There goes a saying “ignorance is bliss” but that certainly doesn’t apply to ignorance over the food we put in our bodies. I’ve always been calorie-conscious: from reading the nutrition label on the back of my friends’ bags of Doritos in seventh grade to refusing certain types of salad dressings in college because you could practically see the globs of fat setting in the containers of Ranch and Blue Cheese. Yet, when I want a really good cookie, I’ll eat it whether it has 40 calories or 400 calories (but if it’s the latter, I’ll just eat one).

Apparently, I’m with the minority.  According to a recent study reported in USA Today about calorie count on fast-food restaurant menus, “People who used the calorie information available at fast-food chain restaurants in New York City bought 106 fewer calories’ worth of food at lunch than those who didn’t see or use the information.”

Other findings from the study, funded by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the city of New York, included:

• 15% of customers say they used the calorie information at lunch; 56% say they saw it.
• Those who used the information purchased an average of 754 calories’ worth of food at lunch in 2009; those who didn’t see or use the information bought 860 calories’ worth of food.
• Those who saw and used the information consumed 152 fewer calories at hamburger chains and 73 fewer calories at sandwich chains compared with everyone else.

When you go to restaurants that post the calorie counts on menus, does it affect your order? Do you choose lower-calorie items when they’re available, or do you eat what you crave?

Today’s review marks some firsts for me. Michel Cluizel, a famous french chocolate maker and chocolatier, was one of the first great chocolates I ever had the pleasure of tasting as I began my journey as a candy enthusiast. Along with that, I experienced many tasting firsts with his work: first “dark” milk chocolate, first single origin chocolate, and my first taste of a 99% chocolate.

I first had 99% truffle back in 2007 at the New York City Chocolate show. It was such a new thing for me back then, and it was one of things I was most excited about discovering that day. I only had it once more after that, before discovering this beautiful tasting box, of course, and that was when Michel Cluizel had a small chocolate shop in the back of ABC Carpets in New York.

Now I was lucky enough to find a box of the 99% and the 85% truffles in a recent trip into Philadelphia. The box is gorgeous and slick with a matte black surface and white lettering. It describes itself as “Tasting box 8 ganaches dark chocolate” which is translated from the french written above it.

What’s cool about this find is that it has a list on ingredients on the back, so I know exactly what makes these intense chocolate a complete masterpiece. Listed is cocoa, cane sugar, anhydrous butter, cocoa butter, cream, sorbitol syrup and honey, coloring agents, whole milk powder, ginger, bourbon vanilla pod, spices. Unfortunately, it doesn’t separate the ingredients for the 99% and the 85% pieces. Interesting.

Th texture of these is just incredible. I haven’t really experienced a smoother and more rich ganache than these, unless, of course you get them a few hours fresh. They’re velvety smooth and very thick on the tongue. You do sense the difference from the shell and the creamy interior, but they quickly melt together in the mouth, leaving a very seamless experience.

The flavors are bitter, but the butter and cream really cut it so it’s more enjoyable that you’d first think. I know 99% sounds very daunting! The 99% has acidic fruity notes, while still giving a full chocolatey taste. The 85% is milder with more caramel notes mixed with berries, it’s still a dark chocolate, but it’s a little creamier and sweeter.

These are terribly luxurious, and even though they are little works of chocolate art, I can’t see myself buying them with any regularity. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product, which is superb, but more because of availability of funds and finding the product again.

I have a big passion for retro/classic candies. I think the biggest reason, aside from the fact that they’re usually delicious, is that they’re a marriage between two of some of my favorite things: food and history. So when I heard about the very retro/regional bar, Blue Monday, hailing from Kentucky, you bet I was super eager to get my hands on one. It took me a few years to finally get around to ordering myself some on the internet, but it was well worth the wait.

The package design is very classic, and reminds me of my favorite candy bar of all time: the Zero bar. It’s a bright silver wrapper with blue writing on it. The specific bars I got have the 135th Kentucky Derby date and location on it. Just goes to show what a local candy this is!

The whole bar clocks in at 1 oz and 130 calories, which is a nice size for an afternoon snack. The ingredients are simple: sugar, water, cream, and bittersweet chocolate. Very straightforward and honest.

