Have you found yourself pausing over recent headlines about chocolate?
In late 2025, a wave of sensational media coverage swept through France and Belgium following investigative reporting by the French consumer group UFC-Que Choisir. Headlines warning of ‘poisoned pleasures’, heavy metals in chocolate, and potential risks to children circulated widely, raising uncomfortable questions about the safety of one of Europe’s most cherished foods.
Particularly unsettling was the so-called ‘toxic bio’ paradox: organic and Fairtrade dark chocolates — often perceived as safer and more ethical — were reported in some cases to contain higher levels of cadmium than conventional products. Other stories focused on child exposure, highlighting that a single portion of certain dark chocolates could account for a substantial share of a child’s tolerable daily intake.
While chocolate became the visible focus of the debate, the underlying issue was far broader. Food safety issues resulting from opaque supply chains have plagued everything from baby formula to olive oil.
Chocolate has long been perceived as a low-risk food category. Quality discussions have historically focused on flavour, texture, and shelf life rather than chemical contamination.
That perception is now under strain.
Across Europe, regulators, laboratories, and manufacturers are confronting a growing reality: a rising proportion of cocoa and chocolate products are failing or narrowly passing contamination thresholds that were once considered peripheral risks. What appears on paper as incremental regulatory tightening is, in practice, exposing deeper structural weaknesses in how cocoa is processed and moved through the value chain.
The question increasingly being asked, quietly, is whether traditional cocoa logistics can continue to deliver chocolate that is legally compliant in the European Union without fundamental change.
Contamination is Not a Flavour Problem
One of the most challenging aspects of contamination in chocolate is that many of the most problematic substances are sensorially invisible. A chocolate bar can taste excellent and still exceed legal limits for contaminants.
Many of the most consequential contaminants — including heavy metals, mineral oil hydrocarbons, and certain aromatic hydrocarbons — are chemically active but sensorially silent. They do not affect taste, aroma, or processing characteristics, meaning products can appear high-quality while still failing legal food-safety thresholds.
According to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), cocoa and chocolate products are among the largest contributors to dietary cadmium exposure, particularly for children and high consumers (EFSA CONTAM Panel, 2023). At the same time, regulatory attention has intensified around lead, mineral oil hydrocarbons (MOSH/MOAH), pesticide residues, and mycotoxins.
These contaminants differ in origin and risk profile, but they share a common characteristic: once they enter the cocoa system, they are difficult, or impossible, to remove downstream.
The Proportionality Of Risk: Where Contaminants Enter
Understanding contamination requires distinguishing between different substances and the stages at which risk is most pronounced.
Among the group of heavy metals, cadmium primarily originates from soil uptake, depending on local geochemistry, whereas lead contamination is more closely associated with post-harvest exposure. Studies cited by EFSA and academic research show that lead levels often increase during fermentation, drying and transport due to environmental dust, and contact with contaminated surfaces.
Mineral oil hydrocarbons (MOSH/MOAH) are rarely linked to agricultural practices. Instead, they are strongly associated with post-harvest logistics. The use of jute sacks treated with batching oils, recycled packaging materials, and lubricants in transport and storage environments has been identified as a major migration pathway, particularly given cocoa’s high fat content.
Free fatty acids (FFAs), while not a contaminant by definition, are associated with mould activity, particularly during uncontrolled fermentation and drying, or due to insect infestation resulting from poor storage, which also increases the risk of mycotoxins such as Ochratoxin A (OTA).
Pesticides And The Limits Of Retrospective Traceability
Pesticide residues remain a compliance concern, particularly as detection limits improve. However, the challenge is not simply whether residues exist, but whether they can be accurately attributed.
In fragmented supply chains where beans from multiple farmers are fermented, dried, and stored together, retrospective traceability becomes unreliable. When a residue is detected at export or import, it is often impossible to determine when, where, or by whom a substance was applied.
Why Testing Alone Is No Longer Sufficient
The industry's response to contamination has largely focused on end-product testing. While testing remains essential, it is inherently reactive. It identifies non-compliance after the risk has already materialised.
As regulatory thresholds tighten and analytical sensitivity increases, reliance on testing alone leads to rising costs, higher rejection rates, and increased pressure to blend or downgrade material. None of these measures addresses the underlying causes of contamination.
From Traceability To Controllability At The First Mile
What is increasingly clear is that compliance depends less on retrospective documentation and more on identifying which risks can realistically be controlled.
It is important to distinguish between what can be fully controlled and what can only be managed. Certain risks, such as soil-borne cadmium or inappropriate pesticide use, cannot be eliminated through process design alone. However, first-mile data, batch integrity, and early segregation make these risks visible sooner, allowing informed sourcing, blending, or exclusion decisions before compliance is compromised.
The first mile — fermentation, drying, and early transport — is where most contamination pathways either open or can be closed. At this stage, process design decisions have a disproportionate influence on downstream risk.
Emerging first-mile traceability and process-monitoring approaches focus on capturing data at the moment risk is introduced. This includes monitoring fermentation and drying performance, handling environments, and material contact points in real time.
The Role Of Source-Based Process Design
Source-based processing models, including centralised or controlled fermentation approaches being explored in producing countries such as Cameroon, are increasingly discussed to reduce cumulative contamination risk.
By limiting open-air exposure, reducing batch mixing, and standardising post-harvest conditions, these systems can materially lower the probability of exceeding limit values for contaminants and residues. At the same time, any remaining impurities can be traced and minimised at their source.
The Technical Conversation The Industry Can No Longer Avoid
These issues will be examined in depth at ‘Managing Cocoa Contaminants: Know-How, Monitoring and Mitigation’, a technical workshop taking place during Chocoa 2026 in Amsterdam.
The session will be led by Dr Frank Heckel, Head of LCI Cologne, together with Dr Silke Elwers, VP of Product Integrity at COOKO. The workshop will focus on the current legal situation and the latest news regarding residues and contaminants in cocoa and chocolate in Europe. It also explains how contamination enters cocoa systems, which risks are controllable, and where current approaches fall short.
WORKSHOP
Managing Cocoa Contaminants: Know-How, Monitoring and Mitigation
Thursday, 19 February 2026
10:00–12:00
Chocoa 2026
Amsterdam
TICKETS & INFO HERE
As regulatory scrutiny intensifies, the question facing the chocolate industry is no longer whether contamination matters, but whether existing systems are capable of meeting the standards now being applied.
Key Cocoa Contaminants and Points of Risk in the Value Chain
- Sponsored content: This article was created in collaboration with COOKO. While it aligns with our audience’s interests, the ideas and content are provided by COOKO, which retains copyright and editorial responsibility. We’re sharing it to offer our readers relevant information and perspectives.
