamins and other nutrients.
Vitamins A, D, E and K have been added.
It’s a potato chip! No, it’s a laxative! No, it’s a multi-vitamin!

HAS
January 6, 2017 3:54 pm

Just for the sake of accuracy it is the burps from cow (ruminants) that mainly cause the methane. Half our local GHGs come from this source.

Yirgach
Reply to  HAS
January 6, 2017 6:22 pm

Never disparage cow burps.

Mike McMillan
January 6, 2017 3:55 pm

“There are approximately 1.4 billion cattle on our planet. That’s a lot of cows and a lot of potential methane. Buuut…there are over 7 BILLION people…”
Total mass runs about the same, and total stomachs isn’t too far different, either. And thanks, ctm, for the moderation.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Mike McMillan
January 6, 2017 10:14 pm

In terms of methane production pale in to insignificance compared to forests and termites.

Mike McMillan
Reply to  Patrick MJD
January 7, 2017 7:18 am

Termites weigh a Whole bunch more.

Jtom
January 6, 2017 3:57 pm

Well, we are urged by the experts too eat more beans and grains. We try our best to follow that sage advice. My wife likes foods made from beans (chocolate and coffee). I tend to.add a lot of grain products, made from corn, barley, wheat, rye, etc. (beer, vodka, whiskey). Can I clam ‘greeness’ since these are renewable, carbon-neutral products? Moreover, shouldn’t I get a subsidy or tax break for my green-lifestyle? Seems only fair.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Jtom
January 6, 2017 4:17 pm

Depends on how old you are.
Youngsters who sneak their first cigar have been known to “turn green”.
But, since you mention having a wife then I suspect that you, like me, are past the “youngster” stage in life.
If you really want to be acceptable in the “I’ve gone Green” cliche, may I suggest a massive dose of gamma radiation?
It worked for Bruce Banner!

Bruce Cobb
January 6, 2017 3:59 pm

Took me a while to catch the significance of the name, Crotters.

katio1505
January 6, 2017 4:05 pm

CTM do you ship to Oz? If so, any idea of shipping cost?
Reply: For readers of this blog I’ll make exceptions. I’ll send you an email, but for normal business, no we don’t.

January 6, 2017 4:34 pm

Dr Curry up next on Fox with Trcker Carlson

rd50
Reply to  fobdangerclose
January 6, 2017 4:38 pm

Yes, just saw her. Thanks.

noaaprogrammer
January 6, 2017 5:02 pm

According to some sources, although methane is 24 times stronger than carbon dioxide per unit mole as a greenhouse gas, it only has an estimated lifetime of 8.9±0.6 years in the atmosphere, whereas carbon dioxide has a small effect for a longer period (over 100 years).

January 6, 2017 5:15 pm

If you want to save the planet, eat white chocolate. Much higher albedo.

JohnKnight
Reply to  Michael Palmer
January 6, 2017 5:47 pm

(Albedo . . which, theoretically, checkmates the white privilege claims . . )

TA
January 6, 2017 6:06 pm

Dr. Curry was interviewed by Tucker Carlson tonight. A pretty good interview, although it was rather general in tone.
Carlson did ask Dr. Curry to come back on his show in the future so they could explore climate change in detail, so send Tucker the questions you want him to explore with Dr. Curry.
Tucker should also do a little advertising of the interviews. I just happened to be watching tonight and had no idea Dr. Curry was going to be on until right before she came on. I saw no advance notice of this at all.
Btw, I think WUWT needs more reading material on this website! I’m just kidding! I can’t hardly keep up with everything that’s being posted, there is so much of it!

Dick of Utah
Reply to  TA
January 7, 2017 9:14 am

You may have seen Tucker’s interview of a Cal State Prof. a couple of nights ago on the subject. It’s pretty funny:
https://www.reddit.com/r/tucker_carlson/comments/5m33qw/tucker_carlson_destroys_cal_state_professor_1417/

Yirgach
January 6, 2017 6:41 pm

Best of luck with the chocolate Charles!
I really like high percentage cocoa and normally eat only 90% as it’s easily available.
A 93% cocoa sounds interesting.
I have had 99% cocoa (from Lindt), very expensive and hard to find, but an extremely complex flavor.
Looking forward to sampling some of yours.
Reply: The chocolate base is over 99% cacao. The version with nuts is 93% because it contains 6% pistachios by weight~ctm

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Yirgach
January 7, 2017 5:55 am

Lindt chocolate bars are readily available in Florida and less expensive than Godiva with the same cacao levels. Once you get used to the heavy cacao levels, milk chocolate becomes way too sweet to tolerate.

Severian
January 6, 2017 8:37 pm

Amazing, for the first time in I don’t know how long I’ve found an “ad” for something on the internet that actually interests me and that I want and need. Chocolate with no sugar but sweetened with something I can well tolerate. Will definitely order some, and don’t begrudge allowing this on the site at all! Chocolate is one of the few true luxuries and joys in life, proof that the gods want us to be happy.

Katherine
January 6, 2017 9:18 pm

Nice thought, but I avoid anything with Sucralose. Natural stevia (not the heavily processed extract) or xylitol would be my choice for a sugar substitute. Not that I’d need much. I’ve gone as dark as 99% cacao or even cocoa nibs.

Geoff Sherrington
January 6, 2017 9:41 pm

Hi ctm,
Great times over the years.
But, you devil, you manage to probe like a dental pick finding a hidden cavity, when you mention those 2 words ‘sea salt’ and thus try to ingratiate yourself with the trendy set – those who more often than not are vacuous about hard science.
FFS, apart from (fairly rare) NaCl salt from diapirs, is not ALL salt sea salt?
Or is sea salt, as opposed to salt, a magic-propertied new invention coloured purple or whatever with a rip-off price tag?
I’d prefer the choccie with just plain salt, ta.
Cheers Geoff.
Reply: Hey, that’s the way the ingredients came out between the manufacturer and the testing lab. You would not believe the Fair trade, Organic Cacao, Rain Forest Action Network certified crap that I HAVE LEFT OUT OF THE DESCRIPTION. I used expensive sh!t. ~ctm

Patrick MJD
January 6, 2017 10:18 pm

Well done Charles wish you all the best. We will be eternally thankful to you and AW for bringing the world “Climategate”.

Editor
January 6, 2017 10:40 pm

Sugar alcohols do have their problems, but there may be no worse product with them than the 5 lb Haribo Sugar Free Gummi Bears. The reviews on Amazon are priceless (i.e. free). The bears are more expensive than their price tag implies.
https://www.amazon.com/Haribo-Sugar-Free-Gummy-Bears/product-reviews/B008JELLCA
E.g. (in part):

Oh man…words cannot express what happened to me after eating these. The Gummi Bear “Cleanse”. If you are someone that can tolerate the sugar substitute, enjoy. If you are like the dozens of people that tried my order, RUN!
First of all, for taste I would rate these a 5. So good. Soft, true-to-taste fruit flavors like the sugar variety…I was a happy camper.
BUT (or should I say BUTT), not long after eating about 20 of these all hell broke loose. I had a gastrointestinal experience like nothing I’ve ever imagined. Cramps, sweating, bloating beyond my worst nightmare. I’ve had food poisoning from some bad shellfish and that was almost like a skip in the park compared to what was going on inside me.
Then came the, uh, flatulence. Heavens to Murgatroyd, the sounds, like trumpets calling the demons back to Hell…the stench, like 1,000 rotten corpses vomited. I couldn’t stand to stay in one room for fear of succumbing to my own odors.
But wait; there’s more. What came out of me felt like someone tried to funnel Niagara Falls through a coffee straw. I swear my sphincters were screaming. It felt like my delicate starfish was a gaping maw projectile vomiting a torrential flood of toxic waste. 100% liquid. Flammable liquid. NAPALM. It was actually a bit humorous (for a nanosecond)as it was just beyond anything I could imagine possible.

AndyG55
January 7, 2017 1:03 am

Love chocolate. Your product sound YUMMY 🙂
Cost of importing to Australia is probably an issue.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  AndyG55
January 7, 2017 1:55 am

And probably won’t be granted “Halal” status, for a fee, like Cadbury. I refuse to buy Cadbury Australia chocolate because of that.

AndyG55
Reply to  Patrick MJD
January 7, 2017 2:40 am

Halal chocolate..
The berries pick by 72 virgins ???
Not going to happen anywhere that grows chocolate !!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
January 7, 2017 2:49 am
gringojay
January 7, 2017 3:33 am