The bar is the size of a credit card and looks like a brick with a nice rippling texture from the chocolate enrobing. It smells wonderfully chocolatey with notes of sweetness, cream, cocoa and coconut.

My much anticipated first bite is immediately a surprise to me, as it’s very soft. It looks hard and dense, so I was expecting the center to be similar to taffy. Instead it’s very solid, very sweet, and immediately soft and airy on my tongue. It dissolves quickly and cleanly with no slick or greasy feel. The inside is actually a type of traditional cream pull candy, which is a more airy and light taffy. So in a way, my expectations were right.

The flavor is sweet, lightly milky and similar to marshmallows minus the vanilla. The chocolate is rich and solid in flavor with a pleasant creaminess. Very classic and old fashioned tasting, and I’m immediately smitten with it.

I’m so happy I finally gave this bar a try, and even though it wasn’t exactly what I was expecting (which, to be totally fair, I had no idea what to expect) it turned out to be something better. Just goes to show there’s a reason these bars are still made today!

The owner of Q.bel started the company as a healthy dad’s answer to his son’s desire to eat the same snacks as his friends. Rather than cave and give him foods filled with artificial flavors, colors and additives, he created his own all natural chocolate bars. The bars are made with real chocolate, and:

• No Artificial Colors
• No Artificial Flavors
• No Preservatives
• No High Fructose Corn Syrup
• No Hydrogenated Oils

This is such a great idea that I wholeheartedly support. We should all encourage the snack industry to create products that aren’t filled with artificial nonsense. I’m not asking for diet food. I am aware that there will be sugar, fat and calories in my snacks; I would just prefer them to not have artificial additives. This is why it makes me so sad to say that I was not wowed by this bar.

I found Q.bel at Whole Foods Market. They were on sale that week for a dollar each, so I decided to give one a try. The variety I chose is a pair of milk chocolate covered wafer bars topped with a layer of crisped rice. The chocolate cream-filled wafers were rather flavorless, and the crisped rice top layer was a distracting textural element. The bars are very light and crispy but just don’t pack much flavor. They are by no means bad, but this just isn’t what I would reach for when I’m having a serious chocolate craving.

I’m sorry Q.bel. I really did want to love you.

This is another classic candy that takes the form of a chocolate cup with a creamy marshmallow filling. I cannot help but compare it to its East Coast counterpart the Mallo cup, which is a candy I go ga-ga for, as Cup O Gold shares a few similar traits, like also having coconut bits in it. That’s where the similarities end though, as Cup O Gold has bits of almonds tossed in there along with different forms of packaging. Cup O Gold carries one big cup, whereas Mallo Cup holds two. Look at it as the difference between a package of regular Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups and the one Reese’s Big Cup.

I adore the packaging of Cup O Gold, with its 1970’s color scheme with browns, yellows and oranges and the gleefully grinning prospector (who, makes a large appearance on the boxes that hold the Cup O Gold. He’s just grinning in a small gold emblem on the individual packages). It makes me happy for many reasons I won’t get into, but it may have something to do with my weak spot for vintage design and old west films.

The flavor is nice, with the chocolate sweet and giving a nice chocolate and caramel flavor. There’s more chocolate-to-marshmallow here, so the marshmallow is less of a flavor and is more drippy and fresh than the Mallo Cup. You can still easily taste the marshmallow, which has a light vanilla flavor. It’s more like the infamous Valomilk that’s specific to the Midwest. I really have to concentrate to taste the coconut and almonds, as they’re mixed into the chocolate. The pieces are so small they provide more of a texture than anything.

Most people I meet prefer either Mallo Cup or Cup O Gold. My theory was that it was a classic East Coast/West Coast split on it. That is, until I gave one to my boyfriend (who is a classic Pennsylvania native) and declared he thought that Cup O Gold was the superior of the two. Traitor.

I do love the Cup O Gold, I just can’t get past the fact that I like Mallo Cup better. I think I like the size and ratio of ingredients better. I do pick one up whenever I see these in stores though, because unless I play the comparison game, these a a golden nugget of a candy. You don’t come across them often and you feel like you found treasure when you do.

“Each bar combines whole-grain oats and roasted peanuts, with a chocolate coating on the bottom and a stripe on top.”

Compare that with what’s on the box and the bars’ wrappers: “Chewy Peanut Sweet & Salty Granola Bars.”

Notice the difference? The latter never mentions the chocolate (though it does proclaim the bar to be “fudge dipped”). That’s because there are food labeling laws that require a product to contain cocoa butter (in other words, actual chocolate) in order for it to be called chocolate. A quick glance on the Sweet & Salty bars’ ingredients reveals a total lack of any cocoa product. The “chocolate” on the bar is actually made from palm and soybean oil.

Funny how the labeling law doesn’t seem to apply to press releases. Or to putting photos of chocolate on the box, if not the word “chocolate.”

The bar is on the thin side for a chewy granola bar (compared to Quaker or Nature Valley bars), at about 1 cm tall, but is otherwise normally sized at about 4 cm by 9 cm.

The granola part is mostly whole grain oats mixed with crisped rice and the occasional peanut. The texture of the bar is soft and squishy, and it has a soft bite that gives easily. It’s a bit slipperier (yes that’s the correct form; I looked it up) than I expected from a granola bar, but not exactly greasy.

It tastes mostly of salty peanuts against the oaty nuttiness of whole oats. The bar is a good amount of honeyed sweet - enough to be noticeable, but not so much that it’s cloying or feels like you’re eating a candy bar. The non-chocolate sort of comes through as a light chocolatey finish, but just barely, and it tastes too weak, with no cocoa notes to bolster it.

All in all, the bar tastes pretty decent for a granola bar. It’s not revelatory or anything, but I’ve yet to find a granola bar that blows my palate away. But the complete lack of real chocolate is a letdown, and the nutrition stats are pretty rough. Each bar is 190 calories, 9 grams of fat (14% of your recommended daily intake) and 4.5 grams of saturated fat (a whopping 23% of your recommended daily intake). With those numbers, you might as well have a candy bar.
Sorry, Sunbelt. If you’d used real chocolate instead of all that palm oil and soybean oil, the bar would’ve tasted better, and I daresay it may have been healthier as well. With your current formula, however, you get a finger wag and a shame on you! for trying to pass off mockolate as the real thing.

Don’t you just want to dive into that? Without even hearing about it. The fluffy white cream on the top. The drizzle of maple syrup dripping down. That little piece in the front, flipped up and primed for a quick nibble. The fork at the ready. Mmmm…. It just says bite me. When it comes to Fall, you can’t think of the season without thinking about pumpkins. Whether it’s carving them, picking them, or baking with them, pumpkins just scream Fall. Right up there with apples, changing leaves, a chill in the air and a call for soup.

When it comes to breakfast for dinner, I know my kids are ready and willing. We’ve been doing it every other week or so, and it’s been a hit since the start. With extra time at a deficit in the morning, having breakfast for dinner gives us an opportunity to have the more full, elaborate breakfast meal that we normally miss in the early morning weekday rush of getting out the door. And pancakes? No arm twisting needed. Once I spied this recipe, I knew it would be perfect for dinner. I nixed the cloves, nutmeg and ginger portions of the recipe; those spices tend to be a little stronger than I’d like for kid-friendly food, and truth be told, it wasn’t missed at all. Of course, I might not be able to call these Pumpkin Spice Pancakes then, but I won’t tell if you won’t.

My son was happy to find out we were having pancakes for dinner, but with him being very partial to Banana Pancakes, I held my breath as he took the first bite. I needn’t have worried. “These are good,” he said as he went back for bite after bite after bite. And my daughter? Well, she’s very partial to things that have a sauce to dip in, so I cut up her pancakes and put a small dollop of whipped cream on her plate and she went to town dipping the pancakes in the whipped cream. Can you blame her?

With only a scant amount of sugar in the recipe, and the addition of pumpkin and whole wheat flour, this is a dish you can eat without guilt. Well, assuming your pile of whipped cream or maple syrup doesn’t outweigh the pancake. A plate with crisp bacon and a big stack of these babies and dinner was done faster than you can say “breakfast.” Dig in!

