I first read about the health benefits of flavonol —the chocolate additive mentioned above — as an ingredient in beverages at Scientific Blogging. Diabetes.com reports on a chocolate bar with similar results. The folks at All Info About.com (???) helpfully warn us:

Of course, all research funded by companies with a commercial interest in the outcome has to be treated with caution but the scientists involved are well-respected so the outlook is hopeful. We shall await further, peer-reviewed research with interest.

Well, duh.

Mars, Inc. is giddy, of course:

The findings have been met with enthusiasm by Mars. Chief scientific officer Harold Schmitz, PhD, said “the implications with regard to health and quality of life could be remarkable”. [Emphasis theirs]

Paul Zimmet, MD, PhD, director of the International Diabetes Institute in Australia, was also upbeat about the potential.

“While more research is needed, this study shows tremendous potential for future flavanol-based applications,” he said.

I think that’s great news for folks with diabetes who have been missing chocolate. I just remain skeptical of consumer industry science and worry that, as I depict in the first panel, the candy companies will overstate the health benefits while understating the precautions we all should take in making healthy dietary choices. Not like I’m some shining exemplar of healthy living, what with my late night snacking and lazy resorting to fast food. But if Burger King comes up and tries to tell me the Whopper might prevent cancer, I will not risk heart disease by stuffing burgers down my gullet.

Tags: consumer science industry, consumerism, flavonol, Mars-inc.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008 at 12:30 am and is filed under In Contempt. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.