Hi ctm- Chocolate theobromine content = 200-300mg/40grams dark chocolate. Being fat soluble blood levels of theobromine peak around 2-3 hours after consumption; it’s half life = 7-12 hours. Figure 300-600 mg theobromine dilates arteries of the heart & the heart rate can go up to compensate – but this does not cause blood pressure changes. At high dose (~100 grams of cocoa worth theobromine) some get headaches, shakes or sweat; human LD50 (50% lethality) = 1,000mg/Kg body weight
Chocolate caffeine content in contrast has no effect on heart rate, while it can cause diastolic & systolic pressure to go up. The caffeine content of dark chocolate = 35-35mg/40mg; being water soluble the blood levels of caffeine peaks around 30-40 minutes after consumption; it’s half life = 2&1/2 – 5 hours.
For a more stable chocolate nut bar I suggest using hazelnuts because of all common tree nuts they have the lowest % poly-unsaturated fat content (aside from macademia nuts). Hazelnuts have a high level of mono-saturated fat (44.8%) & this oxidizes much less than poly-unsaturated fat (6% in hazelnuts).
In comparison pistachios are very low in mono-saturated fat & very high in poly-unsaturated fat. Omega 6 poly-unsaturated fat can become an inflammation factor when oxidize.
100 grams of common hazelnuts can have 17.5 gr. of carbohydrates, comprised of 14.2 gr complex carbs & 3.3gr of sugar. Insoluble fiber (good for gut microbes & formed stool) is 13.2 gr & 6.5 gr of soluble fiber.
Total fat is 54.5 gr/100 gr hazelnut. High fat diet up-regulates AMPK; this down shifts the insulin/insulin growth factor 1 signalling pathway (which is what the drug metformin does by increasing AMPK). Calorie restriction also up-regulates AMPK. A
healing cell normally exhibits increased AMPK & one consequence is it performs more oxidative phosphorylation to get more ATP.
Boron content in common hazelnuts= 13.8-22.3 mg/Kg nut meat; it’s good magnesium content causes the boron to have greater effect. A sample of super foods’ comparison for boron/Kg in pomegranate = 5.3, parsley = 4.4, garlic = 2.4 ….
Boron is considered to allay osteo-arthritis & osteo-porosis, while displacing flouride in bones. Hazelnut boron is mostly in different complexed esterified forms (whereas 80-90% of non-complexed boron, like boric acid some people take for joint pain in 24 hrs. is urinated out).
Some of the esterified boron ingested increases the amount of D3 inside our cells; it both augments 25D hydroxylation & stops catabolism of D3. Of the hazelnut’s sugar content a part of the fructose (0.08 mg/gr) is complexed with boron.
Sorry about not having pistachio data handy for comparison purposes. Hazelnuts in USA can be bought online from Oregon producers – ask for “new crop” if available.

gringojay
Reply to  gringojay
January 7, 2017 11:34 am

Again ctm – Data comparisons per 100 grams, listed 1st for pistachio & immediately following 2nd for hazelnut … obviously cultivar varieties of same nut can vary. From basically USDA 2001 source, as opposed to previous data from my notes.
total fat: 44gr. pistachio vs. 61gr. hazelnut;
saturated fat: 3 gr. vs. 4 gr.;
poly-unsaturated fat: 13gr. vs. 8gr.;
mono-unsaturated fat: 23 gr. vs. 46gr.;
linoleic acid: 13gr. vs. 8gr.;
linolenic acid: 0.3gr. vs. 0.1gr.;
calories: 557 vs. 628;
carbohydrate: 28gr. vs. 17gr.;
dietary fiber: 10gr. vs. 10gr.;
vitamin E: 4.6mg. vs. 15.2mg;
alpha-tocopherol: 2.3mg. vs. 15mg.;
beta-tocopherol: 0mg. vs. 0.3mg.;
gamma-tocopherol: 22.6mg. vs. 0mg.;
delta-tocopherol: 0.8mg. vs. 0mg.;
protein: 21gr. vs. 15gr.;
phyto-sterols 214mg. vs. 96mg.
“p-Anisidine value” (AnV) is an industry measure that is indicative of compounds associated with any sequel of fats being oxidized. The AnV
of pistachio is greater than hazelnut, since as the nut content of linoleic acid goes up AnV level also goes up. The linoleic acid content of pistachio
can be between 14.4-22.7%, based on cultivar; pistachio has greater ratio of poly-unsaturated fat & induction rate of reactive peroxidase enzymes (~6 months phase delay if not refrigerated) than hazelnuts.
You may find these 2 reports helpful in creating an ideal pistachio nut bar:
* Nikzadeh, et al. (2008) “Physical and sensory changes in pistachio nut as affected by roasting temperature and storage”
** Raei, et al. (2009) ” Effects of packaging materials, modified atmospheric conditions, and storage temperature on physiochemical properties of roasted pistachio nut”

Mary DeHoff
January 7, 2017 4:54 am

Splenda is a chlorinated hydrocarbon. DDT is a chlroinated hydrocarbon. ‘Nuff said!

urederra
Reply to  Mary DeHoff
January 7, 2017 12:33 pm

Nope, Splenda is a chlorinated sugar. It has hydroxy groups, which make Splenda to be water soluble. DDT doesn´t and it is not water soluble but fat soluble.

January 7, 2017 5:43 am

I’m definitely getting some. I’m diabetic and was doing a liberal low carb diet, about 130g or more a day. I recently switched to a ketogenic very low carb, ~20g, high fat diet and am doing better in a number of areas most noticeably weight loss and fasting blood sugars. It’s nice to have an occasional treat like chocolate with my diet.
Question: How can the Total Carbohydrates be less than sum of the Dietary Fiber and Sugar? In my experience it’s always been greater than or equal to. I always base my food choices on net carbs, calculated as total minus fiber. What is the net carb on this?

Reply:
Net carbs is a nebulous term with no strict definition. It is commonly considered to be the number you get when you subtract grams of fiber from total carbs which would technically give our products negative values for net carbs. So we just say zero. ~ctm

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 7, 2017 5:51 am

I love the notion of a LD (lethal dose) Gringojay gives us for proper/dark chocolate, but as the other stuff pretending to be chocolate certainly will kill you if you eat it we shouldn’t be surprised. I’m just grateful it would be impossible to eat the amount of dark chocolate required without being very sick first.
Afonrazelli’s note about unseriously dark chocolate made me smile too; it reminds me that the next time I go into my local bookstore where they have a “popular science” marked shelf area to ask them where they keep the “unpopular Science” section.

gringojay
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
January 7, 2017 12:42 pm

LD was for theobromine itself, not the chocolate total mass. Sorry about poor writting of that by me.

January 7, 2017 6:00 am

Looks fantastic, Charles, I’ve been looking for a while for some sucralose sweetened low-sugar choccy. Shouldn’t the ‘Total Carbohydrates’ be ’14’ not ‘4’? The subtotal carbs are more than the total of 4.

Reply:
I believe the label is correct 23 fat + 6 protein + 4 carbohydrate + 11 fiber + 1 sugar (mostly from the nuts) = 45 g total. By law we can call the plain version sugar free, but not the pistachio version.~ctm

Reply to  andywest2012
January 7, 2017 4:46 pm

Thanks; the bolding made it looked like the fiber and sugar should be part of the total for Carbs.

January 7, 2017 7:57 am

It’s been nearly two decades since the first hockey stick…and at last there’s one planet-huggy product worth buying.

Barbee
January 7, 2017 9:52 am

Genius.
the bitterness of the chocolate should effectively mask the bitterness of the sucralose.
(That sucralose is so….yukky!)

Juice
January 7, 2017 10:33 am

Ugh. They ruined it with the sucralose. If you’re going to eat 93% cacao chocolate, just go with a little regular sugar or nothing at all.

littlepeaks
January 7, 2017 11:25 am

I went to the store using the link provided. They only sell the two varieties of chocolate bars. Not much of a store. I was curious what else they sold. Hope they will expand their product selection.

stan stendera
January 7, 2017 11:48 am

Hi, Charles the moderator. Delighted to tell you we ordered one of each. Better then good luck with your new venture.
From your old friend (or enemy) taxistan. I lit your hair on fire for a few years there.
P.S. I’ve mellowed or you an Anthony have tamed me.
P.S. 2 Bless you Anthony for including this post. Bravo.

ken gareau
January 7, 2017 10:16 pm

CTM aka Charles the Moderator:
I am a type II diabetic, my wife is not. Her average Fasting Insulin Level was around 3 units prior to drinking a bottled water with Sucralose. Later, her fasting insulin returned to normal after looking for non Sucralose sweeteners (Stevia). My numbers were around 16 average and during the period of using the Sucralose water it was up around the mid 20’s! We did this after having read the two articles I am sending as links and other researched information! One of your competitors with a bar product uses malitol.
I respect this site and those who discuss the issues, and it is in that vein I ask you to investigate these points!
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2013/04/30/dc12-2221
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2013/04/30/dc12-2221
Reply:
Pepino et al. was a small, nonblinded, randomized, cross-over study in a select group of mostly female (15/17), predominantly African American (13/17), relatively young (mean age 35 years), morbidly obese (BMI 42.3 ± 1.6 kg/m2), insulin-sensitive subjects. The study evaluated the response to a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) conducted 10 min after consumption of 60 mL of either distilled water or an aqueous 2 mmol/L sucralose solution. OGTTs were conducted about 1 week apart in the morning after a self-reported overnight fast.
While a statistically significant difference in peak plasma glucose change was reported, the actual peak plasma glucose concentration following the postsucralose OGTT was within the normal range for a 75-g OGTT (2). These results indicate no clinically significant impact on glycemic control. Consistent with this, there was no accompanying statistically significant treatment group difference in mean glucose area under the curve.
Small changes in insulin sensitivity, such as those reported in this study, can be the result of many factors. For example, varying food intake and menstrual status can produce insulin sensitivity changes and have been particularly difficult to control in outpatient studies. There was no record or control of exercise or food intake in the days preceding the self-reported overnight fast, or information on menstrual status in this study of mostly women of menstruating age. The test drink in this study was also about five times sweeter than a typical diet soft drink, and there was no control to assess the impact of sweetness alone. Other factors, such as gastric emptying rates, can also significantly impact OGTT outcomes. Such confounding variables could impact the results of repetitive OGTTs in this small (N = 17) study, and thus explain the nominal differences observed in the insulin and glucose measures reported. ~ctm

ken gareau
Reply to  ken gareau
January 7, 2017 10:19 pm

Sorry for two links being the same. Here is the second link: https://magazine.wustl.edu/2014/February/Pages/Sucralose-raises-insulin-levels.aspx

gringojay
Reply to  ken gareau
January 8, 2017 9:41 am

Hi ken g., – A few taste receptors (“Tas”, or “TAS”) that use G-protein subunits for signaling have been discovered in tissue of the pancreas, skeletal muscle, central nervous system, liver & cardiac cells. The artificial sweeteners are capable of being agonists (activators) of the receptor complex (homodimer) Tas1R2/Tas1R3.
Pancreatic beta-cell sufface has Tas1R2, Tas1R3 & another taste receptor called alpha-gustducin. In other words, even though a sweet substance does not have any caloric nutrients that are metabolized it can act as a ligand (bind) which sets up signalling cascade resulting in insulin release. {{Incidentally, since many may be interested, fructose also can bind to these taste receptors.}}
Humans have genetic encoding poly-morphisms in TAS1R2 & TAS1R3. Changes in one of these genes can alter the binding affinity for a receptor ligand having the unique chemical composition of a specific non-nutrient (artificial) sweetener.
There is also a “learned response” to artificial sweeteners; so that constant users may see different responses from their Tas1R2/Tas1R3 receptors’ signalling. Actual dose (concentration amount) at the time ingested does not cause a linear activation response of taste receptor signal cascade & movement of the number of these receptors to a cell surface; in some cases paradoxically a lower dose elicits more taste receptor signalling than a mega-dose. Furthermore, there is varied response to taste receptor elicitation whether one is lean, overweight or obese (& presumably whether Type 2 diabetic at these weight categories).
Since there are assorted confounding factors the issue of whether human pancreatic Tas1R2 & Tas1R3 can instigate insulin release in response to any one kind of artificial sweetener has not been conclusively established (as far as I know). However, if your fasting insulin tests were done on a empty stomach in the morning (12 hours fast) then I think your reaction could be explained by the above.
My understanding is that sucralose is related to an increased expression GLUT2 in pancreatic Beta-cells & increased expression of SGLT1 in the cells lining (epithelial) the gut as a consequence of Tas1R2/Tas1R3 activity. If there is co-currently any carbohydrate or blood glucose to be metabolized at the same time that then enters the dynamic as well. When glucose is given by injection (intra-venous) as opposed to orally for a glucose tolerance test there is a different response; so I expect this distinction to carry over as a complication in parsing how a specific artificial sugar dose works it’s way through one’s system.

Gary Pearse
January 8, 2017 12:06 pm

Hearty congratulations on your venture and big thanks for your contributions to this often unruly but magnificent site. One can see that over time you have tamed shrews like myself, but without dulling the wonderful free-for-all that that is all too rare these days. Regarding your chocolate, two observations: a)”gourmet” chocolate with weird and wonderful ingredients and just plain dark chocolate seems to becoming a trendy and so I believe you have anticipated an expanding market. 2) I’m fond of chocolate, but prefer real sugar (not too much of it, mind) – do you think you may go beyond the specialized market your after?

Steve Ta
January 9, 2017 5:29 am

There are approximately 1.4 billion cattle on our planet. That’s a lot of cows and a lot of potential methane. Buuut…there are over 7 BILLION people on our planet. That’s a much bigger pool of farting mammals to control if we are going to do our part to save the planet.

Human farts are not predominantly methane, so the comparison doesn’t work.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-composition-of-the-human-fart

%d bloggers like this: