Skip to content
Heavy Metal Index
Cocoa, wheat and spinach beside soil illustrating cocoa ingredient context.

Heavy metals in Cocoa

Cadmium, lead, nickel and other metals in cocoa beans, powder and chocolate: origins, cocoa content, processing, limits, testing and controls.

Quick read

Cadmium is the metal to check in cocoa: it rises with cocoa content, is highest in cocoa powder and dark chocolate, and is lowest in beans from West Africa; lead comes mainly from handling after harvest.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Cocoa overview

Cadmium is the metal that sets cocoa apart, and it travels with the cocoa solids. In the US retail survey by Abt and colleagues, mean cadmium was 700 µg/kg in cocoa powder, 270 µg/kg in dark chocolate and 60 µg/kg in milk chocolate.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source → In Japan, the median rose from 23 µg/kg in chocolate under 50% cocoa to 250 µg/kg at 80% or more.2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source → Lead, by contrast, is usually lower and is driven more by what happens to the bean after harvest than by where it grew.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →8Eileen Abt, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2020Perspective on Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa and ChocolateJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistryRead source →

Growing origin is the strongest supported lever for cadmium. In industry bean testing compiled for a California settlement, median bean cadmium was 55–94 µg/kg for Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Cameroon and Brazil, against 511 µg/kg for Ecuador, 542 µg/kg for Peru and 892 µg/kg for Venezuela.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → The international cadmium assessment found the same pattern in cocoa powder, with a mean of 141 µg/kg in the mainly African cluster and 1,601 µg/kg in the mainly South and Central American cluster.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source → The low-cadmium origins are not lower in lead, so origin choice addresses one metal, not both.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →

For a buyer, the supported priorities are lot results for cadmium with the cocoa-solids content stated, and cleaning and shelling controls for lead.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →7European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source → The EU limits cadmium at 0.10 to 0.80 mg/kg in chocolate according to cocoa content and at 0.60 mg/kg in cocoa powder, and the Codex Alimentarius standard sets 0.3 to 0.9 mg/kg for chocolate and 2.0 mg/kg for cocoa powder.7European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →11Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source → Chocolate supplied about 4% of dietary cadmium across European age groups and close to 10%, with other cocoa products, for school-age children; JECFA judged cocoa a minor contributor overall.12European Food Safety Authority · 2012Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551Read source →9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →

What counts as cocoa

Cocoa comes from the seeds of Theobroma cacao, which are fermented, dried, cleaned and roasted, then separated into shell and nib.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →13Codex Alimentarius Commission · 2022Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Cadmium Contamination in Cocoa Beans (CXC 81-2022)FAO and WHO, 2023. Codex Alimentarius Code of Practice No. CXC 81-2022. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome.Read source → Ground nibs form cocoa liquor, which is pressed into cocoa butter and a cake milled into cocoa powder; chocolate combines liquor, butter, sugar and, in milk chocolate, milk solids.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →

These fractions behave differently for metals, so this page keeps them apart. In a pilot run on Bahia beans, cadmium was 60 µg/kg in the liquor and 111 µg/kg in the powder, while the cocoa butter was below the 1.5 µg/kg quantification limit.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → Bean shells carry much of the lead: in industry testing the median shell lead was 341 µg/kg against 1.2 µg/kg in the separated nibs.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

The page covers beans and nibs, liquor, butter, natural and alkalised cocoa powder, sweetened drinking-chocolate powder sold as powder, and dark, milk and white chocolate. Foods that only contain cocoa, such as chocolate milk, cakes, cereals, spreads and filled or coated confectionery, are outside its scope, as is cocoa butter used as a skin-protectant drug.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2021Over-the-Counter (OTC) Monograph M016: Skin Protectant Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use (Posted September 24, 2021)U.S. Food and Drug Administration, OTC Monograph M016, Final Administrative Order OTC000005Read source → Beans are usually reported on a dry-weight basis and products as sold, and the two are not converted into each other.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →

Heavy metal contamination profile of cocoa

The table holds every cocoa and chocolate result extracted from 40 survey, farm, total diet, monitoring and assessment sources: one row for each statistic a source reports for a subgroup, form and metal.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source → Ratings place a mean, median or single result against a pooled reference for the same cocoa form, built from WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians, individual products and batches, and published subgroup medians; non-detects remain intervals and are never read as zero.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source → Rows that failed a check against their own paper stay visible with the reason and are not compared.18Amjad M, Hussain S, Baloch ZU, Raza A · 2021Determination of Heavy Metals in Locally Available Chocolates in Lahore RegionTurkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and TechnologyRead source →19Emmanuel Joy Enogbe, Agbaghare Daniel Enajeme · 2025Levels of heavy metals concentrations in chocolates from Bwari market Abuja FCT, NigeriaInternational Journal of Adulteration9:e2ijad3057Read source →20Romero-Estevez D, Yanez-Jacome GS, Simbana-Farinango K, Navarrete H · 2019Content and the relationship between cadmium, nickel, and lead concentrations in Ecuadorian cocoa beans from nine provincesFood ControlRead source →

Cadmium and lead dominate the evidence; nickel, total arsenic, mercury, chromium, aluminium and tin are reported by fewer sources.4EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2015Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking waterEFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp.Read source →5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source → Nickel is high in cocoa compared with most foods: European monitoring averaged about 9,500 µg/kg in cocoa beans and products and 3,800 µg/kg in chocolate, and a German cocoa powder pool held 11,050 µg/kg.4EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2015Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking waterEFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp.Read source →17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source → Arsenic results are almost all totals, and nearly every European inorganic-arsenic result for chocolate and cocoa powder was below a limit of about 20 µg/kg.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →

Comparison methods and scope

Each row is one statistic a source reports for one subgroup, cocoa form and metal. Percentiles, ranges and maxima reported for the same samples as a mean or median are shown on that row. Ratings place a reported mean, median or single result against a pooled HMI reference for the same form (beans and nibs, liquor, butter, powder, sweetened powder, and each chocolate type), built from every compatible sampling family. Same-study contrasts compare a subgroup with its own study total for that form. Held rows failed a check against their own paper and are shown but not compared.

About this table
Food formCollection scopeFindingComparisonEvidence
Cocoa and chocolate findings from every extracted survey, farm study, total diet study and monitoring dataset, in µg/kg with each source’s statistic, basis, censoring and sampling frame retained.
Food formCollection scopeFinding (µg/kg)ComparisonEvidence
238 findings · 15 studies · 65 spread figures folded in
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2013–2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2004–2019Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2002–2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2012Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Amazonas2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Blanco Piurano2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cajamarca2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN512014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS952014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS95/ICS392014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Chuncho2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cuzco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Huanuco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Junin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Maranon2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Satipo2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Piura2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017regional means, 8 departments2014Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017San Martin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Spontaneous Hybrids2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Tumbes2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Arguello 2019 Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 76.5 µg/kg; Q3 159 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 119 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Colombia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Columbia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 819 µg/kg; Q3 3,875 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Columbia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 187 µg/kg; Q3 303 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 410 µg/kg; Q3 727 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 89.3 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Haiti2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Haiti2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Honduras2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 280 µg/kg; Q3 470 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 55 µg/kg; Q3 70 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022LAC marine-shale / high Cd:Zn2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmax.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Lewis 2018 Trinidad genebank2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 40 µg/kg; Q3 89.5 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 434 µg/kg; Q3 682 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022range of country means2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Santander2014–2020Bean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Sao Tome2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 64 µg/kg; Q3 85 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Sao Tome2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Trinidad2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 345 µg/kg; Q3 552 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Trinidad2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Trinidad2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Trinidad2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 468 µg/kg; Q3 1,245 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBarraza et al. 2019A-1, Nacional hybrid cacaoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBarraza et al. 2019A-2, CCN-51 hybrid cacaoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBarraza et al. 2019all four bean samplesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsBarraza et al. 2019B, Nacional cacaoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBarraza et al. 2019C-a + C-b mixed, Nacional cacaoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBlommaert et al. 2022immature2020Bean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBlommaert et al. 2022intermediate2020Bean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsBlommaert et al. 2022mature2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBlommaert et al. 2022NA 312 high-Cd cultivar, all pods2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBlommaert et al. 2022NA 312 high-Cd cultivar2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBravo et al. 2024all farms, AraucaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 320–1,190 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsBravo et al. 2024ArauquitaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBravo et al. 2024FortulCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBravo et al. 2024SaravenaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBravo et al. 2024TameCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, all regions2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 890 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Amazonas2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 520–890 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Bahia2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 160 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Espírito Santo2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 440 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Pará2020–2022Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 320–1,440 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Africa/CICollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Africa/CICollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021all samplesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/BACollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/BACollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/ESCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 124–158 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/PACollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 38–819 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/ROCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 52–76 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Ecuador/EQCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 721–1,590 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: startingCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G032011Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 95th percentile 155 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G032011Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G062011Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G062011Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G082011Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022G082011Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022Global2011Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 95th percentile 1,151 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022Global2011Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 95th percentile 1,427 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsRamtahal et al. 2016all sampled plantationsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019AzuayCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 550–620 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019AzuayCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 190–1,930 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019AzuayCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 440–1,700 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019BolívarCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 630–760 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019BolívarCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 250–1,150 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019BolívarCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 150–840 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019El OroCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 390–500 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019El OroCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 220–3,950 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019El OroCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 470–4,080 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 1,070–1,460 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 130–3,100 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 300–1,960 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 210–3,920 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 240–3,570 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Los RíosCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 780–1,000 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Los RíosCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Los RíosCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 160–1,520 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Los RíosCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 230–1,230 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019ManabíCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 420–560 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019ManabíCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 70–3,590 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019ManabíCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 230–3,460 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019NapoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 240–300 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019NapoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019NapoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 100–3,450 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019NapoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 200–2,180 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Santo Domingo de los TsáchilasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 350–464 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Santo Domingo de los TsáchilasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 70–370 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Santo Domingo de los TsáchilasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 380–1,260 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsThomas et al. 2023La Quemazon, Piura2018–2019Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsThomas et al. 2023Las Lomas, Piura2018–2019Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016CameroonCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016EcuadorCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016GhanaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016NigeriaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
65 findings · 4 studies
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Haiti2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Haiti2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellBlommaert et al. 2022intermediate2020Bean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa bean shellBlommaert et al. 2022mature2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellBlommaert et al. 2022NA 312 high-Cd cultivar, all pods2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: shellCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellRamtahal et al. 2016all sampled plantationsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
80 findings · 5 studies · 42 spread figures folded in
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2016median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2017median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2004–2016median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2013–2018median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; targeted sampling2019median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2015–2016median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region SEARO2016median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2017median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 96 µg/kg; Q3 273 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 92.8 µg/kg; Q3 99.5 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 88.8 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 75 µg/kg; Q3 360 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 194 µg/kg; Q1 182 µg/kg; Q3 291 µg/kg; Q3 264 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 604 µg/kg; Q1 650 µg/kg; Q3 899 µg/kg; Q3 912 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 73.8 µg/kg; Q1 72 µg/kg; Q3 90.6 µg/kg; Q3 89 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 313 µg/kg; Q3 785 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 217 µg/kg; Q3 313 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 62.2 µg/kg; Q1 70 µg/kg; Q3 124 µg/kg; Q3 171 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 63.5 µg/kg; Q3 84 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 162 µg/kg; Q3 266 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States producing country2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 86 µg/kg; Q3 380 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)Barraza et al. 2019A-1, Nacional hybrid cacaoCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa liquor (mass)Barraza et al. 2019A-2, CCN-51 hybrid cacaoCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa liquor (mass)Ferreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: liquorCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G032011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 187 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G032011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G052011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 2,810 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G052011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G062011mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G062011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G062011percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G072011mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G072011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G082011mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G082011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G092011mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022G092011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022Global2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 2,592 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022Global2011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022WHO European Region2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 1,000 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)JECFA 2022WHO European Region2011median.
25 findings · 4 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EMRO; unknown2019median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2005–2016median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2013–2016median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2015–2017median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2017median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: cocoaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G042011mean.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G042011median.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G072011mean.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G072011median.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G082011mean.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022G082011median.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022Global2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 73 µg/kg
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022Global2011median.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011below LOD.
127 findings · 12 studies · 47 spread figures folded in
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2016median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; unknown2004–2022median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2003–2016median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2009–2018median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; targeted sampling2019median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2006–2022median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region SEARO2016median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005–2016median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; unknown2006median.
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Africa, Middle East, Asia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 248 µg/kg; Q3 595 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Africa, Middle East, Asia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 153 µg/kg; Q3 556 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All data2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 153 µg/kg; Q3 556 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All data2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All Regions2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 144 µg/kg; Q3 354 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All Regions2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Asia Pacific2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Asia Pacific2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 367 µg/kg; Q3 550 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 195 µg/kg; Q3 218 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 129 µg/kg; Q3 197 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe, Middle East, Africa2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 120 µg/kg; Q3 485 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Germany2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 126 µg/kg; Q3 152 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Germany2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 422 µg/kg; Q3 611 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 97.5 µg/kg; Q3 125 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Latin America2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Latin America2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 319 µg/kg; Q3 509 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022North America2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 95.5 µg/kg; Q3 400 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022North America2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022The Netherlands2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 138 µg/kg; Q3 319 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022The Netherlands2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 153 µg/kg; Q3 472 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 143 µg/kg; Q3 558 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderCantoral et al. 2024Cocoa Powder2022–2023sample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018100% cocoa2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 10–3,150 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Bahia, BrazilCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020EcuadorCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020El Oro, EcuadorCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020GhanaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Habuna, BrazilCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Ivory CoastCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020MalaysiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020VenezuelaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 201920082008mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 570 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 201920122012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 290 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Africa2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019African origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019All samples2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 530 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019American origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Austria2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Bolivia2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Côte d'Ivoire2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Dominican Republic2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019European origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019France, incl. Corsica2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Germany2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 1 Origin A2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 140 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 1 Origin B2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 768 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 2 Origin A2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 130 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 2 Origin B2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 680 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Indonesia2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Italy2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Not specified2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Peru2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Poland2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Russian Federation2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Spain2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Switzerland2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019The Netherlands2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa powder, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
Cocoa powderFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: cocoaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022All cocoa powder2011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G032011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 191 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G032011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G032011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G052011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G052011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 5,295 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G052011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G062011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G062011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G072011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G072011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G082011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 1,510 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G082011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G092011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G092011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G092011mean.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G102011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 1,258 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022G102011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022Global2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 3,740 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022Global2011median.
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 754 µg/kg
Cocoa powderJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011median.
Cocoa powderKataoka et al. 2018Cocoa powder2015–2016mean.Same samples: 15–1,800 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa powderKataoka et al. 2018Cocoa powder2015–2016median.
13 findings · 4 studies
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2003–2005median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2005–2017median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2004–2017median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; targeted sampling2019median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2016median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2012–2016median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderCantoral et al. 2024Chocolate Powder2022–2023sample value.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 11Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 12Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 13Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 14Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa beverage-preparation2016–2019sample value.
75 findings · 12 studies · 6 spread figures folded in
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2005–2017median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2011–2018median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2019–2028median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region SEARO2016median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2009–2013median.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C2Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C3Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C4Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C5Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C6Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 20242023_C7Collection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateBravo et al. 2024all artisanal bars, AraucaCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 580–2,010 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Amargo2020–2022mean.Same samples: 8–740 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Meio amargo2020–2022mean.Same samples: 4–100 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Amargo2020–2022sample value.
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Meio amargo2020–2022sample value.
Dark chocolateCantoral et al. 2024Dark Chocolate Bars2022–2023sample value.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 20–1,290 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020BrazilCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Central AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020East AfricaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020South AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020West AfricaCollection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022Dark chocolate, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
Dark chocolateKataoka et al. 2018Dark chocolate2015–2016mean.Same samples: 25–2,300 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateKataoka et al. 2018Dark chocolate2015–2016median.
Dark chocolateMarincich et al. 2023Bitter chocolateCollection date unreportedmedian.Same samples: Percentile 149 µg/kg
30 findings · 12 studies · 7 spread figures folded in
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2000–2019median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2012median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region SEARO2016median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2009–2014median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; targeted sampling1998–2008median.
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007mean.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: 17–100 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014mean.Same samples: 8–22 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014median.
Milk chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Ao leite2020–2022mean.Same samples: 9–94 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Ao leite2020–2022mean.Same samples: 10–120 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 4–310 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020BrazilCollection date unreportedmean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, conventional pool2016–2019sample value.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, organic pool2016–2019sample value.
Milk chocolateKataoka et al. 2018Milk chocolate2015–2016mean.Same samples: 12–310 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateKataoka et al. 2018Milk chocolate2015–2016median.
Milk chocolateMarincich et al. 2023Milk chocolateCollection date unreportedmedian.Same samples: Percentile 29 µg/kg
8 findings · 3 studies
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2005–2017median.
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2012–2017median.
White chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Branco2020–2022not detected.
White chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Branco2020–2022not detected.
White chocolateKataoka et al. 2018White chocolate2015–2016mean.
White chocolateKataoka et al. 2018White chocolate2015–2016median.
White chocolateKataoka et al. 2018White chocolate2015–2016range.
128 findings · 10 studies · 41 spread figures folded in
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2016–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EMRO; unknown2012–2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2003–2006median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2013–2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; targeted sampling2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2011–2020median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2010–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007mean.Same samples: 5th percentile 3 µg/kg; 95th percentile 300 µg/kg; 470 µg/kg (maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2012Europe, all samples2003–2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedHong Kong TDS 2013Hong Kong market2010–2011mean.Same samples: 16–120 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20152015mean.Same samples: Q1 21.5 µg/kg; Q3 170 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20152015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20172017mean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 189 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20172017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20182018mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; All2015–2018mean.Same samples: Q1 21 µg/kg; Q3 135 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; All2015–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015mean.Same samples: Q1 123 µg/kg; Q3 302 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2016mean.Same samples: Q1 112 µg/kg; Q3 182 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2017mean.Same samples: Q1 170 µg/kg; Q3 249 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2018mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015–2018mean.Same samples: Q1 113 µg/kg; Q3 229 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20152015mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20162016mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; All2015–2017mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1 mean, 2019 vs 20142014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate, all2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 740 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 7–100 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 30–740 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 10–180 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 10–90 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 40–120 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 10–60 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 100 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 16–31 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedCantoral et al. 2024Chocolate Bars2022–2023sample value.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020AfricaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020Central AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020IndiaCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 10–2,730 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020IndiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020MalaysiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020NigeriaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020PakistanCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020South AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022<30% total cocoa solids2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022>=30 to <50% total cocoa solids2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022>=50 to <70% total cocoa solids2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022>=70% total cocoa solids2011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G022011below LOD.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G032011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 31 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G032011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G042011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 121 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G042011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G052011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 878 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G052011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G062011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 126 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G062011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G072011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 172 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G072011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G092011mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G092011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G102011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 310 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022G102011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022Global2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 576 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022Global2011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 337 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedJECFA 2022WHO European Region2011median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018<50%2015–2016mean.Same samples: 13–180 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018<50%2015–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018>=80%2015–2016mean.Same samples: 53–710 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018>=80%2015–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 201850% to <70%2015–2016mean.Same samples: 18–740 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 201850% to <70%2015–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 201870% to <80%2015–2016mean.Same samples: 50–2,300 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 201870% to <80%2015–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018Total chocolate2015–2016mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018Total chocolate2015–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018Total chocolate2015–2016range.
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018Total labelled2015–2016mean.Same samples: 13–2,300 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedKataoka et al. 2018Total labelled2015–2016median.
67 findings · 8 studies · 6 spread figures folded in
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2020median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2003–2006median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2002–2020median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; unknown2020median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsANSES TDS3 2026France TDS3 food group2021–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007mean.Same samples: 5th percentile 8 µg/kg; 95th percentile 500 µg/kg; 2,080 µg/kg (maximum)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (cadmium)EU Member States 2003-20072003–2007median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedmean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedrange.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3, AYS2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEileen et al. 2018all 144 products2015–2016range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEileen et al. 2018percent cocoa not declared on2015–2016mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242014 cohort2014mean.Same samples: 60–1,520 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242014 cohort2014median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016mean.Same samples: 100–2,200 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019mean.Same samples: 54–982 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products exceeding Prop 65 MADL2014–2022percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022range.
190 findings · 9 studies · 32 spread figures folded in
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2019Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2014Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2014Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Amazonas2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Blanco Piurano2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cajamarca2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN512014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS952014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS95/ICS392014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Chuncho2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cuzco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Huanuco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Junin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Maranon2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Satipo2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Piura2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017San Martin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Spontaneous Hybrids2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Tumbes2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Abt & Robin 2020, commercial nibs2014–2020Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Abt 2018 US market2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Aikpokpodion 2013 Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Aikpokpodion 2013 Nigeria, Ogun2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Aikpokpodion 2013 Nigeria, Ondo2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 5.5 µg/kg; Q3 25 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022all SD bean samples with Pb2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Arevalo-Gardini 2016/2017 Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Arevalo-Gardini 2017 Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Arevalo-Gardini 2017 Peru, Piura2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 33 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 87 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cleaned Beans2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cleaned beans2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cleaned beans - detergent washed2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Cleaned beans - mechanical2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Columbia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Columbia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Columbia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana, Brong Ahafo2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana, organic farms2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana, Western2014–2020Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Median 5 µg/kg; Q3 12.6 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Haiti2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Haiti2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 6 µg/kg; Q3 8.7 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 24 µg/kg; Q3 32.5 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Kruszewski 2018 Poland2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Lee & Low 1985 Malaysia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nartey 2012 Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nibs Only2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Median 25 µg/kg; Q3 80 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria, six farms2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Nigeria, six farms2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022overall nib2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 31 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 6.7 µg/kg; Q3 13.4 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Prewinnower nib2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Received beans - uncleaned2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Received Beans - Whole Beans2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Romero-Estevez 2019 Ecuador, Napo2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Romero-Estevez 2019 Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Sao Tome2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 31.5 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Sao Tome2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Sao Tome2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 147 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Ubilla 2018 Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: Q1 68.2 µg/kg; Q3 133 µg/kg
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Venezuela2014–2020Bean basis as reportedpercentile.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Waste - Overs2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower All Nib Channels2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 12020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 22020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 32020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 42020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 52020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Nib Channel 62020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Yanus 2014 Israel2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Zarcinas 2004 Malaysia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, all regions2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, all regions2020–2022Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Amazonas2020–2022Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Amazonas2020–2022Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Bahia2020–2022Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 313 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Espírito Santo2020–2022Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, Pará2020–2022Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 10 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedsample value.
Cocoa beans and nibsEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Africa/CICollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 37–1,040 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021all samplesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/BACollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 2,170 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/ESCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 365–756 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/PACollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: 291–2,530 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Brazil/ROCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 624 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsFerreira et al. 2021Ecuador/EQCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.Same samples: up to 50 µg/kg (range maximum)
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019GuayasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019NapoCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019Santo Domingo de los TsáchilasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016CameroonCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016EcuadorCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016GhanaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016NigeriaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
75 findings · 2 studies
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022All Countries2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022all SD shell samples2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Assa 2018 Indonesia2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Brazil2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana factory2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Dominican2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ghana2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Haiti2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Haiti2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Nartey 2012 Ghana2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Nigeria, six farms2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Peru2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Philippines2017Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Overall Study2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Replicate 12020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Replicate 22020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Replicate 32020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Replicate 42020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022shell, Replicate 52020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Shells Only2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Ubilla 2018 Ecuador2014–2020Bean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2016–2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Vietnam2018Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellAs You Sow 2022Yanus 2014 Israel2014–2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: shellCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
91 findings · 3 studies · 48 spread figures folded in
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2012–2017median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2018median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005–2013median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 30 µg/kg; Q3 70 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 115 µg/kg; Q3 100 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 44.5 µg/kg; Q3 79.3 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Canada2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Canada2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Canada2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 19 µg/kg; Q3 41.9 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 12 µg/kg; Q1 10.5 µg/kg; Q3 53 µg/kg; Q3 37 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Dominican2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 34.8 µg/kg; Q1 33 µg/kg; Q3 60 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020mean.Same samples: Median 20 µg/kg; Q3 30 µg/kg; Q3 39 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 42 µg/kg; Q3 75 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Haiti2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 50 µg/kg; Q1 53 µg/kg; Median 60 µg/kg; Q3 101 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 28.3 µg/kg; Q1 22 µg/kg; Q3 50 µg/kg; Q3 40 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Kruszewski 2018 Poland2014–2020range.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 31 µg/kg; Median 60 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 68.3 µg/kg; Q3 89.9 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Nigeria2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 26.8 µg/kg; Q3 33.8 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Papua New Guinea2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 87.5 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Tanzania2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 28.2 µg/kg; Q3 68.1 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022United States2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 13.2 µg/kg; Q3 28 µg/kg
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)As You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa liquor (mass)Ferreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: liquorCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
27 findings · 4 studies
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2008–2020median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2007median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2018median.
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2004–2013median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022all SD cocoa butter samples2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Combined2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Ghana2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Kruszewski 2018 Poland2014–2020below LOD.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa butterAs You Sow 2022Yanus 2014 Israel2014–2020mean.
Cocoa butterFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: cocoaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa butterJECFA 2011Singapore market 20082008below LOD.
105 findings · 7 studies · 41 spread figures folded in
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EMRO; unknown2020median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2013–2018median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2004–2013median.
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Abt 2018 US market2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Africa, Middle East, Asia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 86.5 µg/kg; Q3 149 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Africa, Middle East, Asia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 180 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All countries2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All data2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 180 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All data2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All Regions2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 152 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022All Regions2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022all SD cocoa powder ingredient2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Asia Pacific2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Asia Pacific2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Belgium2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Belgium2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Belgium2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 165 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Blended2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.Same samples: IQR 160 µg/kg; Q3 320 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Brazil2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 107 µg/kg; Q3 175 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Cameroon2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana factory2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ecuador2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 54.5 µg/kg; Q3 80.5 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Europe, Middle East, Africa2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 51 µg/kg; Q3 84.5 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022France2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Germany2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 90 µg/kg; Q3 190 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Germany2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Germany2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Gray & Cunningham 20192014–2020sample value.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022India2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022India2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022India2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 158 µg/kg; Q3 310 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Indonesia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q1 99.3 µg/kg; Q3 100 µg/kg; Q3 179 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Ivory Coast2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Kruszewski 2018 Poland2014–2020range.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Latin America2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Latin America2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Lo Dico 2018 Italy2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 100 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Malaysia2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 130 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Mexico2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022North America2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 80 µg/kg; Q3 156 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022North America2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Spain2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 142 µg/kg; Q3 219 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Spain2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Spain2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022The Netherlands2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 70 µg/kg; Q3 104 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022The Netherlands2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022The Netherlands2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 75.8 µg/kg; Q3 138 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022United States2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020mean.Same samples: Q1 65 µg/kg; Q3 153 µg/kg
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020median.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Unknown2014–2020percentile.
Cocoa powderAs You Sow 2022Yanus 2014 Israel2014–2020mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 2–380 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Bahia, BrazilCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020EcuadorCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020El Oro, EcuadorCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020GhanaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Habuna, BrazilCollection date unreportedsample value.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Ivory CoastCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020MalaysiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderEileen et al. 2020VenezuelaCollection date unreportedmean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa powder, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
Cocoa powderFerreira et al. 2021pilot processing batch: cocoaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
7 findings · 3 studies
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2019median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2012median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 11Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 12Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 13Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 14Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa beverage-preparation2016–2019sample value.
55 findings · 6 studies · 3 spread figures folded in
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2019median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2004–2015median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2013–2017median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2008–2013median.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Abt 2018 US market2014–2020mean.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Group 2: >65% and <=95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Dark chocolateAs You Sow 2022Lo Dico 2018 Italy, >50% cocoa2014–2020median.
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Amargo2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 40 µg/kg (range maximum)
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Meio amargo2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 60 µg/kg (range maximum)
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Amargo2020–2022sample value.
Dark chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Meio amargo2020–2022sample value.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 2–110 µg/kg (range)
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020BrazilCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Central AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020East AfricaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020South AmericaCollection date unreportedmean.
Dark chocolateEileen et al. 2020West AfricaCollection date unreportedsample value.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022Dark chocolate, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
23 findings · 10 studies · 5 spread figures folded in
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2019median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2009–2017median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2000–2018median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2008–2014median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; targeted sampling1998–2008median.
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2010US Total Diet Study 1991-20052003–2009mean.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: 12–56 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014mean.Same samples: 5–7 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014median.
Milk chocolateAs You Sow 2022Abt 2018 US market2014–2020mean.
Milk chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Ao leite2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 37 µg/kg (range maximum)
Milk chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Ao leite2020–2022mean.Same samples: 7–11 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016mean.Same samples: 2–70 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018all samples of this form2015–2016median.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2018origin not available or multiple2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020Africa2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020BrazilCollection date unreportedmean.
Milk chocolateEileen et al. 2020Latin America2015–2016mean.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, conventional pool2016–2019sample value.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, organic pool2016–2019sample value.
6 findings · 2 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2008–2019median.
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2010median.
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2013median.
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2008–2013median.
White chocolateBurgon 2023bean-to-bar Branco2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 39 µg/kg (range maximum)
White chocolateBurgon 2023conventional Branco2020–2022not detected.
99 findings · 6 studies · 40 spread figures folded in
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region PAHO; random sampling2011–2019median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2008–2013median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedHong Kong TDS 2013Hong Kong market2010–2011mean.Same samples: 7–29 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Abt & Robin 20202014–2020sample value.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022all AYS products with Pb result2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20152015mean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 30 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20152015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016mean.Same samples: IQR 10 µg/kg; Q3 20 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20162016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20172017mean.Same samples: Q1 10.6 µg/kg; Q3 29 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20172017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20182018mean.Same samples: IQR 10 µg/kg; Median 20 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; 20182018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; All2015–2018mean.Same samples: Q1 10 µg/kg; Q3 28 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with <65% cacao; All2015–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015mean.Same samples: Q1 11.1 µg/kg; Q3 40 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2016mean.Same samples: Q1 20 µg/kg; Q3 48 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2017mean.Same samples: Q1 40 µg/kg; Q3 60 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2018mean.Same samples: Q1 12.5 µg/kg; Q3 60 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015–2018mean.Same samples: Q1 20 µg/kg; Q3 50 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >65% and <95% cacao2015–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20152015mean.Same samples: Median 17.3 µg/kg; Q3 80 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20152015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20162016mean.Same samples: Q1 28 µg/kg; Q3 90 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20162016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20172017mean.Same samples: Q1 60 µg/kg; Q3 100 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20172017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20182018mean.Same samples: Q1 17.3 µg/kg; Q3 100 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; 20182018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; All2015–2017mean.Same samples: Q1 17.3 µg/kg; Q3 90 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022chocolate with >95% cacao; All2015–2017median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1 mean, 2019 vs 20142014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Group 1: up to 65% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Kruszewski 2018 Poland2014–2020range.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Lo Dico 2018 Italy, <30% cocoa2014–2020median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Lo Dico 2018 Italy, 30-50% cocoa2014–2020median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022NIST SRM 23842014–2020mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022SD chocolate <=65% cocoa solids2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022SD chocolate >95% cocoa solids2014–2020percentile.
Chocolate, type not specifiedAs You Sow 2022Villa 2014 Brazil2014–2020range.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate, all2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 60 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 20–20 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 30 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 50 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 60 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022below LOD.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022range.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 8 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: up to 40 µg/kg (range maximum)
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023bean-to-bar chocolate2020–2022mean.Same samples: 10–20 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020AfricaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020AsiaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020Central AmericaCollection date unreportedmedian.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020IndiaCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 236–8,040 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020IndiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020MalaysiaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020NigeriaCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020PakistanCollection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEileen et al. 2020South AmericaCollection date unreportedbelow LOD.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Mean conc.Collection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Samples A and BCollection date unreportedrange.
73 findings · 9 studies · 16 spread figures folded in
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2003–2019median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2003–2017median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsANSES TDS3 2026France TDS3 food group2021–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009mean.Same samples: 5th percentile 0 µg/kg; 95th percentile 173 µg/kg; 5th percentile 11 µg/kg; 95th percentile 227 µg/kg; 95th percentile 359 µg/kg; 5th percentile 22 µg/kg; 1,240 µg/kg (maximum); 572 µg/kg (maximum)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2010EU Member States 2003-20092003–2009median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedmean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedrange.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Danquah 2015 Ghana factory2014–2020below LOD.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; all products2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao; blended beans2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Group 3: >95% cacao2014–2020percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Mounicou 20032014–2020range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Waste - Aspiration dust2020mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAs You Sow 2022Waste - Unders2020mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEileen et al. 2018all 144 products2015–2016range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEileen et al. 2018percent cocoa not declared on2015–2016mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242014 cohort2014mean.Same samples: 25–269 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242014 cohort2014median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016mean.Same samples: 50–141 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019mean.Same samples: 25–106 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts 2014-20222014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per day2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per day2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per day2014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per listed serving2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per listed serving2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts, per listed serving2014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products below FDA interim2014–2022percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products exceeding Prop 65 MADL2014–2022percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsJECFA 2011Singapore market 20082008mean.Same samples: 45,400 µg/kg (maximum)
23 findings · 3 studies
Cocoa beans and nibsEFSA 2015literature compilation2003–2012Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Amazonas2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Blanco Piurano2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cajamarca2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN512014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS952014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS95/ICS392014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Chuncho2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cuzco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Huanuco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Junin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Maranon2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Satipo2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Piura2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017San Martin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Spontaneous Hybrids2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Tumbes2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019All nine provincesCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedrange.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019AzuayCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019BolívarCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019EsmeraldasCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsRomero-Estevez et al. 2019ManabíCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
2 findings · 1 study
Cocoa butterEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Cocoa butterEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
4 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa powder, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
Cocoa powderMari-Ann et al. 1984CocoaCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 8,200–12,000 µg/kg (range)
6 findings · 3 studies
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderEFSA 2015Brazil, Campinas local market2003–2012below LOD.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 11Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 12Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 13Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 14Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa beverage-preparation2016–2019sample value.
6 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Dark chocolateEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Dark chocolateEFSA 2015Slovenia, 42 selected products2003–2012max.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022Dark chocolate, national pool2016–2019sample value.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022German Food Monitoring 20122012mean.
Dark chocolateMari-Ann et al. 1984Bitter chocolateCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 1,300–2,700 µg/kg (range)
6 findings · 4 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, conventional pool2016–2019sample value.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, organic pool2016–2019sample value.
Milk chocolateMari-Ann et al. 1984Milk chocolateCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 400–1,200 µg/kg (range)
8 findings · 3 studies · 3 spread figures folded in
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 6,100 µg/kg
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2015France TDS12003–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedHong Kong TDS 2013Hong Kong market2010–2011mean.Same samples: 510–1,800 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Mean conc.Collection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Samples A and BCollection date unreportedrange.
5 findings · 3 studies · 2 spread figures folded in
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 12,000 µg/kg
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2015EU monitoring 2003-20122003–2012mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedmean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedrange.
10 findings · 3 studies
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2010–2023Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2022Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2012Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2007–2014Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union; unknown2003–2012Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsBurgon 2023cocoa beans, all regions2020–2022Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016CameroonCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016EcuadorCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016GhanaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016NigeriaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
5 findings · 1 study
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2013–2023median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2007–2014median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union; unknown2003median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005median.
1 finding · 1 study
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2016–2022median.
8 findings · 3 studies
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2023median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2020–2023median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2009–2022median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2004–2014median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union; unknown2009–2012median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005median.
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2009 (arsenic)Poland1995–2008mean.
5 findings · 2 studies
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2023median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 11Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 12Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 13Collection date unreportednot detected.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 14Collection date unreportednot detected.
4 findings · 1 study
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2023median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2016median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2007–2022median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2007–2008median.
12 findings · 4 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2023median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2016–2021median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2007–2022median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2007–2008median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2014median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; targeted sampling1998–2008median.
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: up to 37 µg/kg (range maximum)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014not detected.
1 finding · 1 study
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2014–2021median.
7 findings · 2 studies
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2023median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; targeted sampling2017–2022median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2007–2015median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region European Union2007–2008median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2008–2009median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023all chocolates2020–2022not detected.
30 findings · 4 studies · 13 spread figures folded in
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2007–2015median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008mean.Same samples: 5th percentile 0 µg/kg; 95th percentile 40 µg/kg; 5th percentile 8.5 µg/kg; 95th percentile 70 µg/kg; 95th percentile 155 µg/kg; 5th percentile 10 µg/kg; 385 µg/kg (maximum); 830 µg/kg (maximum)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2009 (arsenic)EU Member States, all samples1995–2008median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242014 cohort2014not detected.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242016 cohort2016range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019mean.Same samples: 37–200 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242019 cohort2019median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 20242022 cohort2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts tested for As2016–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts tested for As2016–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024all cohorts tested for As2016–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products exceeding Prop 65 MADL 102014–2022percentile.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with per-day data2014–2022range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsHands et al. 2024products with serving data2014–2022range.
2 findings · 1 study
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2017–2023median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2021median.
1 finding · 1 study
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2017–2023median.
1 finding · 1 study
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2017–2023median.
1 finding · 1 study
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2017–2023median.
1 finding · 1 study
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2020median.
2 findings · 1 study
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2017–2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2010median.
1 finding · 1 study
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014below LOD.
1 finding · 1 study
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2022median.
1 finding · 1 study
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2022median.
6 findings · 2 studies
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2012–2016Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2012–2013Bean basis as reportedmedian.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016CameroonCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016EcuadorCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016GhanaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016NigeriaCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
2 findings · 1 study
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2015median.
Cocoa liquor (mass)WHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011median.
1 finding · 1 study
Cocoa butterWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2013–2016median.
5 findings · 3 studies
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2017median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2009–2017median.
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005median.
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa powder, national pool2016–2019below LOD.
3 findings · 2 studies
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2019median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2012median.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderFechner et al. 2022Cocoa beverage-preparation2016–2019below LOD.
3 findings · 2 studies
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2017median.
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011–2017median.
Dark chocolateFechner et al. 2022Dark chocolate, national pool2016–2019below LOD.
10 findings · 5 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2017median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011–2017median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2014median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; targeted sampling1998–2008median.
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: 5.6–9.4 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 25th ATDSAustralia, national food2013–2014not detected.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, conventional pool2016–2019below LOD.
Milk chocolateFechner et al. 2022Milk chocolate, organic pool2016–2019below LOD.
1 finding · 1 study
White chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2017median.
4 findings · 2 studies
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region AFRO; random sampling2018median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2016median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2011–2012median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedBurgon 2023all chocolates2020–2022not detected.
5 findings · 3 studies
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2004–2020median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; unknown2015–2017median.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsANSES TDS3 2026France TDS3 food group2021–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsANSES TDS3 2026France TDS3 food group2021–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014below LOD.
16 findings · 1 study
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Amazonas2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Blanco Piurano2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cajamarca2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN512014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS952014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017CCN51/ICS95/ICS392014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Chuncho2014Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Cuzco2014Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Huanuco2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Junin2014Bean basis as reportednot detected.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Maranon2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Native from Satipo2014Bean basis as reportedbelow LOD.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Piura2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017San Martin2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Spontaneous Hybrids2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsArévalo-Gardini et al. 2017Tumbes2014Bean basis as reportedmean.
2 findings · 1 study
Cocoa liquor (mass)EFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Cocoa liquor (mass)EFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
3 findings · 2 studies
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Cocoa powderEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
5 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020median.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Milk chocolateEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: up to 270 µg/kg (range maximum)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.
2 findings · 1 study
White chocolateEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
White chocolateEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
8 findings · 2 studies
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Mean conc.Collection date unreportedmean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEmmanuel et al. 2025Samples A and BCollection date unreportedrange.
6 findings · 3 studies
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2014EU monitoring 2000-20122000–2012mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2014literature2000–2012range.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedmean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsAmjad et al. 2021All samplesCollection date unreportedrange.
10 findings · 2 studies
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Prewinnower2020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Channel 12020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Channel 22020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Channel 32020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Channel 42020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsAs You Sow 2022Winnower Channel 52020Bean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016Cameroon kernelsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016Ecuador kernelsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016Ghana kernelsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa beans and nibsVineta et al. 2016Nigeria kernelsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
4 findings · 1 study
Cocoa bean shellVineta et al. 2016Cameroon shellsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellVineta et al. 2016Ecuador shellsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellVineta et al. 2016Ghana shellsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
Cocoa bean shellVineta et al. 2016Nigeria shellsCollection date unreportedBean basis as reportedmean.
29 findings · 2 studies · 8 spread figures folded in
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 201920082008mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 231,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 201920122012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 216,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Africa2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019African origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019All samples2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 223,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019American origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Austria2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Bolivia2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Côte d'Ivoire2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Dominican Republic2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019European origins summarised2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019France, incl. Corsica2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Germany2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 1 Origin A2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 117,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 1 Origin B2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 276,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 2 Origin A2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 110,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Grouping 2 Origin B2008–2012mean.Same samples: 95th percentile 276,000 µg/kg
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Indonesia2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Italy2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Not specified2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Peru2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Poland2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Russian Federation2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Spain2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019Switzerland2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019The Netherlands2008–2012mean.
Cocoa powderFechner et al. 2019United Kingdom2008–2012sample value.
Cocoa powderStahl et al. 2017all samplesCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 80,000–312,000 µg/kg (range)
Cocoa powderStahl et al. 2017all samplesCollection date unreportedmedian.
4 findings · 1 study
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 11Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 12Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 13Collection date unreportedmean.
Sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powderElsheikh et al. 2020Brand 14Collection date unreportedmean.
1 finding · 1 study
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
3 findings · 2 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008mean.Same samples: 2,700–11,200 µg/kg (range)
Milk chocolateFSANZ 23rd ATDSAustralia, national food2008median.
5 findings · 4 studies · 2 spread figures folded in
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedEFSA 2008France, 1st Total Diet Study 20002000mean.
Chocolate, type not specifiedHong Kong TDS 2013Hong Kong market2010–2011mean.Same samples: 4,000–19,000 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedStahl et al. 2017all samplesCollection date unreportedmean.Same samples: 6,000–150,000 µg/kg (range)
Chocolate, type not specifiedStahl et al. 2017all samplesCollection date unreportedmedian.
3 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsANSES TDS3 2026France TDS3 food group2021–2022mean.
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsEFSA 2008Germany 1988 and 19911988–1991mean.Same samples: 9,400–103,000 µg/kg (range)
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014sample value.
1 finding · 1 study
Cocoa powderWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2005median.
1 finding · 1 study
Dark chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
2 findings · 1 study
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
Milk chocolateWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; targeted sampling1998median.
3 findings · 2 studies
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region EURO; random sampling2007–2008median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedWHO GEMS/FoodWHO region WPRO; random sampling2010median.
Chocolate, type not specifiedHong Kong TDS 2013Hong Kong market2010–2011not detected.
1 finding · 1 study
Mixed cocoa and chocolate productsUK TDS 2014UK TDS category 10_60 "Chocolate2014below LOD.
1 finding · 1 study
Cocoa powderFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2020median.
1 finding · 1 study
Milk chocolateFDA TDS FY2018–FY2020United States national collections2018–2020not detected.
Shared dataset methods and interpretation

Source summaries retain their original statistic, material, basis and censoring. Each source drawer identifies methods and overlapping samples. No matched reference or pooled distribution is inferred.

HMI cocoa beans and nibs Cd reference · 7 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa beans and nibs Cd reference · 7 sampling families. Beans or nibs, dry or as-received weight as reported (cocoa beans are dried to about 7% moisture), µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference1808192170
Alternative weighting2068192170

87 reference units; 7 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2214%
Eileen et al. 2018714%
Barraza et al. 2019414%
Blommaert et al. 2022214%
Ferreira et al. 2021914%
Burgon 2023114%
As You Sow 20224214%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa beans and nibs from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa beans and nibs, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-beans-Cd:7f2f5d3c2640

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa bean shell Cd reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa bean shell Cd reference · 3 sampling families. Shell (testa), dry weight as reported, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference1244292230
Alternative weighting1244292230

25 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
Blommaert et al. 2022133%
Ferreira et al. 2021133%
As You Sow 20222333%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa bean shell from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa bean shell, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-shell-Cd:d0a46b9991a2

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) Cd reference · 4 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) Cd reference · 4 sampling families. Cocoa liquor as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference601761160
Alternative weighting601761160

27 reference units; 4 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1525%
Barraza et al. 2019225%
Ferreira et al. 2021125%
As You Sow 2022925%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa liquor (mass) from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa liquor (mass), not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-liquor-Cd:76bf4a27a9ea

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa butter Cd reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa butter Cd reference · 3 sampling families. Cocoa butter as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤1.51.75–7.1 (bounded)8.15–10 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤1.51.75–7.1 (bounded)8.15–10 (bounded)

13 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food833%
Ferreira et al. 2021133%
As You Sow 2022433%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa butter from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa butter, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-butter-Cd:d05325447e83

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Cd reference · 9 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Cd reference · 9 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference140274400
Alternative weighting140274400

227 reference units; 9 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3211%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020111%
Eileen et al. 20183911%
Kataoka et al. 201814011%
Fechner et al. 20191011%
Fechner et al. 2022111%
Ferreira et al. 2021111%
Cantoral et al. 2024111%
As You Sow 2022211%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Cd:556d9373bec3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Cd reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Cd reference · 3 sampling families. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference30.547117
Alternative weighting30.547117

28 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2633%
Fechner et al. 2022133%
Cantoral et al. 2024133%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-Cd:b9aad70ca7ce

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate Cd reference · 7 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate Cd reference · 7 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference49110130
Alternative weighting49110162

230 reference units; 7 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2714%
Eileen et al. 20185714%
Kataoka et al. 201814014%
Fechner et al. 2022114%
Cantoral et al. 2024114%
Burgon 2023314%
Marincich et al. 2023114%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-Cd:32087c34aad3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Cd reference · 8 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Cd reference · 8 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference16.31923
Alternative weighting16.31923

124 reference units; 8 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food4313%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020113%
Eileen et al. 20184013%
Kataoka et al. 20183513%
Fechner et al. 2022213%
FSANZ 23rd ATDS113%
FSANZ 25th ATDS113%
Marincich et al. 2023113%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Cd:9dd1f7f095a9

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI white chocolate Cd reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI white chocolate Cd reference · 3 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤0.65≤10.28–6 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤0.465≤10.21–6 (bounded)

20 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1433%
Kataoka et al. 2018533%
Burgon 2023133%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for white chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for white chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-white_chocolate-Cd:ae1462f0dd07

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified Cd reference · 4 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified Cd reference · 4 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference6060141
Alternative weighting6060141

38 reference units; 4 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2725%
Cantoral et al. 2024125%
As You Sow 2022525%
Kataoka et al. 2018525%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-Cd:d038cb34b11b

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Cd reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Cd reference · 3 sampling families. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference16130240
Alternative weighting16130240

40 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3533%
UK TDS 2014133%
Hands et al. 2024433%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Cd:69b6f7594b3a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa beans and nibs Pb reference · 4 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa beans and nibs Pb reference · 4 sampling families. Beans or nibs, dry or as-received weight as reported (cocoa beans are dried to about 7% moisture), µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference1.2–3.6 (bounded)17.5–25 (bounded)200
Alternative weighting2–3.6 (bounded)17.5–25 (bounded)168

50 reference units; 4 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1425%
Eileen et al. 2018525%
Ferreira et al. 2021825%
As You Sow 20222325%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa beans and nibs from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa beans and nibs, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-beans-Pb:98cfad15f251

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa bean shell Pb reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa bean shell Pb reference · 2 sampling families. Shell (testa), dry weight as reported, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference142142329
Alternative weighting142142329

26 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
Ferreira et al. 2021150%
As You Sow 20222550%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa bean shell from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa bean shell, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-shell-Pb:607f94d00a33

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) Pb reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) Pb reference · 3 sampling families. Cocoa liquor as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤2221–40 (bounded)70–80 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤2221–40 (bounded)70–80 (bounded)

22 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1033%
Ferreira et al. 2021133%
As You Sow 20221133%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa liquor (mass) from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa liquor (mass), not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-liquor-Pb:0d36c71ec04b

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa butter Pb reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa butter Pb reference · 3 sampling families. Cocoa butter as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤10≤2210–30 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤10≤2210–30 (bounded)

19 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1133%
Ferreira et al. 2021133%
As You Sow 2022733%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa butter from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa butter, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-butter-Pb:528d4c1e2f32

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Pb reference · 6 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Pb reference · 6 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference30–40 (bounded)80–90 (bounded)113
Alternative weighting30–40 (bounded)80–90 (bounded)113

73 reference units; 6 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2717%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020117%
Eileen et al. 20183817%
Fechner et al. 2022117%
Ferreira et al. 2021117%
As You Sow 2022517%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Pb:2fdc8870b75f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Pb reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Pb reference · 2 sampling families. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference15.519.340.3–42.8 (bounded)
Alternative weighting15.519.340.3–42.8 (bounded)

13 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1250%
Fechner et al. 2022150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-Pb:9cc6fa032abc

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate Pb reference · 5 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate Pb reference · 5 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference29.536–38 (bounded)60–66 (bounded)
Alternative weighting29.536–39 (bounded)60–66 (bounded)

81 reference units; 5 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2220%
Eileen et al. 20185420%
Fechner et al. 2022120%
Burgon 2023320%
As You Sow 2022120%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-Pb:841ec9d5da2d

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Pb reference · 6 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Pb reference · 6 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference79.514–20 (bounded)
Alternative weighting79.514–20 (bounded)

75 reference units; 6 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3817%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020117%
Eileen et al. 20183217%
Fechner et al. 2022217%
FSANZ 23rd ATDS117%
FSANZ 25th ATDS117%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Pb:1611f7c06948

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI white chocolate Pb reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI white chocolate Pb reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤5≤6≤20
Alternative weighting≤5≤6≤20

11 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1050%
Burgon 2023150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for white chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for white chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-white_chocolate-Pb:8c95f65aff31

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified Pb reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified Pb reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference13.6–20 (bounded)20–35.4 (bounded)50–67.5 (bounded)
Alternative weighting13.6–20 (bounded)20–35.4 (bounded)50–67.5 (bounded)

40 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2850%
As You Sow 20221250%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-Pb:4485fec1958e

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Pb reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Pb reference · 3 sampling families. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference723–30 (bounded)55
Alternative weighting723–30 (bounded)55

21 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1733%
UK TDS 2014133%
Hands et al. 2024333%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Pb:4c21cb1f0494

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Ni reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Ni reference · 2 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference106001080011100
Alternative weighting106001080011100

2 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020150%
Fechner et al. 2022150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Ni:d19b14acb677

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Ni reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder Ni reference · 1 sampling family. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference215021502150
Alternative weighting215021502150

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
Fechner et al. 20221100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-Ni:ac7b04d6eb5f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate Ni reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate Ni reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference280028002800
Alternative weighting280028002800

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
Fechner et al. 20221100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-Ni:cdd9c7c5b22a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Ni reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Ni reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference763873920
Alternative weighting763873920

3 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020150%
Fechner et al. 2022250%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Ni:e6598a82d9e2

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Ni reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Ni reference · 1 sampling family. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference610610610
Alternative weighting610610610

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
UK TDS 20141100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Ni:9c436118e5c5

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa beans and nibs tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa beans and nibs tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Beans or nibs, dry or as-received weight as reported (cocoa beans are dried to about 7% moisture), µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤35≤6575–85 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤35≤6575–85 (bounded)

14 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food14100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa beans and nibs from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa beans and nibs, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-beans-tAs:4e08669156b6

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa liquor as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤40≤5025–100 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤40≤5025–100 (bounded)

13 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food13100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa liquor (mass) from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa liquor (mass), not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-liquor-tAs:698f78af2408

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa butter tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa butter tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa butter as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤30≤50
Alternative weighting≤20≤30≤50

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa butter from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa butter, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-butter-tAs:409eb5128f27

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder tAs reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder tAs reference · 2 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference24–29 (bounded)2929–50 (bounded)
Alternative weighting24–29 (bounded)2929–50 (bounded)

28 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2750%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-tAs:872348f1002d

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤20.6≤40
Alternative weighting≤20≤20.6≤40

11 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food11100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-tAs:0880602e4347

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤3811.4–52 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤20≤3811.4–52 (bounded)

17 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food17100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-tAs:c81587dff74b

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate tAs reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate tAs reference · 3 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference3.13.1–5 (bounded)10–25 (bounded)
Alternative weighting3.13.1–5 (bounded)10–25 (bounded)

22 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1933%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020133%
FSANZ 23rd ATDS233%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-tAs:13c542f322a3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI white chocolate tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI white chocolate tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤37.5≤38.5≤50
Alternative weighting≤37.5≤38.5≤50

6 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food6100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for white chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for white chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-white_chocolate-tAs:876f11905c27

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified tAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified tAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤16.5≤25.512.8–41.8 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤16.5≤25.512.8–41.8 (bounded)

20 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food20100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-tAs:76bbc65406e6

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products tAs reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products tAs reference · 3 sampling families. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference57–30 (bounded)37–50 (bounded)
Alternative weighting57–30 (bounded)37–50 (bounded)

14 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1133%
UK TDS 2014133%
Hands et al. 2024233%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-tAs:393bd01b393a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤18.4≤2014–20 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤18.4≤2014–20 (bounded)

6 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food6100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-iAs:cd8a621ad15f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤11.4≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤11.4≤20≤20

7 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food7100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-iAs:0268c7c78a1a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤10≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤10≤20≤20

7 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food7100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-iAs:11dc9d17be8c

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤10≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤10≤20≤20

5 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food5100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-iAs:497524191531

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI white chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI white chocolate iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤20≤20≤20

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for white chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for white chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-white_chocolate-iAs:887480f1e1f6

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤6≤206–20 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤6≤206–20 (bounded)

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-iAs:56e99e29ac1f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products iAs reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products iAs reference · 1 sampling family. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤12≤12≤12
Alternative weighting≤12≤12≤12

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
UK TDS 20141100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-iAs:2e2e1174b3d9

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder DMA reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder DMA reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤20≤20≤20

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-DMA:87ce97f5629c

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate DMA reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate DMA reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤20≤20≤20
Alternative weighting≤20≤20≤20

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-DMA:d7934d48e00e

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa beans and nibs tHg reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa beans and nibs tHg reference · 1 sampling family. Beans or nibs, dry or as-received weight as reported (cocoa beans are dried to about 7% moisture), µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤5≤1522
Alternative weighting≤5≤1522

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa beans and nibs from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa beans and nibs, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-beans-tHg:c1685b41d5b3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) tHg reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa liquor (mass) tHg reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa liquor as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤3≤5.530–36.8 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤3≤5.530–36.8 (bounded)

4 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food4100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa liquor (mass) from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa liquor (mass), not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-liquor-tHg:f169815dadde

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa butter tHg reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa butter tHg reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa butter as produced, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤10≤10≤10
Alternative weighting≤10≤10≤10

2 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa butter from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa butter, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-butter-tHg:4d04d8131c15

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder tHg reference · 3 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder tHg reference · 3 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤3≤415
Alternative weighting≤3≤415

16 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1433%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020133%
Fechner et al. 2022133%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-tHg:f7ea49fae3fe

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder tHg reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder tHg reference · 2 sampling families. Powder as sold, before mixing into a drink, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤3.33≤3.33≤10.5
Alternative weighting≤3.33≤3.33≤10.5

7 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food650%
Fechner et al. 2022150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for sweetened cocoa or drinking-chocolate powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-sweetened_powder-tHg:bdcf31d0912e

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate tHg reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate tHg reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤2.87≤4.10.04–4.55 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤2.87≤4.10.04–4.55 (bounded)

15 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1450%
Fechner et al. 2022150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-tHg:15b8ca560e29

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate tHg reference · 4 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate tHg reference · 4 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤1≤3.877.8
Alternative weighting≤1≤3.877.8

15 reference units; 4 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1125%
FDA TDS FY2018–FY2020125%
Fechner et al. 2022225%
FSANZ 23rd ATDS125%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-tHg:4185153282ff

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI white chocolate tHg reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI white chocolate tHg reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤3≤5≤15
Alternative weighting≤3≤5≤15

5 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food5100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for white chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for white chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-white_chocolate-tHg:43af8ff38867

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified tHg reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified tHg reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤53.65–7.2 (bounded)38
Alternative weighting≤53.65–7.2 (bounded)38

8 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food8100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-tHg:9e374c7f3887

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products tHg reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products tHg reference · 2 sampling families. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤0.5≤0.5≤1.57
Alternative weighting≤0.5≤0.5≤1.57

16 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1550%
UK TDS 2014150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-tHg:67b8c305396f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Cr reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Cr reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference370037003700
Alternative weighting370037003700

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY20201100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Cr:b3bd90add018

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Cr reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Cr reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference500500500
Alternative weighting500500500

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY20201100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Cr:1d73357e9cb7

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Cr reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Cr reference · 1 sampling family. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference180180180
Alternative weighting180180180

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
UK TDS 20141100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Cr:6b07e60c3ffc