Pumpkin Spice Pancakes
Recipe from Joy the Baker, who adapted it from Martha Stewart

makes 14-18 small pancakes

3/4 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 cup whole wheat flour
2 tablespoons brown sugar
2 teaspoons baking powder
1/4 teaspoon salt
3/4 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1/4 teaspoon fresh grated nutmeg (I skipped)
pinch of ground ginger (I skipped)
pinch of ground cloves (I skipped)
1 cup milk
1/2 cup canned pumpkin
1 egg
2 tablespoons vegetable oil or melted butter

Whisk together flours, salt, spices, sugar and baking powder in a medium sized bowl. In a separate bowl, whisk together milk, egg, pumpkin and vegetable oil or melted butter. Pour the wet ingredients into the dry ingredients and whisk until just combined. Don’t worry if you have a few lumps. You don’t want to over beat the batter, it’ll produce tough pancakes.

Let the batter sit for 10 minutes while you heat the skillet. Over low-medium heat melt a tablespoon of butter or vegetable oil . Once skillet is hot, spoon a heaping 2 tablespoons of batter (I used roughly a 1/4 cup measure for each one for bigger pancakes) per pancake into the skillet. When pancake starts to bubble slightly, carefully flip over.

Once browned and cooked through place pancakes on a oven proof plate and place in the oven set at 200 degrees F to keep warm while the rest of the pancakes are cooked.

Serve with whipped cream and cinnamon sugar… or maple syrup. Delicious!

According to Cheerios, eating Honey-Nut Cheerios is an easy way to help lower cholesterol. Fine. Not everything you do can be a mega challenge. Mixing up easy things (drinking more water, for example) and harder ones (taking up a new physical activity or sport) is a good way to improve health. But the messages on the box? They promote idleness — the very thing that is contributing to wider waistlines!

Here are a few examples of what Cheerios considers challenging, and suggests easy alternatives to:

• Walking five miles
• Giving up your favorite sweets
• Finding 30 minutes to exercise
• Holding off a snack attack

Seriously? It’s half-assed efforts (like splitting desserts) that got us here. Laziness just isn’t a marketing technique and as much as I like these Cheerios for my kids, I don’t like when a company tries to manipulate consumers in a terrible and negative way.

This campaign could have been a fantastic, positive message about making a series of small and large changes to improve health. Instead, it’s filled with language and ideas that just rub me - a health conscious woman and mom - the total wrong way.

Next!

I decided to make her Chocolate Hazelnut biscotti, which are really much more like drop cookies. I did make one small substitution; in place of the toasted hazelnuts that I couldn’t find at the market, I used dried cranberries. The whole effect was awesome, so much so that my husband and I had eaten all the leftovers before I remembered to take a picture!

Giada’s Chocolate Hazelnut Cookies, with Cranberries

1-1/3 cups flour
1/2 tsp baking powder
1/2 tsp baking soda
1/4 tsp salt
1 stick butter, room temp
1/2 cup chocolate hazelnut spread
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1/2 cup light brown sugar
1 egg
1 tsp vanilla extract
1 cup dried cranberries

Preheat oven to 375.

Cream butter, chocolate spread, and sugar until smooth. Add egg and vanilla and beat an additional minute.

In another bowl combine flour, salt, b. powder and b. soda. Use a rubber spatula to add to chocolate mixture. Stir in cranberries.

Drop spoonfuls of dough onto a lined sheet. Use a fork to flatten.

Bake 10-12 minutes.

All things glorious and delicious often start down the path of being dipped into something scrumptious and wonderful.  This book goes the distance in bringing forth some of the best put together recipes I’ve ever run across.

From the real Onion dip on page 16 to the simple put together Tex-Mex dip on page 74, each recipe is mouthwatering to read and prepare.  I just wish the book could have been filled with beautiful pictures showcasing the recipes, alas my imagination must do until I prepare each one. With 95 recipes to share Rick Rodgers as certainly gone the distance in putting a great selection under one roof.

I highly recommend this book for all those dip lovers out there, regardless if you double dip or sneak a taste with your finger.  You will certainly be pleased with the results when you pick up a copy and begin to create and blend in your own kitchen.  Now go forth, and dip!