comment: >
  
  That reminds me, I'm heading to Levines, if anyone needs pants.
context: But, if you look at other studies, it literally changes by the week which brands are high and which brands are low. It's because they're constantly buying more beans and the beans come from different farms. If they have one good test it's because they bought one good batch. Every brand has this problem from time to time and there's not really much that can be done about it short of rebuilding the chocolate supply chain from the ground up.  Every time you do this kind of test you're going to catch a few brands out and it's going to be basically random which ones had the high numbers in which one didn't. >
  
  Maybe a rebuild is just the medicine, if not for the ~~chemicals~~ heavy metals, then the slavery. >
  
  Just to be a petty pedant, as elements on the periodic table, heavy metals are not technically chemicals unto themselves. >
  
  Reasonable clarification. Nothing petty or pedantic imo. I ain't no nerd. Thanks >
  
  Bitch I aint no nerd!