For children (and not only) any occasion is good to dress up and get sweets, and Halloween is no exception. Adults should pay a little attention to the quality of sweets, chocolates and snacks in the shape of pumpkins, ghosts and more. These products may in fact contain horror ingredients and additives, as shown by our market survey on 13 proposals for the holiday that falls on October 31st.
1) Slam the monster on the packaging
Halloween sweets almost always are characterized only by the packaging, decorated with skeletons, ghosts and other horror characters. In other cases, it is the shape that contextualizes the food.
The recipes are not very suitable, as often happens, for children’s nutrition:
– sugar dominates, despite EFSA’s recommendations to reduce its consumption to a minimum (1)
– problematic food additives and synthetic flavorings also crop up in various Halloween sweets and snacks.
2) Tiger, look but don’t eat
The Dutch chain Tiger pays little attention to the quality of food, as already emerged in a previous survey. (2)
Two out of three, among the Halloween products examined, are particularly unsuitable for children:
– the marshmallows pumpkin and skull shaped (with pork and beef gelatine), are made up of 75% sugar (encouraged by the addition of glucose-fructose syrup) and contain colourings which should be avoided.
The E120, carmine red, obtained by crushing cochineal insects, can cause allergies and promote hyperactivity. And it is also present in various other foods intended for children, as we have seen, such as drinks with orange juice and milk snacks (such as Frùttolo). It is prohibited in organic products and subject to an acceptable daily dose of 2,5 mg/kg of body weight (3,4)
The E133, brilliant blue FCF, when consumed in excess has been found to have cytotoxic and genotoxic potential on human blood lymphocytes, as has also been seen; (5)
– French fries Halloween paprika-flavored crisps are truly horror. Not so much for the ghost shape as for the presence of smoke aromas (in addition to other synthetic aromas) which, as we have seen, are genotoxic. That is, capable of damaging DNA and promoting the onset of cancer and hereditary diseases. For this reason, the authorization for their use in food has not been renewed, with a shameful derogation that allows their continued use for another five years, until 2029. (6) As if that were not enough, the salt content of Tiger crisps stands at 1,7%. One bag is therefore worth a third of the maximum daily salt limit indicated by the WHO.
2.1) Tiger, ‘milk chocolate’ coins
The chocolate coins milk is the third Tiger product reviewed. Cocoa butter and cocoa mass are Rainforest Alliance certified and the flavor is natural vanilla.
Sugar once again is abundant beyond measure, 62%, in first place in the ingredients list. And saturated fats express 16%.
The emulsifier soy lecithin is a must. It is not recommended for people allergic to it since the possibility of contamination by the protein fractions of this allergen cannot be excluded.
Similar recipe and nutritional values qualify the Walcor Horrorween chocolate coins. Also close to the price (22 €/kg), but with a non-certified cocoa.
Less sugar (56,1%), more saturated fats (18,6%) and synthetic flavours are found in the much more expensive milk chocolate shape from Dolfin.
3) Dolfin, jellies with fruit juice
Fruit juice (7%), vegetable colorants and a modest quantity of sugars (12,5%) favorably distinguish Dolfin Slime jellies, with the defect of synthetic aromas.
The thickener – necessary in jellies (where often Porcine collagen is used) – is agar-agar (E 406), a mixture of polysaccharides extracted from red algae. A non-problematic additive, except in excess which can cause intestinal disorders (bloating, flatulence, laxative effect).
Agar-agar is prohibited in some confectionery products due to the risk of suffocation, especially for children and the elderly. The label warns that ‘Adult supervision is recommended for the consumption of jellies by children under 5 years of age due to their limited chewing ability‘.
4) Zàini, soft but to be used with care
The bag for Halloween by Zàini contains two types of sweets, soft candies (mou) and pralines.
Sugar is the first ingredient in both sweets, which contain high levels of it.
The mou candies add glucose syrup to the sugar, in a mix that makes the percentage of sugars soar to 65%. In addition to synthetic flavorings.
Coconut and cocoa butter bring the saturated fat of chocolate pralines to 25%, the highest level of all 13 products tested. With added soy lecithin and natural flavors.
5) Ferrero, the bat
A bat-shaped envelope is Ferrero’s Halloween proposal. The package contains 8 pieces, including six milk chocolate snacks (two of which are double) and two Tic Tacs, with different synthetic flavors.
The whole envelope costs around 11 euros (50 euros/kg, like high-end pastry products).
5.1) Kinder Ferrero, palm oil for everyone
From Nutella even vegan to Kinder sweets, Ferrero keeps palm oil in the recipe. A tropical fat that GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade) persists in criticizing, both for its socio-environmental impact in the lands of origin, and for its nutritional impact. (7)
Two of the four sweets milk chocolate bars in the Ferrero bag are identical (Kinder and Kinder Maxi bars), two others are made using the same basic recipe with the addition of cereals or hazelnut cream.
The bars Kinder and Kinder Maxi are characterized by sugar as the primary ingredient (53,3%). And saturated fats reach 22,6%, the highest peak of the entire sample after Zàini pralines. Emulsifiers (soy lecithin) and vanillin (synthetic) complete the recipe.
On this basis, the other two chocolate snacks are divided into:
– Kinder Cereali, with a little less chocolate and a minimum of cereals, compared to the standard recipe. Sugars thus drop to just under half of the snack (49,1%) and saturated fats to 21,9%
– Kinder Bueno, filled with hazelnut cream, with 43,6% sugar and 16,8% saturated fat.
Emulsifiers and vanillin (synthetic vanilla) always present.
5.2) Tic Tac, sugar and synthetic flavours
The two candies Tic Tac are almost identical in terms of recipe and nutritional values:
– sugar in first place, representing 91-93% of the candy
– filled with maltodextrin (carbohydrates) and rice starch
– thickener gum arabic (E414), which may cause gastrointestinal discomfort (bloating, flatulence, laxative effect) in case of heavy consumption or combination with other gums.
The tastes, in the references on the company website, are quite ‘suggestive’:
– a ‘unparalleled fruity orange heart’ in Tic Tac Orange, whose ingredients only include synthetic flavours
– ‘the strawberry flavor blends with vanilla and mint’ in the strawberry mix, where ‘strawberry powder and lemon juice powder‘ are preceded by synthetic aromas, without any trace of mint or vanilla.
A taste for horror, after all, rhymes with Halloween.
Marta Strinati
Footnotes
(1) Marta Strinati. The harmful role of sugars in the diet, EFSA opinion. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(2) Dario Dongo. Tiger, nice items but snacks with outlawed labels and palm oil all over the place. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(3) Marta Strinati, Dario Dongo. Juice, orange juice or drink? 34 products in comparison. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(4) Marta Strinati. Frùttolo and other milk snacks, 10 products compared. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(5) Marta Strinati. Toxicity of synthetic food colors, scientific review. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(6) Marta Strinati. Smoke aromas, genotoxic but still very widespread. Here they are in 40 products. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade).
(7) Dario Dongo. Brazil, land grabbing and deforestation for the ‘sustainable’ palm oil of Ferrero and Big Food. Open letter. 22.5.23
Professional journalist since January 1995, he has worked for newspapers (Il Messaggero, Paese Sera, La Stampa) and periodicals (NumeroUno, Il Salvagente). She is the author of journalistic surveys on food, she has published the book "Reading labels to know what we eat".
 any occasion is good to dress up and get sweets, and Halloween is no exception.){kind=link}