Originally posted by norrahe
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Bring on the chocolate diet
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Bring on the chocolate diet"
Collapse
-
The word "occasionally" does not to me mean "a few times a week", it means that whoever is eating knows when to stop! Unlike some lardy fat bastards!
-
... or is this a euphamism for sex?Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostInterestingly the article says nothing about chocolate quality (though it suggests dark chocolate is better). But quantity unimportant :-
"And it appears it is how often you eat chocolate that is important, rather than how much of it you eat. The study found no link with quantity consumed."
not how much but how often? dark is best?
the mind boggles
Leave a comment:
-
actually the biggest chocolate consumer that I've ever known didn't carry an ounce of fat, but he was a tree-surgeon and a landscaper which I think has more of a bearingOriginally posted by BrilloPad View PostInterestingly the article says nothing about chocolate quality (though it suggests dark chocolate is better). But quantity unimportant :-
"And it appears it is how often you eat chocolate that is important, rather than how much of it you eat. The study found no link with quantity consumed."
If you sit, like many of us, polishing the arse of your trousers all day, it's likely that you will put on a few pounds...
Leave a comment:
-
Interestingly the article says nothing about chocolate quality (though it suggests dark chocolate is better). But quantity unimportant :-Originally posted by norrahe View PostI think it may come down to quality and also the amount of antioxidant compounds, catechins in said chocolate. In the mass produced gunk you get these days is probably negligible.
I'm sure there are people out there who will use it an an excuse to stuff their faces and wonder why they aren't getting any thinner
"And it appears it is how often you eat chocolate that is important, rather than how much of it you eat. The study found no link with quantity consumed."
Leave a comment:
-
I think it may come down to quality and also the amount of antioxidant compounds, catechins in said chocolate. In the mass produced gunk you get these days is probably negligible.
I'm sure there are people out there who will use it an an excuse to stuff their faces and wonder why they aren't getting any thinner
Leave a comment:
-
A "few times a week" and "occasionally" are the same thing surely?Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post"It found those who ate chocolate a few times a week were, on average, slimmer than those who ate it occasionally."
Good to see them use exact scientific terms like "few". That has explained that then.

Leave a comment:
-
"It found those who ate chocolate a few times a week were, on average, slimmer than those who ate it occasionally."
Good to see them use exact scientific terms like "few". That has explained that then.
Leave a comment:
-
Bring on the chocolate diet
Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) for umbrella company contractors: an April 2026 explainer Today 07:19
- IR35: IT contractors ‘most concerned about off-payroll working rules’ Yesterday 07:11
- Labour’s near-silence on its employment status shakeup is telling, and disappointing Feb 3 07:47
- Business expenses: What IT contractors can and cannot claim from HMRC Jan 30 08:44
- April’s umbrella PAYE risk: how contractors’ end-clients are prepping Jan 29 05:45
- How EV tax changes of 2025-2028 add up for contractor limited company directors Jan 28 08:11
- Under the terms he was shackled by, Ray McCann’s Loan Charge Review probably is a fair resolution Jan 27 08:41
- Contractors, a £25million crackdown on rogue company directors is coming Jan 26 05:02
- How to run a contractor limited company — efficiently. Part one: software Jan 22 23:31
- Forget February as an MSC contractor seeking clarity, and maybe forget fairness altogether Jan 22 19:57


Leave a comment: