Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Barry Smith, Director of the Institute of Philosophy, School of Advanced Study, University of London

Stuck in front of our screens all day, we often ignore our senses beyond sound and vision. And yet they are always at work. When we’re more alert we feel the rough and smooth surfaces of objects, the stiffness in our shoulders, the softness of bread.

In the morning, we may feel the tingle of toothpaste, hear and feel the running water in the shower, smell the shampoo, and later the aroma of freshly brewed coffee.

Aristotle told us there were five senses. But he also told us the world was made up of five elements and we no longer believe that. And modern research is showing we may actually have dozens of senses.

Almost all of our experience is multisensory. We don’t see, and hear, smell and touch in separate parcels. They occur simultaneously in a unified experience of the world around us and of ourselves.

What we feel affects what we see and what we see affects what we hear. Different odours in shampoo can affect how you perceive the texture of hair. The fragrance of rose makes hair seem silkier, for instance.

Odours in low-fat yogurts can make them feel richer and thicker on the palate without adding more emulsifiers. Perception of odours in the mouth, rising to the nasal passage, are modified by the viscosity of the liquids we consume.

My long-term collaborator, professor Charles Spence from the Crossmodal Laboratory in Oxford, told me his neuroscience colleagues believe there are anywhere between 22 and 33 senses.

These include proprioception, which enables us to know where our limbs are without looking at them. Our sense of balance draws on the vestibular system of ear canals as well as sight and proprioception.

Another example is interoception, by which we sense changes in our own bodies such as a slight increase in our heart rate and hunger. We also have a sense of agency when moving our limbs: a feeling that can go missing in stroke patients who sometimes even believe someone else is moving their arm.

There is the sense of ownership. Stroke patients sometimes feel their, for instance, arm is not their own even though they may still feel sensations in it.

Some of the traditional senses are combinations of several senses. Touch, for instance involves pain, temperature, itch and tactile sensations. When we taste something we are actually experiencing a combination of three senses: touch, smell and taste – or gustation – which combine to produce the flavours we perceive in food and drinks.

Gustation, covers sensations produced by receptors on the tongue that enable us to detect salt, sweet, sour, bitter and umami (savoury). What about mint, mango, melon, strawberry, raspberry?

We don’t have raspberry receptors on the tongue, nor is raspberry flavour some combination of sweet, sour and bitter. There is no taste arithmetic for fruit flavours.

We perceive them through the combined workings of the tongue and the nose. It is smell that contributes the lion’s share to what we call tasting.

This is not inhaling odours from the environment, though. Odour compounds are released as we chew or sip, travelling from the mouth to the nose though the nasal pharynx at the back of throat.

Touch plays its part too, binding tastes and smells together and fixing our preferences for runny or firm eggs, and the velvety, luxuriousness gooeyness of chocolate.

Sight is influenced by our vestibular system. When you are on board an aircraft on the ground, look down the cabin. Look again when you are in the climb.

It will “look” to you as though the front of the cabin is higher than you are, although optically, everything is in the same relation to you as it was on the ground. What you “see” is the combined effect of sight and your ear canals telling you that you are titling backwards.

The senses offer a rich seam of research and philosophers, neuroscientists and psychologists work together at the Centre for the Study of the Senses at the University of London’s School of Advanced Study.

In 2013, the centre launched its Rethinking the Senses project, directed by my colleague, the late Professor Sir Colin Blakemore. We discovered how modifying the sound of your own footsteps can make your body feel lighter or heavier.

We learned how audioguides in Tate Britain art museum that address the listener as if the model in a portrait was speaking enable visitors to remember more visual details of the painting. We discovered how aircraft noise interferes with our perception of taste and why you should always drink tomato juice on a plane.

While our perception of salt, sweet and sour is reduced in the presence of white noise, umami is not, and tomatoes, and tomato juice is rich in umami. This means the aircraft’s noise will taste enhance the savoury flavour.

At our latest interactive exhibition, Senses Unwrapped at Coal Drops Yard in London’s King’s Cross, people can discover for themselves how their senses work and why they don’t work as we think they do.

For example, the size-weight illusion is illustrated by a set of small, medium and large curling stones. People can lift each one and decide which is heaviest. The smallest one feels heaviest, but people can them place them on balancing scales and discover that they are all the same weight.

But there are always plenty of things around you to show how intricate your senses are, if you only pause for a moment to take it all in. So next time you walk outside or savour a meal, take a moment to appreciate how your senses are working together to help you feel all the sensations involved.

Barry Smith has received funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council for his research on multisensory experience, which underpins the creation of this exhibition on the senses,

– ref. Humans could have as many as 33 senses – https://theconversation.com/humans-could-have-as-many-as-33-senses-270697

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul Hough, Lecturer Sport & Exercise Physiology , University of Westminster

The festive season has a reputation for undoing good habits such as eating well and exercising. Normal routines disappear, days become less structured and exercise habits can fade. The solution to staying active is not more willpower, but smarter planning. Research shows that simple, practical strategies can help people stay active through Christmas and into the new year.

At this time of year, articles often focus on the calorie content of festive foods and drinks, alongside advice on how to “burn off” festive indulgence. However, guilt-based motivation is ineffective in the long term.

You are more likely to stick with exercise when it feels rewarding rather than forced. This is known as intrinsic motivation, which comes from enjoying the activity itself, rather than exercising due to pressure, guilt or external rewards. Behaviour change research shows that physical activity habits are more likely to last when they are easy to start and driven by intrinsic motivation.

For example, someone is more likely to maintain a running habit because it improves their mood or helps them decompress, rather than because they are trying to burn a specific number of calories.

To support intrinsic motivation, it helps to choose activities you enjoy or are curious about and avoid rigid rules. Exercises should match your current ability and offer a sense of progress, such as improvements in strength, technique or stamina. Clear, achievable progress increases enjoyment and commitment. Training with others, joining group classes or sharing progress can also help sustain motivation.

Most people do not stop exercising over Christmas because they lose motivation. Instead, their routines change. Late nights, travel, disrupted schedules, limited gym access or exercising in unfamiliar places create practical barriers. In many cases, exercise habits fade because of logistics, not a lack of desire.

In behavioural science, anything that makes a behaviour harder to start than it needs to be is described as friction. Even small obstacles can increase the effort, time or mental energy required to begin, making people more likely to delay or abandon the behaviour.

Friction is often subtle. Forgetting login details for a fitness app, not knowing what workout to do, or wondering whether there is enough time for a session to be “worth it” can be enough to derail exercise plans. Each small obstacle adds hesitation and increases the chance of giving up.

Reducing friction makes it far easier to maintain fitness over Christmas. This can be done by preparing in advance, simplifying choices and making the first step as easy as possible.

Prepare and plan ahead

Preparing ahead of time reduces delays and procrastination. Keep a gym bag packed or lay out workout clothes the night before. If you train with music or podcasts, have them ready. Create a default route for outdoor activities such as running or cycling so you don’t have to decide where to go.

When routines change, the type of exercise often needs to change too. Many people turn to social media or YouTube for ideas, but the sheer number of options can lead to decision fatigue, where repeated choices drain mental energy and make it more likely that exercise is postponed altogether.

To avoid this, bookmark a small number of go-to workouts on your phone and label them by duration and location. For example:

15 minutes | Bodyweight cardio | Home – Star jumps x 20 Mountain climbers x 20 Step-ups x 20 High skips x 20 Rest 1 minute Repeat for five rounds

Choose workouts for the week in advance where possible. Use a fixed rotation of three or four sessions, such as full-body strength, a 30-minute run, then full-body strength again. Limiting options reduces decision fatigue and makes starting easier.

Simplify

When time is limited or the gym is busy, effective workouts can still be completed in under 30 minutes using time-efficient training methods.

1. Circuits

In the gym, instead of resting between sets on one machine, move between exercises that target different muscle groups. For example, rotate between chest press, seated row, leg press, shoulder press, lat pulldown and a core exercise. If equipment is unavailable, substitute with a similar movement using dumbbells or bodyweight.

2. Supersets

Pair exercises that work different muscle groups and perform them back to back, such as a dumbbell chest press followed by a chest-supported row.

3. Drop sets

After completing a set, reduce the weight by 20% to 30% and continue until fatigue. Repeat for two to four drops.

4. Myo reps

Choose a weight you can lift for 12 to 15 repetitions. After the first set, rest briefly, then perform mini sets of three to five repetitions, rest for 20 seconds. Keep going until until you can’t complete 3 reps.

Drop sets and myo reps are effective for muscle growth. For maximum strength goals, traditional or cluster sets are more appropriate.

Metabolic conditioning

Metabolic conditioning involves short bursts of high-intensity exercise that challenge both muscles and the cardiovascular system. It is particularly useful when time is limited.

1. Circuit training

Plan a circuit of several exercises. Perform each exercise for 30 to 60 seconds then move to the next exercise. Rest for one to two minutes after completing all the exercises and repeat for multiple rounds.

2. Every minute on the minute circuits

At the start of each minute, complete a set number of repetitions and rest for the remainder of the minute before starting the next exercise.

3. Tabata intervals

Alternate 20 seconds of intense exercise with ten seconds of rest. Perform a total of eight intervals before resting for two to three minutes. Repeat this for two to three minutes series.

4. As many reps as possible

Select four or five exercises with target reps for each exercise. Set a timer for 12 to 20 minutes and cycle through the exercises continuously, aiming to complete as many rounds as possible.

Even during the disruption of the festive season, it is possible to stay active. Skipping exercise entirely until January risks losing fitness and breaking momentum. Evidence-based strategies that reduce friction and make exercise easy to start are far more effective than relying on willpower. By keeping workouts simple and accessible, you can maintain fitness through Christmas without having to start again in the new year.

Paul Hough does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Staying fit over Christmas using science-backed methods – https://theconversation.com/staying-fit-over-christmas-using-science-backed-methods-271720

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amy Brown, Professor of Child Public Health, Swansea University

Are you a parent to one child? Or are you considering having a child in the future, and wondering about what your family size should be?

Parents of only children are frequently asked when they are having another child, as if there is an expectation that they will be planning another – even though around 45% of families in the UK now have one child.

In research for my new book on only children, I asked over 3,000 parents who had one child about their reasons behind that decision. For some, having one child was a conscious choice. Parents enjoyed the lifestyle and balance that having one child brought, or wanted to limit their family for environmental reasons. Sometimes a difficult or distant relationship with their own sibling drove this choice.

Others, however, had wanted more than one child. Circumstances meant that they couldn’t, or had decided not to, have another baby.

These reasons were often deeply personal. Some parents had difficulties conceiving. Some had experienced miscarriage, baby loss or bereavement, meaning that their only child was the only child here. Others had such a difficult pregnancy or traumatic birth that they could not physically or psychologically experience another pregnancy.

The cost of living also affected decisions. Many had made the decision that they couldn’t afford another child due to childcare, housing costs or job insecurity. Some had separated from the child’s other parent or been bereaved. Health problems, for parents or their child, were common, including disability and serious illnesses such as cancer. Health problems, for parents or their child, were common, including disability and serious illnesses such as cancer.

Some mothers talked about how difficult they found the postnatal period, lack of sleep, feeding difficulties and loneliness, resulting in postnatal depression. Some wanted another baby but their partner did not, or parents had experienced significant disagreements in how to parent and care for a child.

Explaining and feeling that you need to justify reasons to family, friends or even strangers who feel entitled to ask, can clearly be distressing. What’s more, parents of one child are likely to have heard that only children are at risk of being lonely, spoiled or being unable to make friends.

This is simply not true. These myths about one child families (a term many prefer to “only child”) have been around for a long time, but the evidence just isn’t there.

Research on only children

The few studies that have shown differences for outcomes for children with or without siblings are often small, flawed, or conducted at a time when there was a lot of social and political pressure to have more children.

More recent research shows very little difference at all. Only children do not have poorer social skills. They are not more selfish or narcissistic. They aren’t less happy in life. They may spend more time alone but are not more likely to describe themselves as lonely, which is an important distinction.

In fact, only children often have slightly higher scores on self-esteem, emotional stability and contentment. Research shows small advantages in creativity, leadership, and curiosity. There is also a small advantage in motivation to achieve.

What affects childhood

Children’s lives are affected by so many different factors. Where there is an absence of a sibling, a different, positive opportunity often fills it. Only children have more time to spend connecting with other family members of friends, more time for hobbies, more family money for activities that they prefer, or simply more focused time alone. Life might look different, but that doesn’t mean it’s worse.

Every child is made up of their own unique strengths and personality that is a culmination of genetics, home life and more. There are far more influential differences between only children’s lives than the shared experience of not having a sibling.

One aspect people often worry about is whether only children will feel the strain in the future when looking after ageing parents. Although some people find great support in their siblings, one study found that adult children may leave care or support for older parents to their siblings.

Although some only children do wish they had a brother or sister, it’s also important to remember that having a sibling isn’t a guarantee they will get along or support each other. Children who feel bullied by their siblings have an increased risk of depression and self-harm. When we wish for more siblings we are wishing for a good relationship and supportive person, and that isn’t always the case.

Research does however show a difference in people’s views of only children. One study asked people to rate characteristics of a hypothetical only child versus one with siblings. People were more likely to believe that only children were higher in narcissistic tendencies. They then tested this belief, finding no difference in narcissism scores between people who had a sibling or not. This is an excellent example of how people believe in the stereotype of the narcissistic selfish only child, but it’s not actually true.

These stereotypes are harmful and importantly not based in reality. Families increasingly come in all different shapes and make ups. Let’s focus on how we make sure more children can feel loved, connected and secure, rather than how many siblings they have.

Amy Brown receives funding from UKRI. She is a volunteer for the charity the Human Milk Foundation.

– ref. There are countless reasons families have only one child – and they won’t grow up to be selfish or spoiled – https://theconversation.com/there-are-countless-reasons-families-have-only-one-child-and-they-wont-grow-up-to-be-selfish-or-spoiled-271142

Source: The Conversation – UK – By James Rodgers, Reader in International Journalism, City St George’s, University of London

A vast amount of information has not necessarily meant more reliable information, writes James Rodgers, a former BBC correspondent who held postings in Gaza, Moscow and Brussels

On December 10, the year 2025 reached a murderous milestone. In 2024, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) had recorded 126 journalists and media workers killed, the highest number since the CPJ first began keeping records in 1992. In 2025, the figure was matched with three weeks of the year still to go.

One nationality, Palestinian, has paid by far the highest price. “Israel has killed almost 250 journalists since the Israel-Gaza war began in 2023,” the CPJ reported.

What does this mean for audiences’ understanding of a world where international affairs are dominated by war, the climate crisis and unpredictable politics?

As far back as the early years of the US, and through the European revolutions of the 19th centuries, information and freedom have been linked. In 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”

Today, we have access to more media than at any other time in human history. But this vast amount of information has not necessarily meant more reliable information. Governments and tech companies striving to control the message often succeed.

Israel has banned international journalists entering Gaza. Palestinian journalists continue, at great risk, to report from the territory. Russia, meanwhile, has placed restrictions on reporting its “special military operation” – in a word, war – on Ukraine.

A generation ago, when the CPJ first began keeping data on journalists’ deaths, it was different. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the cold war allowed international media organisations freedom to work as never before in the former Soviet bloc.

As those countries embraced political change, they encouraged freer media to flourish within their new societies. True, these media were often influenced by political and business interests – the news media often are. But there was plurality where previously there had only been the party line.

The 1990s, imperfect though they were as a time of press freedom, were better than what has followed since. As the media academic and former foreign correspondent Peter Greste has persuasively argued, the aftermath of 9/11 involved state power extending, “into control over information and ideas. They did that by loosening the definitions of what constituted ‘terrorism’ and ‘national security’”.

Greste’s words were informed by the price he had paid for his own journalism. In late 2013, along with two colleagues, Mohamed Fadel Fahmy and Baher Mohammad, he was detained in Egypt on terrorism charges. He spent 400 days in prison. The charges had resulted from the fact that he had spoken to the Muslim Brotherhood as part of his reporting.

“How do you accurately and fairly report on Egypt’s ongoing political struggle without talking to everyone involved?” he wrote at the time.

Information access

It is not new that governments seek to control media. What is new is that the US is so proudly among them. Jefferson would probably not like what the current US government is doing, especially its recent policy of restricting access to the Pentagon for reporters who themselves refuse restrictions on their reporting.

The words that follow Jefferson’s discussion of the relative merits of governments and newspapers are less well remembered: “But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.”

Outdated gendered language aside, that, today, is the problem. For while we have more and more media, we have far less media freedom.

In the age of mass media, news organisations have largely controlled the means of distribution. Today, the tech companies take the lead. Not everyone is receiving the “papers”. Where they are not formally censored, they are harder to find – and cost money, unlike social media content.

Read more:
Perfect storm of tech bros, foreign interference and disinformation is an urgent threat to press freedom

Algorithms may be adjusted to give us more cat videos and fewer questions. Governments and criminals place physical restrictions, up to and including death, on journalists’ work. Powerful politicians use legal action – or the threat of it – to silence trusted news organisations.

In my previous career as an international correspondent, I reported on wars in the former Soviet Union and the Middle East. In the 1990s and 2000s, journalists were often restricted by governments not wanting bad news reported – but rarely simply banned as they increasingly seem to be now.

In Gaza and in Russia, international journalists are unable to access places they need to tell the story. In both cases, courageous reporters from those countries risk danger and even death to try to tell the world what is happening.

The restrictions placed upon journalists today may mean that governments seem to be winning at the moment. Their desire to control confirms the power to challenge that journalism still holds.

James Rodgers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The enduring power of journalism in a world of more media and less freedom – https://theconversation.com/the-enduring-power-of-journalism-in-a-world-of-more-media-and-less-freedom-271781

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Spear, Professor of Anatomy, University of Bristol

You push back from the table after Christmas lunch, full from an excellent feast. You really couldn’t manage another bite – except, perhaps, a little bit of pudding. Somehow, no matter how much you’ve eaten, there always seems to be room for dessert. Why? What is it about something sweet that tempts us into “oh, go on then”?

The Japanese capture this perfectly with the word betsubara, meaning “separate stomach”. Anatomically speaking, there is no extra compartment, yet the sensation of still having space for pudding is widespread enough to deserve a scientific explanation.

Far from being imaginary, the feeling reflects a series of physiological and psychological processes that together make dessert uniquely appealing, even when the main course has felt like the limit.

A good place to start is with the stomach itself. Many people picture it as a fixed-size bag that fills steadily until it can take no more, as though another mouthful would cause it to overflow.

In reality, the stomach is designed to stretch and adapt. As we begin to eat, it undergoes “gastric accommodation”: the smooth muscle relaxes, creating extra capacity without a major increase in pressure.

Crucially, soft and sweet foods require very little mechanical digestion. A heavy main course may make the stomach feel distended, but a light dessert, such as ice cream or mousse, barely challenges its workload, so the stomach can relax further to make space.

Hedonic hunger

Much of the drive to eat pudding comes from the brain, specifically the neural pathways involved in reward and pleasure. Appetite is not governed solely by physical hunger. There is also “hedonic hunger”, the desire to eat because something is enjoyable or comforting.

Sweet foods are particularly potent in this respect. They activate the brain’s mesolimbic dopamine system, heightening motivation to eat and temporarily weakening fullness signals.

After a satisfying main course, physiological hunger may be gone, but the anticipation of a sugary treat creates a separate, reward-driven desire to continue eating.

Another mechanism is sensory-specific satiety. As we eat, our brain’s response to the flavours and textures on the plate gradually diminishes, making the food less interesting. Introducing a different flavour profile – something sweet, tart or creamy – refreshes the reward response.

Many people who genuinely feel they cannot finish their main course suddenly discover that they “could manage a little pudding” because the novelty of dessert re-engages their motivation to eat.

Desserts also behave differently once they reach the gut. Compared with foods rich in protein or fat, sugary and carbohydrate-based foods empty from the stomach quickly and require relatively little early breakdown, contributing to the perception that they are easier to accommodate even when you are full.

Timing plays a role, too. The gut-brain signalling that creates the sensation of fullness does not respond instantly.

Hormones such as cholecystokinin, GLP-1 and peptide YY rise gradually and typically take between 20 and 40 minutes to produce a sustained sense of satiety. Many people make decisions about dessert before this hormonal shift has fully taken effect, giving the reward system space to influence behaviour.

Restaurants, consciously or otherwise, often time dessert offerings within this window.

Layered onto these biological processes is the influence of social conditioning. For many people, dessert is associated with celebration, generosity or comfort. From childhood onwards, we learn to regard puddings as treats or as natural components of festive meals.

Cultural and emotional cues can trigger anticipatory pleasure before the food even arrives. Studies consistently show that people eat more in social settings, when food is freely offered, or during special occasions – all situations where dessert typically features.

So the next time someone insists they are too full for another mouthful of dinner but somehow finds space for a slice of cake, rest assured: they are not being inconsistent. They are simply experiencing a perfectly normal and rather elegant feature of the human body.

Michelle Spear does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why there’s always room for dessert – an anatomist explains – https://theconversation.com/why-theres-always-room-for-dessert-an-anatomist-explains-271562

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Peter Alexander, Professor of Global Food Systems, University of Edinburgh

Familiar bars of chocolate have been getting more expensive, and often smaller. Is this really just because cocoa has become more expensive, as is often claimed in the media?

In the UK, a Cadbury Dairy Milk “family” bar has shrunk from 200g to 180g since 2021. In the same period, the price has risen from £1.86 to about £2.75, a price increase of around 65% once you account for the smaller size. Over the same period, overall consumer prices have risen by around 21%.

Much of the media coverage of these changes points in the same direction: higher cocoa prices, often linked to climate change and disease damaging cocoa harvests, particularly in West Africa. One recent article about Maltesers (made by Mars) described increases as the “direct result” of wholesale cocoa prices.

Cocoa prices have indeed risen sharply in recent years. But on their own, they do not fully explain why the prices of chocolate products have risen so much, nor why they remain high even as cocoa prices have eased from their peak.

Before the recent spike, international cocoa prices had been trading for several years at around US$2,400 to US$2,600 (£1,800-£1,950) per tonne. But by spring 2024, they had quadrupled, briefly trading above US$10,000 per tonne in December 2024 and January 2025. This reflected poor harvests, plant disease, and heavy rains and heat in major producing countries such as Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana.

Since that peak, cocoa prices have fallen by nearly half and are now twice their pre-spike level at around US$6,000 per tonne. This reflects expectations of better supply, as weather conditions improve in West Africa and new plantings in Ecuador reach maturity.

Wholesale prices for sugar and whole milk powder also rose after 2021, though by smaller multiples than cocoa, and have since eased from their recent highs.

But the price of a chocolate bar at the checkout reflects more than its ingredients. It includes processing, packaging, energy, transport, staff costs, marketing and the profit margins of both manufacturer and retailer.

How costs have changed

Analysis by the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority of food and grocery manufacturers’ costs shows that, for many processed foods, ingredients are less than half of the production costs, with further costs added along the supply chain.

What happened to Dairy Milk?

To show how changes in ingredient costs compare with prices for consumers, my price calculations focus on a single example: Cadbury Dairy Milk, the UK’s favourite chocolate brand.

By combining international wholesale prices for cocoa, sugar and whole milk powder with a simplified recipe (based on Dairy Milk’s minimum cocoa and milk‑solids percentages of 20% and 23%, with sugar making up the remainder), I estimated the cost per 100g of milk chocolate of these key high‑cost ingredients. It rose from around 10p-15p in late 2021 to 20p-30p at the peak.

In December 2021, a 200g Dairy Milk family bar in a large supermarket cost about £1.86 – roughly 93p per 100g of chocolate. By late 2025, the standard family bar was 180g and typically cost around £2.75, about £1.53 per 100g. This is a rise of 60p per 100g, or about 65%.

The increase in retail chocolate prices until early 2024 was around half the rise in wholesale ingredient costs. But after that, further hikes in retail prices were much less clearly justified by ingredient costs alone. Even at their highest point, ingredients added only about 10p-15p per 100g relative to 2021 – yet by late 2025, the retail price per 100g was about 60p higher than in 2021.

The aspect of this increase not explained by ingredients reflects other costs and choices, including higher energy and packaging costs, higher wages, and decisions by manufacturers and retailers about margins and pack sizes.

One of these choices is “shrinkflation”: keeping the price broadly similar while reducing the size of bars and tubs, as with Dairy Milk’s move from 200g to 180g. This size reduction alone contributes roughly a quarter of the increase in the price per gram of chocolate.

Cocoa prices have since fallen by about half from their peak, and wholesale sugar and whole milk powder prices have also eased. But Dairy Milk has not become cheaper, nor has the family bar’s size increased back to 200g.

Of course, Cadbury is not the only company to do this. And while the price rises over the past 18 months cannot be explained by wholesale ingredient costs, Mondelez, Cadbury’s owner, reports that its gross profit margin fell from around 40% a year earlier to about 30% in the latest quarter, even as it raised prices.

Mondelez previously said its chocolates continued to be “much more expensive to make” and so it had slightly reduced the weight and increased the list price of some products. There is no suggestion that the company is misleading the public on the reason for price rises.

Record cocoa prices are real, and they have clearly pushed up the cost of making chocolate. And cocoa production in future may again be hit by climate, disease or other shocks, leading to fresh spikes in ingredient prices.

But other pressures and pricing choices have also contributed to how much consumers must now pay for their favourite chocolate – and how sticky those higher prices have proved to be.

Peter Alexander does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The cost of chocolate is soaring, but blaming cocoa prices doesn’t give the whole picture – https://theconversation.com/the-cost-of-chocolate-is-soaring-but-blaming-cocoa-prices-doesnt-give-the-whole-picture-272315