I was under the impression that Tony’s is working towards a chocolate industry without child labor and forced labor. But the issue is quite complex and they’re not there yet.
Not saying they’re bad. It seems that they’re doing what they can and according to their website they “lead by example”. But I’m not sure if they make any promises about a 100% child labor / forced labor free supply chain at this moment.
The above could be outdated, maybe they’ve achieved their objectives for their own supply chain already. But I can’t find it on their website atm.
Previously they claimed no slave labor for many years.
They audited their supply chain every year, but eventually found that no matter the claims of their suppliers and auditors, they were finding instances of child labor.
So they’ve updated their stance and are actively working to change the industry
It used to say "slave free" (yes, without a hyphen because apparently they know better than 4 translators) but now it says they try to be as slave free as possible.
Well there's your problem, in the Netherlands (and other places) Hershey milk 'chocolate' isn't legally chocolate. It needs at least 35% cacao to be called chocolate. It would be called 'Cacao fantasy' here instead. So no wonder you think it's shit chocolate, cause it isn't chocolate to begin with
That's like saying "I didn't know I liked olives because faeces from people who have eaten olives is disgusting".
Hershey's is widely hated for a reason, it shouldn't be legal to sell.
FYI: Check if whatever brand you like also works with Tony's for their supply chain. For example Jumbo (NL supermarket) sources their chocolate from Tony's and there's quite a lot more partners.
I mean there is also a big difference between American brands in the US and the EU. Last time I went to the US, I brought back snickers, Twix, and KitKats. Then I bought the EU alternative and set up a double blinded taste test with my friends.
Without fail we all immediately were able to tell them apart. The American version was chalky and tasted like pure sugar. The EU version, albeit also nowhere near Tony quality and still very sweet, was much higher quality and you could taste the individual components of the candy. It was not just a sweet punch in the face.
I worked in a Nabisco factory a decade ago in the US making Oreo.
They've consistently looked for cost cutting measures to reduce the amount of cocoa powder (expensive input) put into the product. What happened when I was there was they would look for a new vendor that would offer stronger cocoa flavor profile per kg and then use that as a justification to cut the amount of cocoa powder in the product. To mask it they would amp up the sweetness.
In a blind test, a normal people can't tell the difference year to year, but if you compare it to what it was ten years ago, there would be a noticeable difference.
I'm not american or european, but yeah. They don't ship here (nor any other ethical alternatives) so sadly i'm stuck with stuff like pepsico and nestle. I try to abstain as much as possible.
You guys eat american chocolate
Why not? It tastes fine. My main problem is how they use forced labor to source the cocoa; which in this case chocolonely is the exception. Even european companies (like nestle) still suffer the same issues.
Though i'm biased since as i said, we mainly only have pepsico and nestle so i don't know how "proper" chocolate in your guys's opinion tastes.
We do have pretty decent chocolate here, but it's not any of the major brands. I grew up eating Hershey, which is pretty bad (but it kind of has a special place in my heart - nostalgia and all that).
I love Tony's as much as the next guy. However, be aware that a test conducted in 2022 found high levels of lead in Chocolonely Dark Chocolate variant.
Consistent, long-term exposure to even small amounts of heavy metals can lead to a variety of health problems. The danger is greatest for pregnant people and young children because the metals can cause developmental problems, affect brain development, and lead to lower IQ, says Tunde Akinleye, the CR food safety researcher who led this testing project.
I didn't downvote but I will add a note to Tony's.
First of all: I applaud their mission and every company in the world should be working without slavery of any kind.
Because Tony's is so open about their sourcing and making a big deal about being 100% slave free, they are an easy target for organizations checking their claims. There have been a couple of moments in time where Tony's has been challenged, the most recent one being 2021, where they have been removed from the list of ethical chocolate companies by the American company Slave Free Chocolate, because they collaborated with Barry Callebaut.
Now, to expand on 'collaboration', here: Tony's buys their cocoa very transparently, from farmers who do not employ children, paid or otherwise. Then, to process this cocoa they need an efficient factory and they use one in Antwerp, Belgium. This factory also processes the cocoa from Barry Callebaut.
Tony's doesn't really care, of course, about being taken off the list by this company. They know they are ethical enough by their own measure, which is still leagues ahead of most.
The point here being that one might read one headline or the other, refuse to go into any depth and form their opinion. Now any time they read Tony's all they remember is 'they are not as holy as they make themselves out to be'. Hence they'll just downvote this any time they glance over it.
Tony's is great and tastes awesome, but the real question here is, are we european really eating that much non-EU sweets? Maybe the occasional Snickers or Mars, but all the stuff that I tasted and was from across the pond was either brutally sweet or had no flavor at all.
I'm not european so i can't answer with certainty: but most (including EU corporations) chocolate producers are very unethical, exploiting forced labor and destroying rain forests.
A change is still a change, even if you think it is small :)
I don't see Milka as quality, more Fondente Nero by Novi, or better, Venchi. But that doesn't imply Tony's are bad, I tried a variety pack last time, I enjoyed 90% of them (I'm not into too sweet)
That sounds good - i do hope they aren't exploiting labor tho. I'll have to check later. thanks; i didn't even know about this company, they don't sell here :(
The main reason I avoid these is that this brand and many other dark chocolate brands apparently contain large amounts of toxic metals like lead and cadmium.
No idea if it's true or not.
I knew there was truth to it, but I was too lazy to post sources of studies, etc. and wanted to raise my concerns for anyone else to do their own research on, if they cared to.
Thankfully, someone else gave a better response than I did regarding the topic, so I'll give that a read to refresh my memory.
Yes, Consumer Reports did find that Tony’s dark bar had higher levels of lead than some other bars.
To determine the risk posed by the chocolates in CR’s test, we used California's maximum allowable dose level (MADL) for lead (0.5 micrograms) and cadmium (4.1mcg).
Per that metric, Tony's Chocolonely Dark 70% was found to have a 134% dose of lead per ounce. Tony’s has disputed the validity of those metrics.
You can see the report here and Tony’s statement here.
Cacao naturally contains heavy metals, so every chocolate product contains them as well. Some cacao contains more than others. And dark chocolate contains more cacao than milk chocolate, so it contains more heavy metals as well.