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Al reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Al reference · 2 sampling families. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference130000160000160000
Alternative weighting130000160000160000

12 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
Fechner et al. 20191150%
Stahl et al. 2017150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Al:af2e4e9b4c23

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate Al reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate Al reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference434004880054100
Alternative weighting434004880054100

2 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-Al:d3056dc518a9

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Al reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Al reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference378041007600
Alternative weighting378041007600

3 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food250%
FSANZ 23rd ATDS150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Al:db032cc6659d

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified Al reference · 2 sampling families

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified Al reference · 2 sampling families. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference58002250039000
Alternative weighting58002250039000

3 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food250%
Stahl et al. 2017150%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-Al:0075ef02e08f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Al reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Al reference · 1 sampling family. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference604060406040
Alternative weighting604060406040

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
UK TDS 20141100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Al:da13ce710029

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder Sn reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder Sn reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤60≤60≤60
Alternative weighting≤60≤60≤60

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food1100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-Sn:a4bff2a1a055

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI dark chocolate Sn reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI dark chocolate Sn reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference21.523.425.2
Alternative weighting21.523.425.2

2 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for dark chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for dark chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-dark_chocolate-Sn:5c939585cdf6

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate Sn reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate Sn reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤1.516.3–17.1 (bounded)32.6
Alternative weighting≤1.516.3–17.1 (bounded)32.6

2 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food2100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-Sn:41c858107d66

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI chocolate, type not specified Sn reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI chocolate, type not specified Sn reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤8.678.67–9.07 (bounded)9.07–10 (bounded)
Alternative weighting≤8.678.67–9.07 (bounded)9.07–10 (bounded)

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
WHO GEMS/Food3100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for chocolate, type not specified from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for chocolate, type not specified, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-chocolate_unspecified-Sn:eaa9931c6449

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Sn reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI mixed cocoa and chocolate products Sn reference · 1 sampling family. Products as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤10≤10≤10
Alternative weighting≤10≤10≤10

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
UK TDS 20141100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for mixed cocoa and chocolate products from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for mixed cocoa and chocolate products, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-mixed_products-Sn:78d66eb1f8c2

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI cocoa powder U reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI cocoa powder U reference · 1 sampling family. Cocoa powder as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference3.93.93.9
Alternative weighting3.93.93.9

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY20201100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for cocoa powder from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for cocoa powder, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-powder-U:45f06645fa65

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI milk chocolate U reference · 1 sampling family

Reference and scope

HMI milk chocolate U reference · 1 sampling family. Chocolate as sold, µg/kg. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)Q1MedianQ3
Primary HMI reference≤1≤1≤1
Alternative weighting≤1≤1≤1

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing familyReference unitsWeight
FDA TDS FY2018–FY20201100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for milk chocolate from every compatible sampling family in the cocoa evidence ledger: WHO GEMS/Food region-by-year medians (random sampling, individual records only), FDA Total Diet Study composites where they exist, individual products or batches printed by surveys, and published subgroup medians. Each family has equal total weight; subgroups have equal weight within a family. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges, maxima and values quoted from other studies never enter as observations.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

An international evidence-library reference for milk chocolate, not a probability sample of any market. GEMS/Food regions are reporting regions, not growing origins. Many submissions are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:cocoa-milk_chocolate-U:05f34cbff98c

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

1 dataset

How metals reach cocoa

Cadmium enters the bean from the soil through the roots, and soil conditions explain much of the difference between farms.6Wade J, Ac-Pangan M, Favoretto VR, Taylor AJ, Engeseth N, Margenot AJ · 2022Drivers of cadmium accumulation in Theobroma cacao L. beans: A quantitative synthesis of soil-plant relationships across the Cacao BeltPLOS ONERead source →21Ramtahal G, Yen IC, Bekele I, Bekele F, Wilson L, Maharaj K, Harrynanan L · 2016Relationships between cadmium in tissues of cacao trees and soils in plantations of Trinidad and TobagoFood and Nutrition SciencesRead source → A synthesis of studies across the cacao belt ranked total soil cadmium and soil pH as the strongest predictors of bean cadmium, and its model lowered bean cadmium from about 1.65 to 1.0–1.1 mg/kg as soil pH rose from 5 to about 7.6Wade J, Ac-Pangan M, Favoretto VR, Taylor AJ, Engeseth N, Margenot AJ · 2022Drivers of cadmium accumulation in Theobroma cacao L. beans: A quantitative synthesis of soil-plant relationships across the Cacao BeltPLOS ONERead source → In Trinidad, nib cadmium tracked leaf cadmium closely (r = 0.79) but total soil cadmium only weakly (r = 0.35).21Ramtahal G, Yen IC, Bekele I, Bekele F, Wilson L, Maharaj K, Harrynanan L · 2016Relationships between cadmium in tissues of cacao trees and soils in plantations of Trinidad and TobagoFood and Nutrition SciencesRead source →

Within the tree, cadmium reaching the nib travels mainly through the branches rather than from the leaves.22Blommaert H, Aucour A-M, Wiggenhauser M, Moens C, Telouk P, Campillo S, Beauchêne J, Landrot G, Testemale D, Pin S, Lewis C, Umaharan P, Smolders E, Sarret G · 2022From soil to cacao bean: Unravelling the pathways of cadmium translocation in a high Cd accumulating cultivar of Theobroma cacao L.Frontiers in Plant ScienceRead source → In a high-accumulating cultivar at the Trinidad genebank, nibs averaged 2,050 µg/kg, and in Peru two nearby Piura sites differed tenfold, at 7.12 and 0.72 mg/kg, with flood-plain soils transferring cadmium to beans about 3.5 times more readily.23Thomas E, Atkinson R, Zavaleta D, Rodriguez C, Lastra S, Yovera F, Arango K, Pezo A, Aguilar J, Tames M, Ramos A, Cruz W, Cosme R, Espinoza E, Chavez CR, Ladd B · 2023The distribution of cadmium in soil and cacao beans in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →22Blommaert H, Aucour A-M, Wiggenhauser M, Moens C, Telouk P, Campillo S, Beauchêne J, Landrot G, Testemale D, Pin S, Lewis C, Umaharan P, Smolders E, Sarret G · 2022From soil to cacao bean: Unravelling the pathways of cadmium translocation in a high Cd accumulating cultivar of Theobroma cacao L.Frontiers in Plant ScienceRead source →

Lead mostly arrives on the outside of the bean after harvest, through soil and dust during fermentation, drying, transport and storage.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →8Eileen Abt, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2020Perspective on Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa and ChocolateJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistryRead source → In a factory study, separated shells held 163 µg/kg lead and nibs 15.2 µg/kg, cleaning lowered whole-bean lead from 95.2 to 39.7 µg/kg, and dust collected from the cleaners carried 2,370–3,130 µg/kg.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → The same investigation attributed about 70% of the lead in nibs to contact during bean breaking and winnowing.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Aluminium and nickel follow the cocoa solids as well. German monitoring found a mean of 146 mg/kg aluminium in cocoa powder, and data compiled by a German state laboratory gave medians of 160 mg/kg in powder and 39 mg/kg in chocolate.24Fechner C, Greiner M, Heseker H, Lindtner O · 2019Dietary exposure assessment of aluminium and cadmium from cocoa in relation to cocoa originPLoS ONERead source →25Stahl T, Falk S, Rohrbeck A, Georgii S, Herzog C, Wiegand A, Hotz S, Boschek B, Zorn H, Brunn H · 2017Migration of aluminum from food contact materials to food - a health risk for consumers? Part I of III: exposure to aluminum, release of aluminum, tolerable weekly intake (TWI), toxicological effects of aluminum, study design, and methodsEnvironmental Sciences EuropeRead source →

Which origins and products measured lower

For cadmium, West African beans are consistently the lowest measured.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source → Industry bean testing gave medians of 55 µg/kg for Nigeria, 60 µg/kg for Côte d’Ivoire, 70 µg/kg for Ghana and 90 µg/kg for Cameroon, against 246 µg/kg for the Dominican Republic, 359 µg/kg for Indonesia, 511 µg/kg for Ecuador and 542 µg/kg for Peru.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → In the international assessment, cocoa powder averaged 141 µg/kg in the mainly African cluster, 609 µg/kg in Indonesia and 1,601 µg/kg in the mainly South and Central American cluster, and cocoa liquor showed the same order.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source → In the US retail survey, products of Latin American origin had higher cadmium than those of African origin after allowing for cocoa content.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →

Within producing countries the range is wide, so a country name alone does not settle a lot. Peruvian regional bean means ran from 0.17 mg/kg in Cuzco to 1.78 mg/kg in Tumbes, although the authors found the regional differences not statistically significant.16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source → A nationwide survey of 560 trees on 159 Ecuadorian farms in 2017 found cadmium in peeled, unfermented beans from 0.03 to 10.4 mg/kg dry weight, with a geometric mean of 0.55 mg/kg.44Argüello D, Chávez E, Lauryssen F, Vanderschueren R, Smolders E, Montalvo D · 2019Soil properties and agronomic factors affecting cadmium concentrations in cacao beans: A nationwide survey in EcuadorScience of The Total EnvironmentRead source → Ecuadorian province means ran from about 0.3 mg/kg in Napo to about 1.7 mg/kg in Guayas, and Brazilian beans averaged 60 µg/kg from Bahia but 129 µg/kg from Pará and 1,153 µg/kg in four Ecuadorian samples in the same study.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →20Romero-Estevez D, Yanez-Jacome GS, Simbana-Farinango K, Navarrete H · 2019Content and the relationship between cadmium, nickel, and lead concentrations in Ecuadorian cocoa beans from nine provincesFood ControlRead source → Genotype also matters: in Peru the native Chuncho type averaged 0.17 mg/kg against 0.90 mg/kg for CCN 51 and 1.80 mg/kg for spontaneous hybrids.16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →

For lead, the lowest results do not come from the low-cadmium origins. Industry bean medians for lead were 5–10 µg/kg for the Dominican Republic, Ecuador and Peru and 25 µg/kg for Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria and Cameroon.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → In Brazil, the four Ecuadorian bean samples had the highest cadmium and the lowest lead in the study.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → Because lead depends on post-harvest handling, the useful comparison for lead is between handling and cleaning practices, not between countries.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Among products, milk and white chocolate are the lowest for both metals because they hold the least cocoa.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source → Milk chocolate averaged 60 µg/kg cadmium and 10 µg/kg lead in the US survey, against 270 and 30 µg/kg in dark chocolate and 700 and 110 µg/kg in cocoa powder, and white chocolate cadmium was near or below detection.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source → Organic labelling did not mean lower cadmium: certified-organic products averaged about 400 µg/kg more cadmium in a multi-year US analysis, and a German organic milk chocolate pool held 56 µg/kg against 16 µg/kg for the conventional pool.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source →17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source →

For nickel, which the EU has limited in chocolate and cocoa powder since July 2025, the supported comparison is between products rather than origins.27European Commission · 2024Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1987 of 30 July 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2023/915 as regards maximum levels of nickel in certain foodstuffsOfficial Journal of the European Union, L series, 2024/1987 (31.7.2024)Read source → Milk chocolate measured 700–1,000 µg/kg in German and US total diet samples, against 2,800 µg/kg in dark chocolate and 10,600–11,050 µg/kg in cocoa powder.14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source → The only origin data, from one Peruvian survey, put regional bean means between about 3.5 and 9.3 mg/kg, read from a figure and without detection limits, which is too weak to rank origins for nickel.16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →

Which cocoa origins measured lowest in cadmium?

Beans from Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Cameroon had median cadmium of 55–90 µg/kg in industry testing, and Brazilian beans 94 µg/kg.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → Within Brazil, Bahia beans averaged 60 µg/kg, and within Peru, Cuzco beans averaged 0.17 mg/kg.16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → These are observed values for one metal; they do not make those origins lower in lead.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Which chocolate types have the least cadmium?

Milk chocolate and white chocolate, because cadmium follows the nonfat cocoa solids.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source → In Japan, milk chocolate had a median of 23 µg/kg and dark chocolate 150 µg/kg, and white chocolate was near the detection limit.2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →

Processing, fermentation and shelling

Processing redistributes metals between fractions rather than removing them.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → In the Bahia pilot run, about 59% of the cadmium stayed in the mill residue, 35% went to the liquor and 6% to the shell, and pressing sent all of the liquor’s cadmium into the cake and none into the butter.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → That is why cocoa powder, the defatted solids, is the most concentrated retail form, while cocoa butter is low.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →

For lead, cleaning and shelling are the steps with measured effects.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → Mechanical cleaning lowered whole-bean lead from 95.2 to 39.7 µg/kg, and adding a detergent and acid wash lowered it to 23.2 µg/kg.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → After winnowing, the fine nib fractions carried up to 143 µg/kg lead against about 15–20 µg/kg in the coarse fractions, so screening out fines is a further lever.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Fermentation has only small tested effects on cadmium. Adding Rhizobium japonicum to the fermenting mass lowered Trinitario bean cadmium from 0.36 to 0.29–0.30 mg/kg but barely changed Nacional beans (0.34–0.35 mg/kg).28Chang JV, Cortez LV, Solorzano CE, Flor FI · 2022Induction of rhizobium japonicum in the fermentative mass of two varieties of cacao (Theobroma Cacao L.) as a strategy for the decrease of cadmiumInternational Journal of Health SciencesRead source → A review notes that cadmium can move from nib to shell when fermentation drives nib pH below 5, which is a mechanism rather than a validated control.8Eileen Abt, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2020Perspective on Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa and ChocolateJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistryRead source →

Does cocoa butter contain heavy metals?

Very little cadmium: in the Brazilian pilot run, butter was below 1.5 µg/kg while the powder from the same batch held 111 µg/kg.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → International data put the global median for cocoa butter at 20 µg/kg cadmium.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →

Mitigation from farm to factory

Controls for cocoa act at the farm, during post-harvest handling, in the factory and at lot acceptance.13Codex Alimentarius Commission · 2022Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Cadmium Contamination in Cocoa Beans (CXC 81-2022)FAO and WHO, 2023. Codex Alimentarius Code of Practice No. CXC 81-2022. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome.Read source → The Codex code of practice recommends soil testing, liming toward pH 6 or above (for example 3 t/ha/year of dolomite), avoiding cadmium-rich fertilisers, applying zinc and using low-cadmium planting material, but it reports no measured effect sizes.13Codex Alimentarius Commission · 2022Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Cadmium Contamination in Cocoa Beans (CXC 81-2022)FAO and WHO, 2023. Codex Alimentarius Code of Practice No. CXC 81-2022. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome.Read source →

The field evidence for cadmium is limited but measurable. In a Peruvian field trial, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi lowered bean cadmium from 0.94 to 0.56 mg/kg, while biochar at 1–2% had smaller effects.29Vega-Jara L, Palacin Agüero J, Farfán Tucto S, Vangeli S, Márquez-Dávila K · 2025Mitigation of Cadmium Accumulation in Cocoa Beans Using Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi, Biochar and Callisia repensFolia AmazónicaRead source → In a greenhouse trial, quinoa biochar at 2% cut seedling leaf cadmium by 15–54% depending on soil, but beans were not measured.30Julian E. Lopez, Catalina Arroyave, Adriana Aristizabal, Byrone Almeida, Santiago Builes, Eduardo Chavez · 2022Reducing cadmium bioaccumulation in Theobroma cacao using biochar: basis for scaling-up to fieldHeliyonRead source → Compost changed soil cadmium fractions in Ecuador, but the bean results were not printed.31Gutiérrez E, Chávez E, Gamage KHH, Argüello D, Galkaduwa MB, Hettiarachchi GM · 2022Cadmium fractionation in soils affected by organic matter application: Transfer of cadmium to cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) tissuesFrontiers in Environmental ScienceRead source →

Lead controls are about cleanliness after harvest: drying beans off the ground, cleaning, removing shells and dust, and keeping equipment free of lead.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →13Codex Alimentarius Commission · 2022Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Cadmium Contamination in Cocoa Beans (CXC 81-2022)FAO and WHO, 2023. Codex Alimentarius Code of Practice No. CXC 81-2022. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome.Read source → Testing detects contamination and supports exclusion or blending, but it does not remove metals.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →32Meter A, Atkinson RJ, Laliberte B · 2019Cadmium in Cacao from Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review of Research and Potential Mitigation SolutionsBioversity International / CAF Development Bank of Latin AmericaRead source →

About this table
ControlMaterialEffectsEvidence
Controls by production stage, retaining all paired analyte outcomes. Seasons and reused guidance do not add independent studies. No effectiveness ranking is implied.
ControlMaterialEffectsEvidence
Raise soil pH by liming where soils are acidicsoil remediation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Context
Guidance

Codex CXC 81-2022

HMI source record · Original source

Official guidance; not an independent experimental dataset. Reused across actions without adding studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumGuidance; effect not measuredBean cadmiumLimed versus unlimed acidic soilsCocoa beansContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Guidance; no measured comparison in the code.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

The code recommends liming toward pH 6 or above, for example 3 t/ha/year of dolomitic lime, and calls liming the most effective method found to date; no effect size is given.

ContextSelected control
MaterialCocoa farm soils (code of practice)
Stagesoil remediation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsAcidic cadmium-bearing soils.
Tested scaleGuidance
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Official or author guidance. Acidic cadmium-bearing soils.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedGuidance; effect not measuredNumerical baseline not extractedAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansProduction section

No quantified effect in the code itself.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Acidic cadmium-bearing soils.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Target soil pH and total soil cadmium when siting and managing farmssoil remediation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
1

Wade et al. 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower modelled bean Cd at higher soil pHModelled bean cadmium (dry matter)Soil pH 5 versus about 7Cocoa beansModerate · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (1050 − 1650) / 1650 × 100 = -36.4%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Modelled bean cadmium at soil pH 5 versus about 7.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

In a model fitted to 892 compiled bean results, bean cadmium fell from about 1.65 to 1.0–1.1 mg/kg as soil pH rose from 5 to about 7; total soil cadmium and pH were the strongest predictors.

ContextSelected control
MaterialCompiled bean and soil data across the cacao belt
Stagesoil remediation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsFarms across Latin America and Africa represented in the compiled studies.
Tested scaleCompiled field data
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Statistical model of compiled data. Farms across Latin America and Africa represented in the compiled studies.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower modelled bean Cd at higher soil pH1650 → 1050 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansFig. 6

Model of observational data; not a liming trial.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Farms across Latin America and Africa represented in the compiled studies.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Inoculate trees with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungicultivation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
Cd · Decreased
1

Vega-Jara et al. 2025

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower bean Cd with fungiMean bean cadmiumFungi versus controlCocoa beansModerate · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (560 − 940) / 940 × 100 = -40.4%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

CadmiumDecreasedSmall reduction with 1% biochar (figure estimate)Mean bean cadmiumBiochar 1% versus controlCocoa beansLow · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (810 − 940) / 940 × 100 = -13.8%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Untreated control trees in the same plot.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi lowered mean bean cadmium from 0.94 to 0.56 mg/kg; Callisia repens, the combination, and biochar at 1–2% had smaller effects.

ContextSelected control
MaterialCacao trees in a Peruvian field trial
Stagecultivation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsOne site; 18 trees; one season.
Tested scaleField plot
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. One site; 18 trees; one season.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower bean Cd with fungi940 → 560 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansResults; Fig. 1A
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedSmall reduction with 1% biochar (figure estimate)940 → 810 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansFig. 1A

Small trial; some figure readings; significance letters inconsistent with text.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One site; 18 trees; one season.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Add biochar to cadmium-bearing soilssoil remediation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
Cd · Decreased
1

López et al. 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower leaf Cd (seedlings)Leaf cadmiumBiochar 2% versus control, Cd-spiked soilSeedling leavesHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (6400 − 13900) / 13900 × 100 = -54.0%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

CadmiumDecreasedNot statistically significantLeaf cadmiumBiochar 2% versus control, acidic soilSeedling leavesModerate · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (1800 − 2900) / 2900 × 100 = -37.9%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Same soils without biochar.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Quinoa biochar at 2% cut seedling leaf cadmium by 15–54% depending on soil and lowered readily soluble soil cadmium by 71–78%; beans were not measured.

ContextSelected control
MaterialCacao seedlings in pot trials, three soils
Stagesoil remediation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsGreenhouse pots; young plants.
Tested scalePot
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. Greenhouse pots; young plants.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower leaf Cd (seedlings)13900 → 6400 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedSeedling leavesTable 2; Table S6
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedNot statistically significant2900 → 1800 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedSeedling leavesTable 2

Leaf endpoint only; transfer to beans untested.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Greenhouse pots; young plants.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Apply compost to shift soil cadmium into bound formssoil remediation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Context
1

Gutiérrez et al. 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumSoil fractions changed; bean effect not reportedSoil cadmium fractionsCompost versus noneSoilContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Same farms without compost.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Compost changed the humic- and fulvic-acid-bound soil cadmium fractions; bean cadmium was measured but not printed by farm or treatment.

ContextSelected control
MaterialEight Ecuadorian cacao farms
Stagesoil remediation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsEcuadorian farms; one season.
Tested scaleFarm
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. Ecuadorian farms; one season.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedSoil fractions changed; bean effect not reportedNumerical baseline not extractedAbsolute values unextractedSoilTables 2–4

No published bean outcome.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Ecuadorian farms; one season.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Prefer low-cadmium genotypes where availablecultivation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
1

Arévalo-Gardini et al. 2017

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower Cd in Chuncho (observational)Mean bean cadmium (dry weight)CCN 51 versus ChunchoCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (170 − 900) / 900 × 100 = -81.1%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Genotypes grown in different regions; not a common-garden trial.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

The native Chuncho type averaged 0.17 mg/kg bean cadmium against 0.90 mg/kg for CCN 51 and 1.80 mg/kg for spontaneous hybrids.

ContextSelected control
MaterialBeans from 70 Peruvian plantations
Stagecultivation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsPeru, 2014.
Tested scaleField survey
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational comparison. Peru, 2014.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower Cd in Chuncho (observational)900 → 170 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansFig. 3

Genotype and region confounded.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Peru, 2014.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Add Rhizobium japonicum during fermentationharvest and collection · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
Cd · Decreased
1

Chang et al. 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedSmall reduction (Trinitario)Bean cadmium5% inoculum versus controlCocoa beansLow · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (290 − 360) / 360 × 100 = -19.4%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

CadmiumDecreasedNo meaningful change (Nacional)Bean cadmium5% inoculum versus controlCocoa beansLow · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (350 − 360) / 360 × 100 = -2.8%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Uninoculated fermentation of the same beans.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

At 3–5% inoculum, Trinitario bean cadmium fell from 0.36 to 0.29–0.30 mg/kg; Nacional beans barely changed (0.34–0.35 mg/kg).

ContextSelected control
MaterialFermenting Trinitario and Nacional beans
Stageharvest and collection
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsOne fermentation trial; two varieties.
Tested scaleFermentation batch
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. One fermentation trial; two varieties.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedSmall reduction (Trinitario)360 → 290 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansTable 16
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedNo meaningful change (Nacional)360 → 350 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansTable 16

No SD or significance test reported.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One fermentation trial; two varieties.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Clean beans before breakingfood processing · As reportedCocoa
Pb · Decreased
Pb · Decreased
1

As You Sow 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadDecreasedLower bean Pb after mechanical cleaningWhole-bean leadCleaned versus receivedCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (39.7 − 95.2) / 95.2 × 100 = -58.3%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

LeadDecreasedLower bean Pb after detergent and acid washWhole-bean leadWashed versus receivedCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (23.2 − 95.2) / 95.2 × 100 = -75.6%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Received beans before cleaning.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Mechanical cleaning lowered whole-bean lead from 95.2 to 39.7 µg/kg, and a detergent and acid wash lowered it to 23.2 µg/kg; cleaner dust held 2,370–3,130 µg/kg.

ContextSelected control
MaterialCôte d’Ivoire beans processed in North America
Stagefood processing
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsOne factory; one bean lot; August 2020.
Tested scaleFactory
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. One factory; one bean lot; August 2020.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Lead (Pb)As reportedLower bean Pb after mechanical cleaning95.2 → 39.7 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 2, Appendix C
Lead (Pb)As reportedLower bean Pb after detergent and acid wash95.2 → 23.2 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 2, Appendix C

Single factory study.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One factory; one bean lot; August 2020.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Remove shells and nib fines thoroughlyfood processing · As reportedCocoa
Pb · Decreased
Pb · Decreased
1

As You Sow 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadDecreasedLower Pb in nib than shellLead by fractionShell versus nibCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (15.2 − 163) / 163 × 100 = -90.7%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

LeadDecreasedLower Pb in coarse nib fractionsNib lead by particle sizeFines versus coarseCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (17.5 − 143) / 143 × 100 = -87.8%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Shell versus nib, and fine versus coarse nib fractions.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Separated shells held 163 µg/kg lead against 15.2 µg/kg in nibs; after winnowing, the fine nib fraction carried up to 143 µg/kg against about 15–20 µg/kg in coarse fractions.

ContextSelected control
MaterialBeans and nib fractions
Stagefood processing
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsOne factory study.
Tested scaleFactory
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. One factory study.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Lead (Pb)As reportedLower Pb in nib than shell163 → 15.2 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 2, Appendix C
Lead (Pb)As reportedLower Pb in coarse nib fractions143 → 17.5 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 2, Appendix C

Single study.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One factory study.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Recognise that pressing concentrates cadmium in powderfood processing · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Increased
1

Ferreira de Oliveira et al. 2021

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumIncreasedCd concentrates in powderCadmium by fractionLiquor versus powderCocoa productsHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (111 − 60) / 60 × 100 = 85.0%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Liquor versus its butter and powder fractions.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Pressing sent all liquor cadmium into the cake; cocoa butter was below 1.5 µg/kg while powder held 111 µg/kg against 60 µg/kg in liquor.

ContextSelected control
MaterialOne Bahia bean batch processed at pilot scale
Stagefood processing
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsOne pilot batch.
Tested scalePilot plant
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Measured comparison. One pilot batch.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedCd concentrates in powder60 → 111 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa productsProcessing section

Single batch; mass balance only.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One pilot batch.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Source low-cadmium origins and verify bean lotssourcing and procurement · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
Pb · Increased
1

As You Sow 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower Cd in West African beans (observational)Median bean cadmiumEcuador versus Côte d’IvoireCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (60 − 511) / 511 × 100 = -88.3%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

LeadIncreasedPb not lower in West African beansMedian bean leadEcuador versus Côte d’IvoireCocoa beansHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (25 − 10) / 10 × 100 = 150.0%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Bean origins tested by the same companies.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Median bean cadmium was 55–94 µg/kg for Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Cameroon and Brazil, against 511–892 µg/kg for Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela; lead medians did not follow the same order.

ContextSelected control
MaterialIndustry bean testing by growing origin
Stagesourcing and procurement
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsIndustry testing, 2015–2019.
Tested scaleIndustry dataset
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational comparison. Industry testing, 2015–2019.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower Cd in West African beans (observational)511 → 60 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 1 origin tables
Lead (Pb)As reportedPb not lower in West African beans10 → 25 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedCocoa beansAttachment 1 origin tables

Blinded industry data without QA details.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Industry testing, 2015–2019.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Choose cocoa content with its cadmium implication in viewproduct formulation · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Decreased
1

Kataoka et al. 2018

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumDecreasedLower Cd at lower cocoa contentMedian chocolate cadmium≥80% versus <50% cocoaChocolate as soldHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (23 − 250) / 250 × 100 = -90.8%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Cocoa-content groups in one retail survey.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Median cadmium rose from 23 µg/kg in chocolate under 50% cocoa to 120, 190 and 250 µg/kg in successive higher-cocoa groups.

ContextSelected control
Material140 chocolates sold in Japan
Stageproduct formulation
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsJapan, 2015–2016.
Tested scaleRetail survey
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational comparison. Japan, 2015–2016.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedLower Cd at lower cocoa content250 → 23 µg/kgAbsolute values unextractedChocolate as soldTable 5

Lowers cadmium per gram of product, not per gram of cocoa.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Japan, 2015–2016.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Enforce the Codex cocoa cadmium limits at lot releaselot acceptance and release · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Context
1

JECFA 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumTotal exposure 0.7% lower on averageCocoa share of dietary cadmiumWith versus without limitsDietary exposureContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Exposure with and without the limits applied to occurrence data.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Applying the Codex limits lowered cocoa’s average share of cadmium exposure from 2.2% to 1.5% and total cadmium exposure by 0.7% on average (up to 2.4%).

ContextSelected control
MaterialCocoa products in international diets
Stagelot acceptance and release
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsGlobal cluster diets.
Tested scaleExposure model
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Statistical model of compiled data. Global cluster diets.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedTotal exposure 0.7% lower on averageNumerical baseline not extractedAbsolute values unextractedDietary exposureTable 7

Modelled; testing detects and excludes, it does not remove cadmium.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Global cluster diets.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Do not rely on organic certification to lower cadmiumsourcing and procurement · As reportedCocoa
Cd · Context
1

Hands et al. 2024

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

CadmiumHigher Cd in organic productsProduct cadmiumOrganic versus non-organicProducts as soldContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Organic versus non-organic products in the same analysis.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Certified-organic products averaged about 401 µg/kg more cadmium and 20 µg/kg more lead than non-organic products.

ContextSelected control
Material72 US dark chocolate and cocoa products
Stagesourcing and procurement
AudienceIngredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
PeriodAs reported
ConditionsUS market, 2014–2022.
Tested scaleRetail survey
Sample unitsSource sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offsEffects on other metals, yield, flavour and cost not quantified unless stated.
VerificationConfirm with lot-specific results on the same form and basis.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational comparison. US market, 2014–2022.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching the bean or product, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

AnalytePeriodEffectConverted valuesOriginal means (SD)BasisLocator
Cadmium (Cd)As reportedHigher Cd in organic productsNumerical baseline not extractedAbsolute values unextractedProducts as soldRegression table

Observational; product mix not controlled.

No percentage calculated unless shown in outcomes.

Not applicable unless stated.

Trade-offs and implementation

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

US market, 2014–2022.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved fieldNext action
controlled intervention effectKeep effect unquantified unless measured in beans or product.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Intervention evidence

Trade-offs and limits of controls

Switching origin to reduce cadmium can leave lead unchanged or higher. West African beans had the lowest cadmium medians but lead medians of about 25 µg/kg, while Ecuadorian and Peruvian beans were higher in cadmium and lower in lead in the same industry testing.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Soil amendments are not uniformly effective. A review found that gypsum, or lime with compost, lowered leaf cadmium but not bean cadmium in some trials, and that some liming materials increased uptake.33García Porras GA, Santos JAd, Carvalho MRd, Pinzón-Sandoval EH, Pereira AAS, Guilherme LRG · 2025Addressing Cadmium in Cacao Farmland: A Path to Safer, Sustainable ChocolateAgricultureRead source → Biochar effects were not statistically significant in every soil tested.30Julian E. Lopez, Catalina Arroyave, Adriana Aristizabal, Byrone Almeida, Santiago Builes, Eduardo Chavez · 2022Reducing cadmium bioaccumulation in Theobroma cacao using biochar: basis for scaling-up to fieldHeliyonRead source →

Blending dilutes a high-cadmium lot rather than removing cadmium, and a lower-cocoa recipe lowers cadmium per gram of chocolate but not per gram of cocoa.2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →32Meter A, Atkinson RJ, Laliberte B · 2019Cadmium in Cacao from Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review of Research and Potential Mitigation SolutionsBioversity International / CAF Development Bank of Latin AmericaRead source → Organic certification is not a cadmium control: certified-organic products measured higher in the US analysis.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source →

Testing cocoa for metals

A useful cocoa test states the form, the basis and the cocoa-solids content, because the EU and Codex limits are set by cocoa-solids class.7European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →11Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source → Beans are usually reported on a dry-weight basis and products as sold; Singapore’s cocoa-powder limits are even set on a dry, fat-free basis.16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →34Singapore Food Agency · 2026Food Regulations: regulation 31 heavy metals, arsenic and leadSingapore Statutes OnlineRead source →

Detection limits must sit well below the relevant limit. FDA’s reporting limits were 3 µg/kg for cadmium and 10 µg/kg for lead in cocoa powder, while some monitoring submissions used limits of 40 µg/kg or more for cadmium in powder, which hides much of the lower range.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source → Several surveys reported no detection limit, reference material or recovery check, and two were held here because their values could not be reconciled with their own methods.18Amjad M, Hussain S, Baloch ZU, Raza A · 2021Determination of Heavy Metals in Locally Available Chocolates in Lahore RegionTurkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and TechnologyRead source →19Emmanuel Joy Enogbe, Agbaghare Daniel Enajeme · 2025Levels of heavy metals concentrations in chocolates from Bwari market Abuja FCT, NigeriaInternational Journal of Adulteration9:e2ijad3057Read source →

Arsenic and mercury in cocoa are reported almost entirely as totals.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →35EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2009Scientific Opinion on Arsenic in FoodEFSA Journal 2009;7(10):1351Read source → Inorganic arsenic in European monitoring of chocolate and cocoa powder was mostly below about 20 µg/kg, and no source measured methylmercury or hexavalent chromium in cocoa.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →

Why do some surveys report very high metals in chocolate?

Some very high values come from products that are mostly not cocoa or from methods that cannot support them. A Lahore survey converted digest results with inconsistent factors and included many compound confections without cocoa, and an Abuja survey reported chromium 30–40 times the limit it cited while concluding compliance.18Amjad M, Hussain S, Baloch ZU, Raza A · 2021Determination of Heavy Metals in Locally Available Chocolates in Lahore RegionTurkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and TechnologyRead source →19Emmanuel Joy Enogbe, Agbaghare Daniel Enajeme · 2025Levels of heavy metals concentrations in chocolates from Bwari market Abuja FCT, NigeriaInternational Journal of Adulteration9:e2ijad3057Read source →

Buying and verifying cocoa

Ask for lot-specific cadmium results with the cocoa-solids content, and compare them with the limit for the destination market.7European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →11Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source → The EU sets cadmium at 0.10 mg/kg for milk chocolate under 30% cocoa solids, 0.30 mg/kg for chocolate under 50%, 0.80 mg/kg for chocolate at 50% or more and 0.60 mg/kg for consumer cocoa powder.7European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source → Codex and Hong Kong set 0.3, 0.7, 0.8 and 0.9 mg/kg across the same cocoa-content bands and 2.0 mg/kg for cocoa powder, and Australia and New Zealand set 0.5 mg/kg for chocolate and cocoa products.11Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →36Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation Cap. 132VRead source →37Food Standards Australia New Zealand · 2024Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFederal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908Read source →

Other markets also limit lead and arsenic. MERCOSUR sets lead at 0.2–0.5 mg/kg and arsenic at 0.2–0.5 mg/kg for cocoa paste and chocolates, China sets lead and total arsenic at 0.5 mg/kg for cocoa products and chocolate, and the EU has applied nickel limits of 2.5–15 mg/kg since July 2025.27European Commission · 2024Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1987 of 30 July 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2023/915 as regards maximum levels of nickel in certain foodstuffsOfficial Journal of the European Union, L series, 2024/1987 (31.7.2024)Read source →38MERCOSUR Grupo Mercado Comun · 2011MERCOSUR/GMC/RES. No. 12/11: Reglamento Tecnico MERCOSUR sobre Limites Maximos de Contaminantes Inorganicos en AlimentosMERCOSUR/GMC/RES. No. 12/11Read source →39USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, FAS China Staff (Beijing) · 2023China Releases the Standard for Maximum Levels of Contaminants in Foods (USDA FAS GAIN Report CH2023-0040, unofficial translation of GB 2762-2022)USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN), Report Number CH2023-0040Read source →

For cadmium, record the bean origin and request bean-lot results, since origin is the strongest predictor but varies within countries.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source → Buyers have used bean acceptance thresholds of about 0.5–1.1 mg/kg to meet the chocolate limits.32Meter A, Atkinson RJ, Laliberte B · 2019Cadmium in Cacao from Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review of Research and Potential Mitigation SolutionsBioversity International / CAF Development Bank of Latin AmericaRead source → For lead, specify cleaning, shell and dust removal and request finished-lot results, because lead depends on handling rather than origin.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Exposure from cocoa and chocolate

Cocoa is a modest but real source of dietary cadmium.12European Food Safety Authority · 2012Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551Read source →9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source → EFSA found that chocolate products supplied 4.3% of cadmium exposure across European age groups, and close to 10% for school-age children when cocoa beans and products are added.12European Food Safety Authority · 2012Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551Read source → JECFA put cocoa products at 0.1–9.4% of cadmium exposure across national and regional diets and concluded they are not a major contributor; applying the Codex limits lowered total exposure by 0.7% on average.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →

Chocolate matters more for nickel. EFSA found that sugar and confectionery, driven mainly by chocolate, supplied up to 31% of adolescents’ nickel exposure, and cocoa beverages, with soft drinks, were the main beverage contributors for toddlers.40EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2020Update of the Risk Assessment of Nickel in Food and Drinking WaterEFSA Journal 2020;18(11):6268Read source →

Concentration is not intake: a small serving of dark chocolate can add more cadmium than a larger serving of milk chocolate.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source → Australian milk chocolate averaged 15 µg/kg cadmium and 6 µg/kg lead in the 25th total diet study, near the low end of retail chocolate.41Food Standards Australia New Zealand · 201925th Australian Total Diet StudyFood Standards Australia New ZealandRead source →

Evidence review and remaining gaps

This assessment covers every source record in the HMI library that is tagged to cocoa or mentions cocoa, cacao or chocolate, plus every matching row in WHO GEMS/Food, the FDA Total Diet Study and other indexed datasets, each with a recorded decision based on its content. Two retail surveys are held in full and individual values from several others are held because they could not be reconciled with their own methods or figures.18Amjad M, Hussain S, Baloch ZU, Raza A · 2021Determination of Heavy Metals in Locally Available Chocolates in Lahore RegionTurkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and TechnologyRead source →19Emmanuel Joy Enogbe, Agbaghare Daniel Enajeme · 2025Levels of heavy metals concentrations in chocolates from Bwari market Abuja FCT, NigeriaInternational Journal of Adulteration9:e2ijad3057Read source →20Romero-Estevez D, Yanez-Jacome GS, Simbana-Farinango K, Navarrete H · 2019Content and the relationship between cadmium, nickel, and lead concentrations in Ecuadorian cocoa beans from nine provincesFood ControlRead source →

The remaining gaps are mostly unpublished data. Per-farm bean results behind the Ecuadorian compost trial and the Peruvian national map, per-product values behind the multi-year US analysis, and EFSA’s 2020 nickel annex were not available in the library.23Thomas E, Atkinson R, Zavaleta D, Rodriguez C, Lastra S, Yovera F, Arango K, Pezo A, Aguilar J, Tames M, Ramos A, Cruz W, Cosme R, Espinoza E, Chavez CR, Ladd B · 2023The distribution of cadmium in soil and cacao beans in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source →40EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2020Update of the Risk Assessment of Nickel in Food and Drinking WaterEFSA Journal 2020;18(11):6268Read source →31Gutiérrez E, Chávez E, Gamage KHH, Argüello D, Galkaduwa MB, Hettiarachchi GM · 2022Cadmium fractionation in soils affected by organic matter application: Transfer of cadmium to cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) tissuesFrontiers in Environmental ScienceRead source →

References identify the sources used in these answers. The Sources index preserves additional discovery links; inclusion there does not mean a source has been reviewed for this assessment. Corrections, completed searches, new direct evidence and changes in requirements should reopen the relevant answer.

Cocoa FAQs

What heavy metals are found in cocoa and chocolate?

Cadmium is the metal found at levels that matter most, followed by lead; cocoa is also high in nickel and aluminium.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →4EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2015Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking waterEFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp.Read source →24Fechner C, Greiner M, Heseker H, Lindtner O · 2019Dietary exposure assessment of aluminium and cadmium from cocoa in relation to cocoa originPLoS ONERead source → Arsenic and mercury are usually low or below detection.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →

How do heavy metals get into cocoa?

Cadmium is taken up from the soil by the roots and is highest where soils are rich in cadmium and acidic.6Wade J, Ac-Pangan M, Favoretto VR, Taylor AJ, Engeseth N, Margenot AJ · 2022Drivers of cadmium accumulation in Theobroma cacao L. beans: A quantitative synthesis of soil-plant relationships across the Cacao BeltPLOS ONERead source →23Thomas E, Atkinson R, Zavaleta D, Rodriguez C, Lastra S, Yovera F, Arango K, Pezo A, Aguilar J, Tames M, Ramos A, Cruz W, Cosme R, Espinoza E, Chavez CR, Ladd B · 2023The distribution of cadmium in soil and cacao beans in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source → Lead mostly settles on the bean shell from soil and dust after harvest.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Is organic chocolate lower in heavy metals?

Not in the available evidence: in a multi-year US analysis, certified-organic products averaged about 400 µg/kg more cadmium and 20 µg/kg more lead.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source → A German organic milk chocolate pool also had more cadmium than the conventional pool (56 against 16 µg/kg), though that is one pool each.17Fechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, Sarvan I · 2022Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFood Chemistry: XRead source →

Which types of chocolate have the lowest levels?

Milk and white chocolate, because they contain the least cocoa solids.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source → In the US survey, milk chocolate averaged 60 µg/kg cadmium against 270 µg/kg in dark chocolate and 700 µg/kg in cocoa powder.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →

Which growing regions produce cocoa with the lowest cadmium?

West African beans measured lowest, with medians of 55–90 µg/kg for Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Cameroon, against 511–892 µg/kg for Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → Ranges within countries are wide, and these origins are not lower in lead.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →16Arévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, He ZL · 2017Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruScience of the Total EnvironmentRead source →

Is cocoa powder higher in metals than chocolate?

Yes: cocoa powder is the most concentrated retail form because it is defatted cocoa solids.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → US cocoa powder averaged 700 µg/kg cadmium and 110 µg/kg lead, against 270 and 30 µg/kg in dark chocolate.1Eileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, Lauren Posnick Robin · 2018Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketFood Additives & Contaminants: Part B SurveillanceRead source →

What do the levels in chocolate mean for health?

Chocolate is a modest source of dietary cadmium, supplying about 4% of European exposure and close to 10% for school-age children.12European Food Safety Authority · 2012Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551Read source → JECFA concluded cocoa products are not a major contributor to cadmium exposure, but they matter more for nickel in children and adolescents.9Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · 2022Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentWHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA)Read source →40EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2020Update of the Risk Assessment of Nickel in Food and Drinking WaterEFSA Journal 2020;18(11):6268Read source →

Can processing reduce heavy metals in cocoa?

Cleaning and shelling lower lead: cleaning cut whole-bean lead from 95.2 to 23.2–39.7 µg/kg in one factory study.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → Processing does not remove cadmium; it moves it into the cocoa solids, so powder ends up more concentrated than liquor.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source →

How much does chocolate add to children’s exposure?

For European school-age children, chocolate and cocoa products together supplied close to 10% of cadmium exposure.12European Food Safety Authority · 2012Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551Read source → Chocolate also drove up to 31% of adolescents’ nickel exposure.40EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2020Update of the Risk Assessment of Nickel in Food and Drinking WaterEFSA Journal 2020;18(11):6268Read source →

Why does dark chocolate have more cadmium than milk chocolate?

Cadmium sits in the nonfat cocoa solids, so it rises with cocoa content.10Ferreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, Tfouni SAV · 2021Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFood Control 119, 107455Read source → In Japan, the median rose from 23 µg/kg below 50% cocoa to 250 µg/kg at 80% or more.2Kataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, Akiyama H · 2018Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanFood Hygiene and Safety ScienceRead source →

Is the lead in chocolate from the soil?

Mostly not: lead is concentrated on the shell and in dust, and one investigation attributed about 70% of nib lead to contact during bean breaking and winnowing.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source → Industry shell lead had a median of 341 µg/kg against 1.2 µg/kg in nibs.3Ahn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., Ramtahal, Gideon · 2022Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportExpert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments).Read source →

Has lead or cadmium in chocolate been falling?

In a US analysis of products bought in 2014–2022, lead was lower in the 2019 and 2022 cohorts than in 2014, and cadmium was lower in 2022.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source → The cohorts were different products chosen by popularity, so this is not a market-wide trend.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source →

Does cocoa contain nickel?

Yes, at levels high for food: about 9,500 µg/kg in cocoa beans and products and 3,800 µg/kg in chocolate in European monitoring.4EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · 2015Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking waterEFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp.Read source → The EU has limited nickel since July 2025 at 2.5–7.0 mg/kg in chocolate and 15 mg/kg in cocoa powder.27European Commission · 2024Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1987 of 30 July 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2023/915 as regards maximum levels of nickel in certain foodstuffsOfficial Journal of the European Union, L series, 2024/1987 (31.7.2024)Read source →

Does cocoa contain arsenic or mercury?

Usually little: FDA cocoa powder held 29 µg/kg total arsenic and 15 µg/kg mercury, and most European inorganic-arsenic results were below about 20 µg/kg.5World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →14U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source → A US analysis reported a median of 50 µg/kg total arsenic in dark chocolate and cocoa products.26Hands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, Frame LA · 2024A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAFrontiers in NutritionRead source →

Is bean-to-bar chocolate different?

Not clearly: Brazilian bean-to-bar dark chocolates averaged 78 µg/kg cadmium and 13 µg/kg lead, and bean-to-bar milk chocolates 25 and 12 µg/kg, in the same range as the few conventional bars tested alongside them.42Burgon VH · 2023Cacau e Chocolates “Bean to Bar”: Contaminantes Inorgânicos e Ocratoxina A (Cocoa beans and “Bean to Bar” chocolates: Inorganic contaminants and Ochratoxin A)Master’s thesis, Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos (ITAL), Centro de Ciência e Qualidade de Alimentos, Campinas-SP, BrazilRead source → Artisanal Colombian single-farm bars made from high-cadmium beans averaged 1,100 µg/kg cadmium.43Bravo AG, Espinosa LF, Quiroga JA, Noriega RD, Castellanos DA · 2024Cadmium in cacao crops and artisanal chocolates in the Arauca Department, ColombiaEnvironmental Monitoring and AssessmentRead source →

References

Works cited on this page, in citation-number order. See Sources for this page’s source inventory. Each title links to a source record with bibliographic details, reported findings, and document provenance.

  1. Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa Powder and Chocolate Products in the U.S. MarketEileen Abt, Jennifer Fong Sam, Patrick Gray, and Lauren Posnick Robin · Food Additives & Contaminants: Part B Surveillance · 2018 · doi.org/10.1080/19393210.2017.1420700Peer-reviewed
  2. Surveillance of Cadmium Concentration in Chocolate and Cocoa Powder Products Distributed in JapanKataoka Y, Watanabe T, Hayashi K, and Akiyama H · Food Hygiene and Safety Science · 2018 · doi.org/10.3358/shokueishi.59.269Peer-reviewed
  3. Expert Investigation Related to Cocoa and Chocolate Products: Final ReportAhn, Timothy, Chaney, Rufus L., DiBartolomeis, Michael J., and Ramtahal, Gideon · Expert Committee report submitted to As You Sow and the Settling Defendants under a California Proposition 65 Consent Judgment; Project Manager: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG). Final Report dated March 28, 2022 (381 pp., including three technical attachments) · 2022Industry
  4. Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking waterEFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · EFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp · 2015 · doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4002Government
  5. GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsWorld Health Organization · GEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment Programme · 2026 · extranet.who.intDataset
  6. Drivers of cadmium accumulation in Theobroma cacao L. beans: A quantitative synthesis of soil-plant relationships across the Cacao BeltWade J, Ac-Pangan M, Favoretto VR, Taylor AJ, Engeseth N, and Margenot AJ · PLOS ONE · 2022 · doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261989Peer-reviewed
  7. Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006European Commission · Official Journal of the European Union · 2023 · eur-lex.europa.euRegulation
  8. Perspective on Cadmium and Lead in Cocoa and ChocolateEileen Abt and Lauren Posnick Robin · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2020 · doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b08295Peer-reviewed
  9. Cadmium: dietary exposure assessmentJoint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · WHO Food Additives Series, No. 82 (Safety evaluation of certain contaminants in food, prepared by the 91st meeting of JECFA) · 2022 · www.who.intGovernment
  10. Cd and Pb in cocoa beans: Occurrence and effects of chocolate processingFerreira de Oliveira AP, Milani RF, Efraim P, Morgano MA, and Tfouni SAV · Food Control 119, 107455 · 2021 · doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107455Peer-reviewed
  11. General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius Commission · Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme) · 1995 · www.fao.orgGovernment
  12. Cadmium dietary exposure in the European populationEuropean Food Safety Authority · EFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2551 · 2012 · doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2551Government
  13. Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Cadmium Contamination in Cocoa Beans (CXC 81-2022)Codex Alimentarius Commission · FAO and WHO, 2023. Codex Alimentarius Code of Practice No. CXC 81-2022. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome · 2022 · doi.org/10.4060/cc5333enGovernment
  14. FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsU.S. Food and Drug Administration · FDA Total Diet Study · 2022 · www.fda.govDataset
  15. Over-the-Counter (OTC) Monograph M016: Skin Protectant Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use (Posted September 24, 2021)U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2021 · www.fda.govGovernment
  16. Heavy metal accumulation in leaves and beans of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in major cacao growing regions in PeruArévalo-Gardini E, Arévalo-Hernández CO, Baligar VC, and He ZL · Science of the Total Environment · 2017 · doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.122Peer-reviewed
  17. Results of the BfR MEAL Study: In Germany, mercury is mostly contained in fish and seafood while cadmium, lead, and nickel are present in a broad spectrum of foodsFechner C, Hackethal C, Höpfner T, Dietrich J, Bloch D, Lindtner O, et al. · Food Chemistry: X · 2022 · doi.org/10.1016/j.fochx.2022.100326Peer-reviewed
  18. Determination of Heavy Metals in Locally Available Chocolates in Lahore RegionAmjad M, Hussain S, Baloch ZU, and Raza A · Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology · 2021 · doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v9i6.1144-1153.4262Peer-reviewed
  19. Levels of heavy metals concentrations in chocolates from Bwari market Abuja FCT, NigeriaEmmanuel Joy Enogbe and Agbaghare Daniel Enajeme · International Journal of Adulteration9:e2ijad3057 · 2025 · doi.org/10.54905/disssi.v9i10.e2ijad3057Peer-reviewed
  20. Content and the relationship between cadmium, nickel, and lead concentrations in Ecuadorian cocoa beans from nine provincesRomero-Estevez D, Yanez-Jacome GS, Simbana-Farinango K, and Navarrete H · Food Control · 2019 · doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.106750Peer-reviewed
  21. Relationships between cadmium in tissues of cacao trees and soils in plantations of Trinidad and TobagoRamtahal G, Yen IC, Bekele I, Bekele F, Wilson L, Maharaj K, et al. · Food and Nutrition Sciences · 2016 · doi.org/10.4236/fns.2016.71005Peer-reviewed
  22. From soil to cacao bean: Unravelling the pathways of cadmium translocation in a high Cd accumulating cultivar of Theobroma cacao LBlommaert H, Aucour A-M, Wiggenhauser M, Moens C, Telouk P, Campillo S, et al. · Frontiers in Plant Science · 2022 · doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1055912Peer-reviewed
  23. The distribution of cadmium in soil and cacao beans in PeruThomas E, Atkinson R, Zavaleta D, Rodriguez C, Lastra S, Yovera F, et al. · Science of the Total Environment · 2023 · doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163372Peer-reviewed
  24. Dietary exposure assessment of aluminium and cadmium from cocoa in relation to cocoa originFechner C, Greiner M, Heseker H, and Lindtner O · PLoS ONE · 2019 · doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217990Peer-reviewed
  25. Migration of aluminum from food contact materials to food - a health risk for consumers? Part I of III: exposure to aluminum, release of aluminum, tolerable weekly intake (TWI), toxicological effects of aluminum, study design, and methodsStahl T, Falk S, Rohrbeck A, Georgii S, Herzog C, Wiegand A, et al. · Environmental Sciences Europe · 2017 · doi.org/10.1186/s12302-017-0116-yPeer-reviewed
  26. A multi-year heavy metal analysis of 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products in the USAHands JM, Anderson ML, Cooperman T, Balsky JE, and Frame LA · Frontiers in Nutrition · 2024 · doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1366231Peer-reviewed
  27. Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1987 of 30 July 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2023/915 as regards maximum levels of nickel in certain foodstuffsEuropean Commission · Official Journal of the European Union, L series, 2024/1987 (31.7.2024) · 2024 · data.europa.euRegulation
  28. Induction of rhizobium japonicum in the fermentative mass of two varieties of cacao (Theobroma Cacao L.) as a strategy for the decrease of cadmiumChang JV, Cortez LV, Solorzano CE, and Flor FI · International Journal of Health Sciences · 2022 · doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS3.8672Peer-reviewed
  29. Mitigation of Cadmium Accumulation in Cocoa Beans Using Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi, Biochar and Callisia repensVega-Jara L, Palacin Agüero J, Farfán Tucto S, Vangeli S, and Márquez-Dávila K · Folia Amazónica · 2025 · revistas.iiap.gob.pePeer-reviewed
  30. Reducing cadmium bioaccumulation in Theobroma cacao using biochar: basis for scaling-up to fieldJulian E. Lopez, Catalina Arroyave, Adriana Aristizabal, Byrone Almeida, Santiago Builes, and Eduardo Chavez · Heliyon · 2022 · doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09790Peer-reviewed
  31. Cadmium fractionation in soils affected by organic matter application: Transfer of cadmium to cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) tissuesGutiérrez E, Chávez E, Gamage KHH, Argüello D, Galkaduwa MB, and Hettiarachchi GM · Frontiers in Environmental Science · 2022 · doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.954521Peer-reviewed
  32. Cadmium in Cacao from Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review of Research and Potential Mitigation SolutionsMeter A, Atkinson RJ, and Laliberte B · Bioversity International / CAF Development Bank of Latin America · 2019 · scioteca.caf.comGovernment
  33. Addressing Cadmium in Cacao Farmland: A Path to Safer, Sustainable ChocolateGarcía Porras GA, Santos JAd, Carvalho MRd, Pinzón-Sandoval EH, Pereira AAS, and Guilherme LRG · Agriculture · 2025 · doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15040433Review
  34. Food Regulations: regulation 31 heavy metals, arsenic and leadSingapore Food Agency · Singapore Statutes Online · 2026 · sso.agc.gov.sgRegulation
  35. Scientific Opinion on Arsenic in FoodEFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · EFSA Journal 2009;7(10):1351 · 2009 · doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1351Government
  36. Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025 · www.elegislation.gov.hkRegulation
  37. Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFood Standards Australia New Zealand · Federal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908 · 2024 · www.legislation.gov.auRegulation
  38. MERCOSUR/GMC/RES. No. 12/11: Reglamento Tecnico MERCOSUR sobre Limites Maximos de Contaminantes Inorganicos en AlimentosMERCOSUR Grupo Mercado Comun · MERCOSUR/GMC/RES. No. 12/11 · 2011Regulation
  39. China Releases the Standard for Maximum Levels of Contaminants in Foods (USDA FAS GAIN Report CH2023-0040, unofficial translation of GB 2762-2022)USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, FAS China Staff (Beijing) · USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN), Report Number CH2023-0040 · 2023 · www.fas.usda.govRegulation
  40. Update of the Risk Assessment of Nickel in Food and Drinking WaterEFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · EFSA Journal 2020;18(11):6268 · 2020 · doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6268Government
  41. 25th Australian Total Diet StudyFood Standards Australia New Zealand · 2019 · www.foodstandards.gov.auGovernment
  42. Cacau e Chocolates “Bean to Bar”: Contaminantes Inorgânicos e Ocratoxina A (Cocoa beans and “Bean to Bar” chocolates: Inorganic contaminants and Ochratoxin A)Burgon VH · Master’s thesis, Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos (ITAL), Centro de Ciência e Qualidade de Alimentos, Campinas-SP, Brazil · 2023 · scholar.google.comThesis
  43. Cadmium in cacao crops and artisanal chocolates in the Arauca Department, ColombiaBravo AG, Espinosa LF, Quiroga JA, Noriega RD, and Castellanos DA · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s10661-024-12539-9Peer-reviewed
  44. Soil properties and agronomic factors affecting cadmium concentrations in cacao beans: A nationwide survey in EcuadorArgüello D, Chávez E, Lauryssen F, Vanderschueren R, Smolders E, and Montalvo D · Science of The Total Environment · 2019 · doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.292Peer-reviewed

Sources

Browse Cocoa Sources for sources cited on this page and additional discovery candidates. The searchable index distinguishes verified citation use from discovery relationships whose relevance has not been established.

Update history

4 November 2026: Added the Argüello 2019 nationwide Ecuador cacao bean cadmium survey.

22 October 2026 — Rebuilt from every cocoa and chocolate record in the library: WHO GEMS/Food and FDA monitoring results, retail, farm and total diet studies, industry origin testing, form-specific comparisons, verified limits and stage-led controls.