Chocolate's Health Benefits Outweigh the Negatives
Debate Rounds (3)
It doesn't stop with the cardiovascular system either. Not only does it taste delectable, but tryptophan, an essential amino acid, lessens anxiety by producing the neurotransmitter serotonin. Endorphins, the body's natural opiates, reduce sensitivity to pain. All of these natural hormones act as stimulants, anti-depressants, and give pleasurable sensations. Copious quantities of chocolate do not to be consumed to achieve these benefits, either. The aforementioned studies used no more that 3.5 ounces of chocolate.
Additionally, please take the time to further learn about the invaluable benefits of chocolate through the attached videos.
First, I will address the so called health benefits of anti-oxidants that my opponent claims that chocolate has. First, it should be noted that dark chocolate is the only form of chocolate with appreciable anti oxidant content. Furthermore, many forms of dark chocolate simply do not have flavonol in them, as it causes the candy to have a bitter taste. The biggest problem with this substance is that Flavonol is not regulated by the FDA, so chocolate companies are not obliged to provide an appropriate label for flavonol content. Mainstream dark chocolate is packed with artificial flavors, processed sugar, and in some cases milk. The marginal benefits associated with antioxidants are negated or worse when these factors are taken into account. Since natural, "healthy" dark chocolate is rare and part of a fringe market (even more so than the market for regular dark chocolate), it is entirely inaccurate to state that "dark chocolate is healthy". Rather, some very rare forms of dark chocolate, when taken in moderation, can be beneficial when steps are taken to reduce sugar and calorie content in other aspects of one's diet.
Many of the facts that my opponent have stated are very misleading and out of context. The fact that chocolate acts as a stimulant (and contains other addictive drugs) is not necessarily a beneficial factor. Rather, chocolate acts on the brain much in the same way as Heroin, in that the user feels a temporary feeling of relaxation and happiness. This temporary feeling can result in depression and dependency, both to physiological effects of stimulants and cannabinoids in the chocolate and due to psychological addiction. This results in overindulgence far beyond what could be considered medically insignificant. In fact, the premise that any one particular level of chocolate usage will result in a net positive effect on health is flawed. Even the proponents of chocolate for medical usage recommend cutting back on other aspects of one's diet in order to curb the added calories and fat content. Within itself, any measure of chocolate will result in disproportional amounts of calories being ingested. In order to yield any benefits, one must alter their diet, meaning that administering chocolate within itself will not yield net health benefits. This within itself poses a problem, as there are invariably diets in which will never yield benefits from chocolate regardless of whether a cutback is made in one's diet. For example, a diet that is already rich in anti oxidants and low in fat will have no food which could be suitably be substituted for chocolate. Furthermore, due to the abundance of antioxidants already available from such a diet, there would be no change in one's health as far as antioxidants are concerned. This would ultimately result in only negative effects from the stimulants, sugar, fat, and excessive calories contained within chocolate.
The statement "chocolate's health benefits outweigh the negatives" can be proven to be false in some situations, and is thus an untrue statement. While chocolate's may be a healthy alternative as apposed to other foods, it is still untrue to claim that chocolate will provide a net positive benefit to all or even most people. The same could be said as to drinking battery acid as apposed to arsenic. The fact that there are a variety of ways to gain the same benefits of chocolate without being exposed to the unhealthy components of chocolate demonstrates that many people would have nothing to gain by eating chocolate.
My opponents statement is indefensible. It is an excessively broad generalization that can be conclusively proven false. My opponents makes reference to dark chocolate, but fails to make any distinction between dark chocolate and other types of chocolate in his original assertion. Milk chocolate, especially types that are excessively rich, are inarguable unhealthy beyond redemption. Once this fact is accepted, the statement "Chocolate's health benefits outweigh the negatives" should be recognised as false. Even within his argument based solely upon dark chocolate, he makes no distinction between the most common form of commercial dark chocolate, which is undoubtedly unhealthy, and in often cases lack the antioxidants my opponent claims are beneficial.
ccrunnerforlife forfeited this round.
Sam_Lowry forfeited this round.
ccrunnerforlife forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sam_Lowry 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.