I was reading about ammonium phosphatide and its application in chocolate making as a substitute to lecithin. Through my research so far, i found out that cadbury is using the product, i ordered a sample to test anyway. This is good news for those with soy allergies.

http://www.confectionerynews.com/Processing-Packaging/Palsgaard-receives-US-approval-for-chocolate-emulsifier

Has anyone used this new emulsifier? (new to me at least)

updated by @omar-forastero: 04/09/15 10:57:45

Interesting article.

Does anyone know if ammonium phosphatide is approved for use in Canada?

Hi Omar, apart from white chocolate, why should you use an emulsifier in the chocolate?

Some milk chocolate recipes require a lubricant like lecithin as well - especially if the recipe uses high fat powdered milk instead of skim milk powderand anhydrous milk fat (clarified butter). In our case, we use a high fat milk powder (28.5%), so unlike a milk chocolate that uses the liquid AMF, that 28.5% in our case is solid, and makes the chocolate thick like sludge. The lecithin acts like a lubricant and makes the chocolate MUCH more fluid and easy to work with. Without it, we could not mold our milk chocolate.

Sure we could change the recipe, but people love our milk chocolate. It's very similar to a Swiss milk chocolate - very creamy.

As an aside, the term "emuslifier" is technically incorrect, although it's a common term that everyone uses. Technically lecithin, ammonium phosphitades, or PGP act as a lubricant between the solid particles and the liquid fats. As I've preached before, chocolate is a suspension of solid particles in a fat, and not an emulsion of two or more compounds with similar liquid properties. It's just that emulsifier sounds better than "lubricant" on packaging.

Cheers.

Brad

Yup - approved for use in Canada.

Canada The Food and Drugs Act and Regulations.

PGPR to be added to Milk Chocolate ; Sweet Chocolate up to 0.5% PGPR to be added to Unstandardizedchocolate flavoured confectionery coatings up to 0.25 %

--
www.eztemper.com

www.thechocolatedoctor.ca

Thanks Kerry, but PGPR and ammonium phosphatide are different. One uses castor beans (PGPR)and the otheris derived fromrape seed oil. Same concept from each though.

I could probably call our inspector at the CFIA, but she's still on holidays for the next week or so.

Cheers

Brad.

Hi Brad,

I understand that soy lecithin helps with some recipes, but my question is more general: why should you want to produce chocolate that requires soy lecithin? In my opinion, such a product is of a lower quality compared to a traditional pure chocolate, so the use of soy lecithin should be avoided as much as possible, finding a different recipe if necessary.

From what I can observe in Europe, the world of chocolate is split in two: industrial mass production on one side, artisan products on the other, using only traditional ingredients (i.e. cocoa, cocoa butter, sugar, vanilla and milk). These ingredients are the only one allowed in Italy if you want to use the logo "pure chocolate", for example.

PS I don't want to be blunt, I'm trying to express my opinion but English is not my first language.

http://http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn_219.pdf

Oops, wrong file - check page 83. It appears the answer is yes.

--
www.eztemper.com

www.thechocolatedoctor.ca

Looking good so far.

Thanks Kerry! Much appreciated.

The use of lecithin or anything equivalent became a necessity in chocolate production, be it mass or artisan.In my opinion i don't see lecithin to be a low quality product.

Let'skeep cost saving aside, in order to achieve a smooth thin layer of chocolate, you'll need an emulsifier/lubricant in your chocolate. I personally am more interested in applying AP to fillings, because its odorless, while lecithin has a strong smell. I am hoping to make some smooth fillings. hope this works out.

Marco;

I understand where you're coming from, but when it comes to recipes and the reasons for ingredients, who says the Europeans have it right? As a businessman selling my wares in Canada, I don't particularly care what other countries do with their chocolate. It's not personal. It's simply thatI'm not selling there. Here in Canada (and in the UK and Switzerland), people like a very creamy,not overly sweetmilk chocolate. The way to do that is obvious - lots of cream, whether it be powdered cream, or powdered skim milk with AMF. In our particular case, I get a fabulous, spray-dried product from a supplier here, and don't have to worry about extra care in the storage, as I would have with AMF. It's a dried product that lasts longer and requires no refrigeration. Our customers are so happy with the recipe I have tried, tested, and put into production, that they often send bars of our milk chocolate to their family in Europe, and return commenting that the recipientslike it better than the chocolate they can get in Europe and have requested more.

Case in point with regard to Italy: Is milk by itself "pure chocolate"? Is sugar by itself "pure chocolate"? What about vanilla? Nope. Nope, and Nope. Yet these ingredients have MUCH higher percentage counts in a "pure chocolate" recipe than lecithin at less than half a percent. Why then can't lecithin be included? It's no more"pure chocolate" than any of the ingredients you listed above. In fact, it's the only NECESSARY ingredientif one creates a recipe with low fluid fat properties (i.e. 70% cocoa beans, 10% cocoa powder, 20% sugar). Having said that, who's to say that Italy has it right either?

When it comes to dark chocolate, we use no lecithin. The CCB content is high enough to give good fluidity, and then we control the viscosity by temperature and crystalization.

Companies like Lindt however (lindt Excellence 70%) need to use lecithin because to increase intensity, they add cocoa powder to the bar on top of the cocoa content. Without lecithin it would be almost impossible to mold. (Note that I'm not saying Lindt 70% is any good. It just so happens to be widely recognized as a "premium" dark chocolate here in Canada.)

They're European. Did they get it right? I'm not sure. I DO know they sell a heck of a lot more every year than my company does! Yes, they're mass producers. However, business is business. Whether you're selling 10 bars, 100 bars, or 1 million bars, you're sellingyour chocolateto make money, and at that moment in time it's no longer about you, or your views. It's about the customer who's willing to PAY to eat your wares, and if they DO pay, then to them you've got it right.

I hope that makes sense, and doesn't come across confrontational. Having been in business for a long time, and been on many chocolate forums, I see all too often,small businesseswho get caught up in politics, terminology, or what "the other guy" is doing, or what "the industry standard" is.

The recipe in the end is very simple: "Find out what your customers want, and give it to them."

Cheers.

Brad

Hi Brad,

I appreciate your answer, but I still disagree...

Keep in mind that I'm not a chocolate producer, I'm just an importer who decided to sell in Australia one of the best chocolate produced in the world, and this is not my definition but is the result of many awards like the Grand Prix of Chocolaterie in Paris, the Olympics of Food in Berlin and IKKA Contest in Salzburg, and of course the Salon du Chocolate.

I'm not saying that chocolate produced with soy lecithing is necessarily a worst product, just that... it's not chocolate how we are used to make it. And we can't hide the fact that many chocolatiers simply use soy lecithing because it's a cheaper and easier way to obtain certain results.

Of course every market is different, and the American market (where the chocolatier I'm talking about is very well appreciated) is certainly different compared to Italy, Belgium or France. But sometimes customers need to be educated to appreciate a better quality product, and even the American market is starting to buy much more dark chocolate compared to the past, thanks to a few Tuscan chocolatier that started to produce milk chocolate up to 70% of cocoa, too (without soy lecithin).

You say the market is the king, and until there will be people in USA willing to spend $250 per kg for our pralines I'm happy to sell this brand... But at the same time I agree more with a business plan who privilege the quality to the quantity and the profit, money is important but not paramount. Lindt is making much more money with their chocolate than the chocolatier I'm talking about, but he would not switch his position with the bigger stockholder of Lindt even at gun point.

One point we agree on is that education is key, and that is something we have incorporated into our business model in the form of evening chocolate tastings and wine pairings. I host an average of 10 per month - both private and public - and they are usually sold out a month in advance. Tonight it was for 12 people in my shop, and on Thursday it will be a presentation to 250 people at an awards dinner.

You've found your niche selling chocolate that has won European awards, and that's great. Others have found their niche selling what they claim to be "healthy raw chocolate". Good for them too.

What I know is that tonight (as is what happens during most of my seminars), most people who walk through our doors in love with Lindt 70% actually spit it out in disgust after tasting ours. Here's a link to a blog post:

http://laurenzietsman.wordpress.com/2010/12/28/a-visit-to-choklat/

Here's another quote from a customer review on www.UrbanSpoon.com :

" When I walked through the doors of Choklat, I thought Lindt Excellence 70% was a good bar. An hour later I was actually spitting it out into a napkin! It was terrible! I've NEVER spit out chocolate before!"

As you can see, education is a focus of ours. However, for us it still doesn't really matter how many awards a chocolate has won in another country and the +/-10 people who have "passed judgement" on it to grant those awards. Cumulatively, they'll never buy enough chocolate to float my business. What reallymatters to me as the business owneris the 38,000 customers who have purchased our products in the past 3 years. Those 38,000 customers pay the bills and spread the word!

My advice to any business owner thinking of entering their chocolate / confections into a competition: "Be careful. Your results can backfire on you. What if you lose? What if your products get poor reviews? What kind of damage can the words of amere handful of peopledo to your business? Is that kind of damaging publicity really worth the risk?"

Marco, you are a reseller of other people's creations, so it's helpful for you to use awards such as what you've mentioned as part of your sales pitch. THere are a lot of great confections, and chocolate out there made by people who don't enter competitions. In fact there's a lot of chocolate out there BETTER than those who have won the competitions you mentioned. A competition is only as credible as the entries, and if not all the worthy competitors enter, it's not that credible. However the average consumer doesn't know that, so it's easy to play on it as a marketing strategy.

In the end, it's nice that the market is big enough for everybody. However, I'd bet my fancy sportscar that if you and I were the only players on the block I'd win. The secret is STILL to find out what people want, and then give it to them.

Cheers and Best Wishes.

Brad

It seems like it's a competition between us two, judging from your words. Can't add anything more, we have different views. Anyway, 38.000 customers in three years probably are enough to buy you a fancy sport car, and if you are happy with that it's ok.

I still don't like the idea of using soy lecithin (or any other fat other than cocoa butter) in the chocolate, nothing wrong with this, I hope. Also, I would never use Lindt to compare the quality of a good chocolate...

wooha! things are heatin up here, chocolate is melting

Marco I agree with not using any other fat but cocoa butter, however I don't see anything wrong with the use of soy Lecithin. At the end of the day, it's your baby, you decide what baby wears. Alot of chocolatiers use much worse ingredients than all of us and still there product is classified under "chocolate". And if this chocolate did not have a market it sure would not exist. I mean I can't see myself listening to justin beiber, yet beiber has thousands of fans. I can't compare beiber's music to daft punk either coz the genre is completely different. Just like music, you have the mainstream and the indie chocolate.Anyway you both make valid points (besides the muscle flexing) and that's the beauty behind the variety in chocolate abd its ingredients.

Haha! Well said Omar.

I apologize if those reading this think I was being competitive. The reason I provided stats is because it's easy to hide behind anonymity and"talk the talk" on the Internet having not actually accomplished anything. At least Marco admitted that he doesn't actually "make" his chocolate. Thank you for your honesty Marco.

I too agree with not using any other fat than Cocoa Butter (well, except for the milk fat present in powdered milk for milk chocolate). I also agree with using an ingredient like lecithin if it's necessary.

As I've repeated, I believe that business is about making profit. If it isn't, then I challenge whomever questions this philosophy to stop being a hypocrite and stop charging money for their wares. Unless of course I'm missing something, and everyone out there in chocolate land is independently wealthy.

Cheers Omar. Thanks for the tip on Amonium Phosphatide.

Brad

Lecithin will allow you to use less cocoa butter in your recipe, thinning itto get the flow properties you need for your use. It affects yield value a little more than viscosity, but overall more fluid rheology. It does have emulsification properties, and there is water in chocolate. Most chocolatespecifications call for less than 1-1.5% moisture, but it's there. The refining process generates heat, and some of the sugar becomes amorphous and will draw water from the air, the same thing is seen when you make confectioners sugar where you need a little starch to keep it free flowing. This moisture is emulsified by the lecithin. The lecithin has a polar and non polar portion of the molecule, the non polar portion extends into the fat, the polar portion into the moisture, usually on the surface of the sugar. If lecithin was simply a lubricant it would not start thickening the chocolate when you use too much, even tenths of a percent too much. It's not necessary but chocolate without it has higher cocoa butter levels compared to chocolate with, madeto similar rheology. The use of PGPR is becomming more common, but does not work very well if not with lecithin. Both thin the chocolate to let you use less cocoa butter, an expensive ingredient.

I must agree with you, I don't like Lecithin for a number of reasons.

1. Aesthetic
2. Allergen sensitivity.
3. It usually solvent extracted with hexane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexane http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecithin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean_oil

I suspect its most commonly used by big chocolate to enable mass production machinery to be used with cheapened indredients.