The COMPLETE (ridiculous, greenwashed) statement published by HU on their website today (12/22/22). Stand by for my full response.

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

I copied and pasted this (full text below) from HU’s website. Direct link here.


To Our Community

December 22, 2022

An Important Message From The Hu Team

To our cherished Hu Community,

In the past few days, we’ve received messages from a number of you following a recent news story referencing Hu dark chocolate.  We’ve connected with many of you directly, but we felt it was important to share our perspective with you, our broader Hu community.   

We know the story that mentioned Hu dark chocolate was concerning to you.  It was also deeply disturbing and frustrating to us.  As a brand that was founded on a commitment to health and wellbeing learnings and a passion for human-centric philosophy, nothing is more important to us than being open and providing you with safe and delicious products. 

We are writing this – from all members of the Hu team – to explain a bit about the media coverage, address your concerns, and put you and your families at ease.  We appreciate the chance to address what was written about Hu.   

Most importantly, you and your families have nothing to be concerned about eating Hu chocolate.

  • By a very large margin, Hu chocolate easily complies with: (i) the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) safety limits; (ii) European Union safety limits; and (iii) the far-stricter requirements of a 2018 California State court judgment.
  • Chocolate — especially dark chocolate — contains trace amounts of naturally-occurring heavy metals that originate from the soil in which the cacao trees are planted, similar to many other crops grown in soil, including sweet potatoes, spinach, and carrots.  This is nothing new and has been a part of the chocolate world for ages, as the cacao tree’s roots absorb what’s naturally-occurring in the soil.  The higher the percentage of cacao in a chocolate product, the more likely there will be naturally-occurring trace amounts of heavy metals. This does not mean that our chocolate is unsafe to eat.
  • Given Hu’s compliance with the requirements and safety limits outlined above, we understand that you may still be asking: “But where did the numbers shown in the media story specific to Hu chocolate come from?”
  • In response to this question, the specific media story compared levels of lead and cadmium with the media outlet’s interpretation of levels set forth in a California State regulation known as “California Proposition 65,” which is the same broad regulation with a history of requiring California coffee shops to put warnings on their coffee; hotels to post warnings in their lobbies; amusement parks to post warnings at their entrances; and retailers to place warning labels on luggage.
  • The story’s interpretation of California Proposition 65 suggests naturally-occurring trace amounts of lead levels that are significantly lower than the safety limits set forth by the FDA, the European Union, and the far-stricter 2018 California State court judgment.  Specifically:
    • 98% lower than European Union regulations;
    • 96% lower than FDA regulations; and
    • 89% lower than the far-stricter 2018 California State court judgment
  • The California State court judgment requires dark chocolate sold in California to have lead levels less than 0.150 micrograms per gram of chocolate (a microgram is equal to one millionth of a gram).  Hu dark chocolate was measured in the media coverage at a lead level of 0.035 micrograms per gram of chocolate.  So, Hu is 77% below the level required by the already far-stricter California State court judgment.
  • We at Hu, like other chocolate manufacturers, continue to look for ways to reduce the naturally-occurring trace amounts of heavy metals in our products.  But, even as we do this, it is not because our chocolate is unsafe to eat.
  • We jointly work with our suppliers to monitor the naturally-occurring trace amounts of heavy metals in our chocolate to ensure we comply with all safety standards, including those in the far-stricter California State court judgment.

Thank you for sharing your concerns, giving us the chance to respond to you, and continuing to be part of our Hu community.  We hope this information puts you and your families at ease.    

Wishing you all the joys of the holiday season,

The Hu Team


shop lead free banner

Never Miss an Important Article Again!

Join our Email List

3 Comments

  1. Nativas and Equal Exchange have both written similar comments regarding lead and cadmium on their websites. They’re all trying to make people think that Prop 65 is ridiculous when actually it’s the only regulation that helps US consumers know what’s in products we buy.
    The companies also try to play it off as though lead and cadmium are simply naturally in soils, when the fact of the matter is that where cacao is grown the soil, water, and air are highly contaminated by industrial waste, and there is a lack of regulations on pollutants including fertilizers, pesticides, lead paint and gasoline.

    We should stop polluting the soils, use safer manufacturing processes, and start advocating for organic agricultural practices to be the norm- if any of these companies did that they could reduce lead and cadmium levels at least by half.
    Great research on lead and cadmium contamination of cacao in the report and lawsuit from As You Sow. Report can be downloaded from their website. ****except they of course don’t talk about the idea of stopping pollution in the first place.
    It’s not just about choosing a specific chocolate bar over another- they’re often using chocolate from different farms and the contamination levels are site-specific. Is there a company growing, harvesting, and drying cacao on uncontaminated land, unpolluted rivers, and not near or downstream of industry or cars? I haven’t heard of that yet!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *